Re: Re[2]: [ga-roots] Re[4]: [ga-icann] interesting California lawto consider

[Marc Schneiders <marc@schneiders.org>]

On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, at 10:10 [=GMT-0700], William X. Walsh wrote:

> > Some weeks ago, I had a look at most of their websites, and found, that the 
> > majority of them have some more or less stringent requirements concerning 
> > which TLD they would include in their root.
> > You know obviously more than their websites say.
> 
> References please?
> 
> There are no minimum standards or technical requirements at any of the
> alt.roots that I am aware of.  If you know otherwise, please don't
> just say it, point to the references.
> 
> That means that unless someone else, who also didn't meet any minimum
> standards, emailed them that they wanted that string first, you can
> have it, even if you don't know the difference between an MX record
> and a CNAME record, much less how to setup a controlled managed dns
> system for the domain.

This is utter %$#@^& and you know it. You will not get your TLD
included in the ORSC root if there aren't at least two nameservers
correctly answering for it. TINC has even stricter rules:

http://www.tinc-org.com/rules.html

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