I stand corrected. Pre 2000 ('99 ?) the list of root-servers.net carried the full com & net zones. And yes, now those zones are hosted solely on the list of gtld-servers.net servers.
The original operational/organizational diversity of the root-servers is no longer so important as it had been a few years ago.
They run a copy of the com/net zones from A. I see this wildcard in effect on A now...but, for example, I don't see it on F at this moment. When, later tonight, F transfers com from A, the wildcard will be there. This wildcard was trivial to add...and would be possible to remove after the zones are pulled over from A.
Still, it's unlikely this'lll get worked out by this sort of tit-for-tat amongst root operators.
Also, contact the operators of the root nameservers B-M.
No direct contact addresses, but hostmaster@domain for these is a good start, but a list of CIOs (ot the equiv) for these orgs would be more apppropriate... http://www.icann.org/committees/d ns-root/y2k-state ment.htm The root nameservers are operated by all these different entities for the precise reason of preventing this sort of shennanigans. John Postel saw this coming.
If this is a company email server and there are costs associated with install, configuration, admin, then consider plunking down some cash. CommuniGatePro (from stalker.com) runs on just about any platform out there, is very solid, a bazillion features, and once you have it in place (very easy if you have a good understanding of email fundamentals) you can turn account admin over to HR...or even the receptionist. SSL, webmail, etc.
I don't work for Stalker, but I'm a good customer and a big fan. $499 for a 50 user. I run it in conjunction with MailScanner for piping through Spamassassin & Clam AV.
Apparently not a very good one. Most all active WELL users are still interfacing through an ~15+ year old command line toolset.
Slashdot could learn a little something from WELL
on
Salon in Dire Straits
·
· Score: 1
This isn't intended to be flamebait, but is somewhat critical. The WELL has maintained such a dedicated (albeit small) userbase by sticking to a few rules that aren't common on other discussion boards.
No anonymous posting. The motto on The WELL is "You own your own words." Anynymous posting encourages cheap potshots and detracts from the reputation based system when you can post as yourself one time, but then hide behind an anonymous posting in the same thread. Letting users turn off their karma counter for a minute to post as an Anonymous Coward detracts from the system's ability to host an intelligent discussion on anything, let alone something controversial.
Persistence of discussions. There are active discussion topics on the WELL that go back to '85. You can read stuff that predates public internet when WELL users from accross the country were using the Compuserve Packet Network to connect in from local POPs. Here on Slashdot the half-life of a discussion is generally a couple days, then the action moves on to the new topics. Slashdot's karma system rewards those who are the quickest to jump into a discussion, while more thought out posts get less weight if they come in late. The ability to take a look back at how people were talking weeks or months or years ago on a topic is a really cool thing. Perspectives change, and persistent threads on a topic, rather than just new threads based on the latest news story or press release allow easy reference back to previous discussion.
Bye bye Salon, but the Well will likely remain.
on
Salon in Dire Straits
·
· Score: 1
Whatever number of 1000's are on the official roles of the WELL, there are essentially 500-1000 people that actively log in and use the service. There are a large number that have been online there for 10+ years that just couldn't live without it. The systems consist of 5 or 6 machines, the essential staff 3 or 4 people, and the required bandwidth ~10Mb (mostly for piping all the SPAM that comes with hundreds of 10 year old email addresses). Without being underwritten by Salon, WELL users might face fees in the range of $100-$200 per year to support the conferencing system.
ks?hy in the hell would a soccer mom want to do all this crap standing up?
"All this crap" isn't writing chapters of a novel or balancing the family budget spreadsheet. It is sending mails as verbose as "Don't forget to pick up the drycleaning", or reading a message about practice being cancelled next week, or adding feta cheese to the shopping list.
And you most certainly do sound sexist when you automatically assume that a 'soccer mom' is anywhere near the kitchen for any length of time.
If you concede that there are such beings as "soccer moms", then criticizing a the tone of a hypothesis based
on an implied behavior of this stereotype is contradictory on your part. I mean, it's not like "soccer mom" is some fucking degoratory label. It is a title of affluence denoting mom doesn't have to work and can spend her time raising her children.
I would further argue:
1) There *do* exist millions of instances of the popular stereotype "soccer mom".
2) These people *do* spend a lot of time in the kitchen. Not necessarially slavishly cooking for their family, but because the kitchen today is more that a food preparation space. It is a place to eat, read, use the phone, do your homework.
3) These beings have a frequent use for lightweight computing functions such as web, email, IM, and calendaring.
ergo, should this device genuinely deliver these applications in a usable manner in a location proximal to Soccer Mom's base of operation then it would be a "Great tool for the Soccer Mom".
Consider the layout of the modern upscale suburban household. There are large, open kitchens with islands or "breakfast nooks" in which most of the food preparation and eating is done. The "galley" style kitchen isn't in new home designs and the multi-use kitchen is extremely common these days. Mom is spending a lot of time there and is her terminal is just a glance away with this appliance.
People that can afford to spend several hundred more $ for a fridge will value this kind of convenience. The value I see in this is the functionality that will provided in the future wireless tablet PC. It's a terminall with a lightweight set of functions, but it located where you need it.
Not to sound sexist, but there are millions of soccer moms out there for whom this would be a valuable and useful tool. IM'ing with the husband at work, displaying calendar of practice times and PTA meetings, reading discussion groups for the next trip to the Magic Kingdom.... With the kids running around all day it is impossible to take time out sitting in the study in front of the desktop PC. This isn't for/.'ers on average, it's for when we grow up, have kids, and of course, get rich.
Markoff's article is about Malamud & Vixie wanting to operate the registry for.org. Their bid is differentiated by their reputations and their promise to "public domain" the software needed to operate the registry.
Many posts above are confusing the different entities of a domain REGISTRAR and a REGISTRY. There are now, what, hundreds of companies allowing you to register a domain. All these must pay a fee to and submit data to the top level domain registry. Presently for.net,.com, and.org VeriSign. The ICANN deal with VeriSign is to let them keep being the registry if they hand.org off to another company for administration (and pay out US$5M to cover costs). There is nothing about changing policies for who can register a.org. That all went out the window under NetworkSolutions' watch. If VeriSign had control of all three TLDs way back then the taxonomic enforcement that still exists in.edu might still exist as they specialized in reviewing cooporate profiles and documentation, i.e. SSL cert registries. But I digress...
This is a lucrative deal for the bidder that can impress the ICANN board with their proposal. ICANN's RFP starts here...
http://www.icann.org/tlds/org/ and goes on and on and on. One interesting sub-page in there is the "model.org Registry Agreement"
http://www.icann.org/tlds/org/model-registry-agmt. htm The organizational and technical requirements are strenuous. An adequate reply to this RFP sounds like a significant undertaking in and of itself!
I used to work for Vixie and know Malamud by reputation. It is my opinion that the two of them could build excellent tools for for operating a registry. I could see other, new, registry operators adopting their tools in the and their paving the way for ICANN allotting more TLDs in the future.
Note: the Markoff article mentions other bidders that have merit. One of which is a partnership with the Internet Society (http://www.isoc.org) and Afilias Global Registry Services (the.info folks). If they were to propose giving away their backend too I would surely use my ICANN At-Large membership to vote in their favor. Oh wait, ICANN At-Large memberships were never worth a shit and were dissolved...
I don't understand your definitions here. What would you call a "root nameserver"? What I have come to understand "root nameserver" to mean is one of the, what, 13 now (A-M.root-servers.net), servers that all our resolving nameservers use to get NS records for records in the com, net, et al zones. Way back in time, NetSol used to update A.ROOT-SERVERS.NET for the com zone/gTLD daily and the other roots would transfer it daily.
What would be a root nameserver that serves up "a few hundred NS records in one zone file"?
Now, operating a gTLD *registry* means you are providing the zone file for your gTLD to the root nameservers on a daily basis. (Is this is currently done via *XFR or ftp I do not know.) To operate a gTLD registry you don't need to run a nameserver for your gTLD. You just need to provide the mechanism to deliver your zones to the root nameservers (and maybe that would involve a named communication). That is the easy technical aspect of operating a gTLD registry.
The difficult part is the communication with the horde of *registrars* and maintaining your internal database of the gTLD. (as you recognized also)
I agree with the thinking of the above post, but think the muddled terminology is potentially misinformative for some readers.
Slashdot Mirror
I stand corrected.
Pre 2000 ('99 ?) the list of root-servers.net carried the full com & net zones. And yes, now those zones are hosted solely on the list of gtld-servers.net servers.
The original operational/organizational diversity of the root-servers is no longer so important as it had been a few years ago.
They run a copy of the com/net zones from A. I see this wildcard in effect on A now...but, for example, I don't see it on F at this moment. When, later tonight, F transfers com from A, the wildcard will be there.
This wildcard was trivial to add...and would be possible to remove after the zones are pulled over from A.
Still, it's unlikely this'lll get worked out by this sort of tit-for-tat amongst root operators.
Also, contact the operators of the root nameservers B-M.
d ns-root/y2k-state ment.htm
No direct contact addresses, but hostmaster@domain for these is a good start, but a list of CIOs (ot the equiv) for these orgs would be more apppropriate...
http://www.icann.org/committees/
The root nameservers are operated by all these different entities for the precise reason of preventing this sort of shennanigans. John Postel saw this coming.
If this is a company email server and there are costs associated with install, configuration, admin, then consider plunking down some cash. CommuniGatePro (from stalker.com) runs on just about any platform out there, is very solid, a bazillion features, and once you have it in place (very easy if you have a good understanding of email fundamentals) you can turn account admin over to HR...or even the receptionist. SSL, webmail, etc.
I don't work for Stalker, but I'm a good customer and a big fan. $499 for a 50 user. I run it in conjunction with MailScanner for piping through Spamassassin & Clam AV.
Apparently not a very good one. Most all active WELL users are still interfacing through an ~15+ year old command line toolset.
No anonymous posting. The motto on The WELL is "You own your own words." Anynymous posting encourages cheap potshots and detracts from the reputation based system when you can post as yourself one time, but then hide behind an anonymous posting in the same thread. Letting users turn off their karma counter for a minute to post as an Anonymous Coward detracts from the system's ability to host an intelligent discussion on anything, let alone something controversial.
Persistence of discussions. There are active discussion topics on the WELL that go back to '85. You can read stuff that predates public internet when WELL users from accross the country were using the Compuserve Packet Network to connect in from local POPs. Here on Slashdot the half-life of a discussion is generally a couple days, then the action moves on to the new topics. Slashdot's karma system rewards those who are the quickest to jump into a discussion, while more thought out posts get less weight if they come in late. The ability to take a look back at how people were talking weeks or months or years ago on a topic is a really cool thing. Perspectives change, and persistent threads on a topic, rather than just new threads based on the latest news story or press release allow easy reference back to previous discussion.
Whatever number of 1000's are on the official roles of the WELL, there are essentially 500-1000 people that actively log in and use the service. There are a large number that have been online there for 10+ years that just couldn't live without it. The systems consist of 5 or 6 machines, the essential staff 3 or 4 people, and the required bandwidth ~10Mb (mostly for piping all the SPAM that comes with hundreds of 10 year old email addresses). Without being underwritten by Salon, WELL users might face fees in the range of $100-$200 per year to support the conferencing system.
"All this crap" isn't writing chapters of a novel or balancing the family budget spreadsheet. It is sending mails as verbose as "Don't forget to pick up the drycleaning", or reading a message about practice being cancelled next week, or adding feta cheese to the shopping list.
And you most certainly do sound sexist when you automatically assume that a 'soccer mom' is anywhere near the kitchen for any length of time.
If you concede that there are such beings as "soccer moms", then criticizing a the tone of a hypothesis based on an implied behavior of this stereotype is contradictory on your part. I mean, it's not like "soccer mom" is some fucking degoratory label. It is a title of affluence denoting mom doesn't have to work and can spend her time raising her children.
I would further argue:
Well, yeah, yeah there is.
Consider the layout of the modern upscale suburban household. There are large, open kitchens with islands or "breakfast nooks" in which most of the food preparation and eating is done. The "galley" style kitchen isn't in new home designs and the multi-use kitchen is extremely common these days. Mom is spending a lot of time there and is her terminal is just a glance away with this appliance.
People that can afford to spend several hundred more $ for a fridge will value this kind of convenience. The value I see in this is the functionality that will provided in the future wireless tablet PC. It's a terminall with a lightweight set of functions, but it located where you need it.
Not to sound sexist, but there are millions of soccer moms out there for whom this would be a valuable and useful tool. IM'ing with the husband at work, displaying calendar of practice times and PTA meetings, reading discussion groups for the next trip to the Magic Kingdom.... With the kids running around all day it is impossible to take time out sitting in the study in front of the desktop PC.
This isn't for
Markoff's article is about Malamud & Vixie wanting to operate the registry for .org. Their bid is differentiated by their reputations and their promise to "public domain" the software needed to operate the registry.
.net, .com, and .org VeriSign. The ICANN deal with VeriSign is to let them keep being the registry if they hand .org off to another company for administration (and pay out US$5M to cover costs). There is nothing about changing policies for who can register a .org. That all went out the window under NetworkSolutions' watch. If VeriSign had control of all three TLDs way back then the taxonomic enforcement that still exists in .edu might still exist as they specialized in reviewing cooporate profiles and documentation, i.e. SSL cert registries. But I digress...
.org Registry Agreement". htm
.info folks). If they were to propose giving away their backend too I would surely use my ICANN At-Large membership to vote in their favor. Oh wait, ICANN At-Large memberships were never worth a shit and were dissolved...
Many posts above are confusing the different entities of a domain REGISTRAR and a REGISTRY. There are now, what, hundreds of companies allowing you to register a domain. All these must pay a fee to and submit data to the top level domain registry. Presently for
This is a lucrative deal for the bidder that can impress the ICANN board with their proposal. ICANN's RFP starts here...
http://www.icann.org/tlds/org/
and goes on and on and on. One interesting sub-page in there is the "model
http://www.icann.org/tlds/org/model-registry-agmt
The organizational and technical requirements are strenuous. An adequate reply to this RFP sounds like a significant undertaking in and of itself!
I used to work for Vixie and know Malamud by reputation. It is my opinion that the two of them could build excellent tools for for operating a registry. I could see other, new, registry operators adopting their tools in the and their paving the way for ICANN allotting more TLDs in the future.
Note: the Markoff article mentions other bidders that have merit. One of which is a partnership with the Internet Society (http://www.isoc.org) and Afilias Global Registry Services (the
I don't understand your definitions here.
What would you call a "root nameserver"? What I have come to understand "root nameserver" to mean is one of the, what, 13 now (A-M.root-servers.net), servers that all our resolving nameservers use to get NS records for records in the com, net, et al zones. Way back in time, NetSol used to update A.ROOT-SERVERS.NET for the com zone/gTLD daily and the other roots would transfer it daily.
What would be a root nameserver that serves up "a few hundred NS records in one zone file"?
Now, operating a gTLD *registry* means you are providing the zone file for your gTLD to the root nameservers on a daily basis. (Is this is currently done via *XFR or ftp I do not know.) To operate a gTLD registry you don't need to run a nameserver for your gTLD. You just need to provide the mechanism to deliver your zones to the root nameservers (and maybe that would involve a named communication). That is the easy technical aspect of operating a gTLD registry.
The difficult part is the communication with the horde of *registrars* and maintaining your internal database of the gTLD. (as you recognized also)
I agree with the thinking of the above post, but think the muddled terminology is potentially misinformative for some readers.