fwd: Re: [registrars] Re: panix.com hijacked

Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine brunner at nic-naa.net
Sun Jan 16 11:22:30 UTC 2005

Oki all,

Delivery of RC mail to me is fairly desultory. Apparently there is an
earlier thread. Post-Rome the very purpose of the RC seems to me to be
doubtful (advocacy for registrars other than NetSol+4), and post-Elana
the process of the RC left me disinterested.

I'm particularly enamored by Ross' notion of what is going on on NANOG.


------- Forwarded Message

Return-Path: owner-registrars at gnso.icann.org
Delivery-Date: Sun Jan 16 11:14:04 2005
Return-Path: <owner-registrars at gnso.icann.org>
Received: from greenriver.icann.org (greenriver.icann.org [])
	by nic-naa.net (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j0GBDxgx036293
	for <brunner at nic-naa.net>; Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:14:04 GMT
	(envelope-from owner-registrars at gnso.icann.org)
Received: from greenriver.icann.org (greenriver [])
	by greenriver.icann.org (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j0GEx1Qg006202;
	Sun, 16 Jan 2005 06:59:01 -0800
Received: (from majordomo at localhost)
	by greenriver.icann.org (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id j0GEx0hJ006201;
	Sun, 16 Jan 2005 06:59:01 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: greenriver.icann.org: majordomo set sender to owner-registrars at gnso.icann.org using -f
Received: from pechora.icann.org (pechora.icann.org [])
	by greenriver.icann.org (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j0GEwxrw006198
	for <registrars at greenriver.icann.org>; Sun, 16 Jan 2005 06:59:00 -0800
Received: from tomts16-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts16-srv.bellnexxia.net [])
	by pechora.icann.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j0GEwBA16293
	for <registrars at dnso.org>; Sun, 16 Jan 2005 06:58:11 -0800
Received: from [] ([])
          by tomts16-srv.bellnexxia.net
          (InterMail vM. 201-253-122-130-110-20040306) with ESMTP
          id <[email protected][]>;
          Sun, 16 Jan 2005 09:58:57 -0500
Message-ID: <41EA80BF.7020608 at tucows.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 09:57:03 -0500
From: "Ross Wm. Rader" <ross at tucows.com>
Reply-To: ross at tucows.com
Organization: Tucows Inc.
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mark Jeftovic <markjr at easydns.com>
CC: Registrars Constituency <registrars at dnso.org>
Subject: Re: [registrars] Re: panix.com hijacked
References: <Pine.LNX.4.58L0.0501160024320.11253 at c3po.easydns.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58L0.0501160024320.11253 at c3po.easydns.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-registrars at gnso.icann.org
Precedence: bulk

On 1/16/2005 12:29 AM Mark Jeftovic noted that:

> There's a thread on NANOG to the effect that panix.com has been
> hijacked from Dotster over to MelbourneIT and it has pretty
> well taken panix.com and its customers offline, see
> http://www.panix.net/

I don't see what you are looking at - .net and .com point to the same 
place with no indication of anything awry...of course, I'm late to the 
game and the DNS probably tells a different story...

> Looks like this may be among the first high-profile unauthorized
> transfer under the new transfer policy.

Looks like a bunch of guys on the NANOG list engaging in a lot of 
conjecture without the benefit of a lot of facts.

> Maybe there needs to some sort of emergency reversion where at least the
> nameservers can be rolled back immediately while the contesting parties
> sort it out.

Might be interesting - what criteria would trigger the process?

- -- 


"In the modern world the intelligence of public opinion is the one 
indispensable condition for social progress."
	- Charles W. Eliot (1834 - 1926)

------- End of Forwarded Message

More information about the NANOG mailing list