North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: VeriSign SMTP reject server updated
> Declan McCullagh wrote: > > >On Sat, Sep 20, 2003 at 11:34:17AM -0700, ken emery wrote: > > > > > >>I think you haven't "gotten it". I'm getting the message from you that > >>the changes made to the com and net gTLD's are fait accompli. From the > >> > >> > > > >That's the exact message I got from Verisign on Thursday. See: > >http://news.com.com/2100-1024-5078657.html > > > >Basically Verisign is willing to tweak the service to make it less > >controversial but not stop it. > > > > > Then Verisign is no longer a responsible holder of the data and ICANN > sould act to remove their control and invalid data. > > / Mat I wonder what AT&T and InterNap have to say about it as the upstreams I can see of AS30060. While InterNap has a short but notable career of letting their customers do whatever they want (such as completely deaggregate all of their address space down to /24s), I'ld think AT&T would be somewhat responsible. I would hope Verisign would abandon their experiment if they received no ill-gotten gains.