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

- -- "Chris L. Morrow" <christopher.morrow@verizonbusiness.com> wrote:

>Sure work on an expedited removal process inside a real procedure from
>ICANN down to the registry. Work on a metric and monetary system used to
>punish/disincent registrys from allowing their systems to be abused. Work
>on a service/solution for the end-user/enterprise that allows them to take
>action based on solid intelligence in a timely fashion with tracking on
>the bits of that intelligence.
>
>three options, go play :)
>

Good dialogue.

Fow what it's worth, I never advocated pushing "mechanisms" into
the DNS core to deal with this issue -- in fact, I agree with you:
It's an issue that can dealt with locally in recursive DNS, and it
also needs to be dealt with in the policies that exists.

One technical, one non-technical. Even up. :-)

- - ferg

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

wj8DBQFGU8Dkq1pz9mNUZTMRAuB3AJ4wWU9pq+thPlyR52jLCSH+UOW+3wCg/0Fx
d82qbmHd89AVVSHgnFg+MAs=
=VsuA
-----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/


