nanog mailing list archives
Re: VeriSign's rapid DNS updates in .com/.net
From: Paul Vixie <vixie () vix com>
Date: 23 Jul 2004 07:24:17 +0000
because i have sometimes been accused of being unfair to markk, i checked. markk () verisignlabs com (Mark Kosters) writes:
the primary beneficiaries of this new functionality are spammers and other malfeasants,I think this is a true statement.Has anyone done any studies to prove this conjecture?
at dictionary.reference.com we see the following: | con·jec·ture P Pronunciation Key (kn-jkchr) | n. | | 1. Inference or judgment based on inconclusive or incomplete evidence; | guesswork. | | 2. A statement, opinion, or conclusion based on guesswork: The commentators | made various conjectures about the outcome of the next election. as the author of the statement in question, and based on the definition shown, it's just not conjecture.
If this was true, maybe those registries who do perform this particular service today ought to slow down their update frequency.
as others have pointed out, spammers will always find a way to spam, and while the number of cases where the beneficiary is not a spammer is small, it's not zero. so we have to do it. but when someone says, later, that the .COM zone generator ought to use a ttl template of 300 rather than 86400 in order that changes and deletions can get the same speedy service as additions, i hope that icann will say "no." wrt the mit paper on why small ttl's are harmless, i recommend that y'all actually read it, the whole thing, plus some of the references, rather than assuming that the abstract is well supported by the body. -- Paul Vixie
Current thread:
- RE: VeriSign's rapid DNS updates in .com/.net (fwd from ml), (continued)
- RE: VeriSign's rapid DNS updates in .com/.net (fwd from ml) Sam Stickland (Jul 22)
- RE: VeriSign's rapid DNS updates in .com/.net (fwd from ml) Sam Stickland (Jul 22)
- Re: VeriSign's rapid DNS updates in .com/.net Paul Vixie (Jul 22)
- Re: VeriSign's rapid DNS updates in .com/.net Daniel Karrenberg (Jul 22)
- Re: VeriSign's rapid DNS updates in .com/.net Daniel Karrenberg (Jul 22)
- Re: VeriSign's rapid DNS updates in .com/.net Pete Schroebel (Jul 22)
- Re: VeriSign's rapid DNS updates in .com/.net Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine (Jul 22)
- Re: VeriSign's rapid DNS updates in .com/.net Mark Kosters (Jul 22)
- Re: VeriSign's rapid DNS updates in .com/.net Valdis . Kletnieks (Jul 22)
- Re: VeriSign's rapid DNS updates in .com/.net Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine (Jul 22)
- Re: VeriSign's rapid DNS updates in .com/.net Paul Vixie (Jul 23)
- Re: VeriSign's rapid DNS updates in .com/.net william(at)elan.net (Jul 22)
- Re: VeriSign's rapid DNS updates in .com/.net Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine (Jul 22)
- Re: VeriSign's rapid DNS updates in .com/.net Matt Larson (Jul 23)
- Re: VeriSign's rapid DNS updates in .com/.net Duane Wessels (Jul 23)
- Re: VeriSign's rapid DNS updates in .com/.net william(at)elan.net (Jul 23)
- Re: VeriSign's rapid DNS updates in .com/.net Paul Vixie (Jul 24)
- Re: VeriSign's rapid DNS updates in .com/.net Randy Bush (Jul 24)
- Re: VeriSign's rapid DNS updates in .com/.net Robert E. Seastrom (Jul 24)