nanog mailing list archives
RE: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded
From: "Vivien M." <vivienm () dyndns org>
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 18:12:29 -0500
-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu]On Behalf Of jamie rishaw Sent: February 3, 2001 5:36 PM To: Patrick Greenwell Cc: Paul A Vixie; nanog () merit edu Subject: Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded On Sat, Feb 03, 2001 at 02:14:12PM -0800, Patrick Greenwell wrote:I count 141 ICANN "fully: accrediated domain name registrars, with an unknown number of secondary registrars due to systems like OpenSRS. These organizations collectively handle second-level name resolution for the overwhelming majority of the millions of .com, .net, and.org domainsin use on the Internet. And while I haven't done a survey, I'd surmise that they overwhelmingly use BIND. Will these 141 organizations many of whose business relies on BIND be eligible for your fee-based list? Do they consitute providersof "criticalinfrastructure" in your eyes?They're registrars. The don't directly provide DNS in any more critical a nature than any commercial DNS provider. And, since they're commercial organizations using BIND in a commercial aspect, I think they can cough up the money.
Disclaimer: I'm not a registrar myself, but I thought that GTLD registrars sent everything to the NSI registry, and NSI still maintained the actual zone files on the GTLD servers. If this is correct, I would argue that they don't provide DNS in any way (except to their internal machines); certainly, they're not part of critical infrastructure (whereas *.gtld-servers.net, the contents of which they contribute to, certainly are). Therefore, they'd have less need to know about BIND security bugs than a commercial DNS provider, or a non-profit DNS provider like us. Vivien -- Vivien M. vivienm () dyndns org Assistant System Administrator Dynamic DNS Network Services http://www.dyndns.org/
Current thread:
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded, (continued)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Adam McKenna (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Joe Rhett (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Patrick Greenwell (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Paul A Vixie (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Adam Rothschild (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded jlewis (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Valdis . Kletnieks (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Patrick Greenwell (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded jamie rishaw (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Patrick Greenwell (Feb 24)
- RE: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Vivien M. (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Jeffrey Meltzer (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Adrian Chadd (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Joe Rhett (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded mdevney (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Paul A Vixie (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Christian Kuhtz (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Bill Fumerola (Feb 24)
- RE: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded mdevney (Feb 24)