
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

- -- Roger Marquis <marquis@roble.com> wrote:

>Nobody's saying that the root servers are responsible, only that they
>are the point at which these domains would have to be squelched. In
>theory registrars could do this, but some would have a financial
>incentive not to. Also I don't believe registrars can update the roots
>quickly enough to be effective (correct me if I'm wrong).

Why not? The Registrars seem sto being doing a great job of
expediting the activation of new domains -- why can't they de-activate
them just as quickly when they find out they are being used for
malicious purposes?

The "business interests" of the registrars, that's why.

This is one of the many ways that ICANN, and the registrars
in general, are falling down on the job.

But I digress... I'll slink back under my rock now.

- - ferg

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Desktop 9.6.1 (Build 1012)

wj8DBQFGUS6Cq1pz9mNUZTMRAtRpAKC0GSrPnj3GRTtZ57sAOQfz4vnraACcDV10
Bp4R0+pkkIWJ5ZvTESy2KUw=
=mue1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--
"Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson
 Engineering Architecture for the Internet
 fergdawg(at)netzero.net
 ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/


