On-going Internet Emergency and Domain Names

Sun Apr 1 02:25:45 UTC 2007

Douglas Otis wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-03-31 at 16:47 -0500, Frank Bulk wrote:
>> For some operations or situations 24 hours would be too long a time to wait.
>> There would need to be some mechanism where the delay could be bypassed.
> 
> What operation requires a new domain be published within 24 hours?  Even
> banks require several days before honoring checks as protection against
> fraud.  A slight delay allows preemptive enforcement measures.  It seems
> most if not all operations could factor in this delay into their
> planning.

"Sips of knowledge intoxicates the mind, while deeper drinking sobers it 
again."  Where did you drink that Kool-Aide?

Back when I was in the bank automation business, the main effort was to 
build a "quick-clearing" process, measured in hours, for checks.  The 
idea is that an electronic recording of the check would be sent to the 
issuing bank, payment made by the issuing bank to the account of the 
receiving bank, and the payment confirmed when the physical paper (or 
photocopy) of the check arrived.

(If the paper never showed up, the issuing bank would reverse the 
transfer of the money.)

The idea of fractional-day clearing was to reduce the float between 
banks.  Whether that fractional-day clearing made all the way to the 
customer is the decision of the receiving bank, as it controls when the 
funds are released to the depositor.  The receiving bank can *use* that 
money if it doesn't credit the depositing account immediately, but waits 
a day.

I'm a customer.  I want a domain name *now*, not in the future.  I 
believe that, given the speed of the Internet, there is no reason to 
introduce delays.

As for "tasting", I'm against it.  The cost of a domain name is small 
enough that there is no need to have a tasting.  Some of the excuses 
I've seen to support tasting can readily be handled by other processes 
that have the same effect, but without the potential for harm by abusers.