Re: [ga] Re: [More misinformation from Verisign re: WLS]

[George Kirikos <gkirikos@yahoo.com>]

Hello,

--- Andy Gardner <andy@navigator.co.nz> wrote:
> And if it was, even a half-arsed programmer could add rate limiting
> to 
> the SRS protocol very easily. Surely Verisign's got a spare
> half-arsed 
> programmer sitting around somewhere?

Exactly -- throttling was a trivial fix, and solved the problem. See
the February 2002 document where Verisign answered that and other
questions, namely B.2. and B.3.
 
> Or maybe they're not interested in the easy fix?

The technical problem was fixed long ago -- the drop system is
functioning in an orderly manner every day at 2 pm Eastern time for
com/net. Verisign only trots out the load issue when they want to pull
the strings of the "technologists" in ICANN, suggesting that there
still needs to be an engineering solution, even though the problem is
solved. This pulls the wool over the eyes of those in ICANN who have
only a cursory knowledge of WLS, by framing the debate in such a way
that PRESUMES a problem. There's no problem whatsoever at present.

The true "problem" is that Verisign can't abuse its monopoly position
under the status quo, and needs WLS to soak consumers and registrars
with unnecessary charges, for a service already offered in a competitve
manner at the registrar layer.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html