North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Statements against new.net?
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Scott Francis wrote: > > Perhaps next you might wish to stamp your feet and threaten to hold your > > breath until they go away? > > let's not forget what mailing list this is - the operators in this forum can > have a very real and significant impact on the direction "the market" takes. > If, as a group, the NANOG readership decides to take a single position on > anything (ha!), then we could very likely effectively determine in which > direction "the market" will go. After all, if _nobody's_ customers can access > new.net's non-sanctioned gTLDs, they can't very well go to another provider > for such access, and new.net will die the quick death that it deserves. > > (yes, I'm obviously idealistic and naive to think that even a significant > majority of NANOG readers could even agree on which way is up, but I think > enough people agree on this issue that we don't necessarily have to sit back > and let "the market" make decisions that will have real operational impact > for the foreseeable future. We can make those decisions ourselves.) > Actually, I'm enamoured of someone's idea to just blackhole new.net and let them figure out how to sort that. Saves me a whole lot of trouble, I just get to ask the customer where they got the idea that .xxx was a valid tld. If we all do that (And yes I can see a significant [10%+] fraction of this group's readership doing it), then the problem goes away soon. An elegant fix, except that new.net would probably sue anyone who blackholed them... --Matthew Devney