Statements against new.net?

Sat Mar 17 04:41:47 UTC 2001

At 12:06 PM 3/16/01 -0500, Jeff Workman wrote:

>Since new.net (and others) seem to want to blatantly ignore the standards 
>set forth by the IETF, ICANN, and others, why don't we "bend" the 
>standards and stack the deck in our own favor?  Let's all make our own DNS 
>servers authoritative for "new.net."  And, to prevent people from finding 
>out the IP addresses and getting to new.net that way, either blackhole the 
>routes, or add host routes on your LAN that points to some www server/page 
>that points out why what new.net is doing is a Bad Thing.

Send us all a postcard from prison, OK:

4. Stability of the root zone and criminal consequences

    It should be recognized that in the United States, altering DNS
    records to the detriment of a pre-existing organization is covered
    under federal computer fraud statute, 18 United States Code, Section
    1030[6]. As a result, criminal convictions have resulted from the
    alteration of DNS information[7]. Most countries now have similar
    laws.

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-higgs-root-defs-00.txt

[7]  U.S. vs. Kashpureff (NY)
http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/kashpurepr.htm

>We need new TLDs in order to support the growth of the internet.  However, 
>we don't need to do it the way new.net is, and they need to be nipped in 
>the bud.

So instead of wasting energy making the case against you for the 
prosecution, why don't you use that energy productively in this situation? 
New.net already know this. They don't yet know how to go about it.

Best Regards,

Simon Higgs

--
It's a feature not a bug...