nanog mailing list archives
Re: Verisign Responds
From: Randy Bush <randy () psg com>
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 11:55:41 -0700
lets try this again... why should a valid DNS protocol element be made illegal in some parts of the tree and not others? if its bad one place, why is it ok other places?
because some engineers think that all social and business problems can be solved by technical hacks. it's the godess's revenge for the lawyers who think all engineering problems can be solved at layer nine. randy, who will go back to work now
Current thread:
- Re: Verisign Responds, (continued)
- Re: Verisign Responds Paul Vixie (Sep 23)
- Re: Verisign Responds Jack Bates (Sep 23)
- Re: Verisign Responds Matthew Richardson (Sep 23)
- Re: Verisign Responds Kevin Loch (Sep 23)
- Re: Verisign Responds bmanning (Sep 23)
- Re: Verisign Responds Dan Hollis (Sep 23)
- Re: Verisign Responds bmanning (Sep 23)
- Re: Verisign Responds Crist Clark (Sep 23)
- Re: Verisign Responds Dan Hollis (Sep 23)
- Re: Verisign Responds bmanning (Sep 23)
- Re: Verisign Responds Randy Bush (Sep 23)
- Re: Verisign Responds Vadim Antonov (Sep 23)
- Re: Verisign Responds Måns Nilsson (Sep 24)
- Re: Verisign Responds Stephen J. Wilcox (Sep 23)
- Re: Verisign Responds Andy Walden (Sep 23)
- Re: Verisign Responds Kee Hinckley (Sep 23)
- Re: Verisign Responds Dave Crocker (Sep 25)
- Re: Verisign Responds Randy Bush (Sep 23)
- Re: Verisign Responds Eliot Lear (Sep 23)
- Re: Verisign Responds Dave Crocker (Sep 23)
- Re: Verisign Responds Jim Segrave (Sep 24)