ICANN opens up Pandora's Box of new TLDs
morrowc.lists at gmail.com
Fri Jun 27 23:22:27 CDT 2008
(picking up where I ejected on the email...argh)
On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 12:19 AM, Christopher Morrow
<morrowc.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 11:13 PM, Tomas L. Byrnes <tomb at byrneit.net> wrote:
>> These issues are not separate and distinct, but rather related.
>> A graduated level of analysis of membership in any of the sets of:
>> 1: Recently registered domain.
> hi, I just registered 'newproduct.com' for my press release, I'm
> sending you emails from that domain since you signed up with my
> company for new news alerts abotu my great products!
>> 2: Short TTL
> I'm anticipating high traffic loads, I'm putting my pressrelease
> things on akamai/llnw, I want to shift that away quickly when traffic
> levels decrease. I made my ttl's short, for that, plus akamai sets my
> ttl's on their responses to 5mins.
>> 3: Appearance in DShield, Shadowserver, Cyber-TA and other sensor lists.
> sure, these are fine folks... they get things wring at times :(
>> 4: Invalid/Non-responsive RP info in Whois
> oh, whois isn't updated with NS info updates... so for 6-12 hours that
> data's not going to reflect 'valid' info while I send out my
>> Create a pretty good profile of someone you probably don't want to
>> accept traffic from.
> I agree that correlation across many forms of intell gathering is
> good, and probably the way out for folks on the good side of this
> battle. My point was that tossing FUD on top of the 'icann made a
> mistake, maybe' isn't helping the argument nor discussion.
> There should be some work, and maybe there is work happening on this,
> done to bring ICANN policies up to speed with respect to dealing with:
> 1) domain owners who have invalid (chronically bad) info
> 2) registrars who seem to solely
solely registering bad/criminal/abusive domains...
More information about the NANOG