nanog mailing list archives
Re: no whois info ?
From: Janet Sullivan <ciscogeek () bgp4 net>
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 17:03:37 -0700
Rich Kulawiec wrote:
And the other side of it is: I don't think an Internet with anonymous people controlling operational resources is workable.
OK, how many anonymous domains (ala domainsbyproxy) have you been unable to contact?
I *never* attempt to contact the owners of a domain which appears to be the source of abuse, anonymous or otherwise.
I'm confused. You never try to contact the owners of a domain which appears to be the source of abuse, but insist that domains can't be anonymous?
Current thread:
- Re: no whois info ?, (continued)
- Re: no whois info ? Rich Kulawiec (Dec 11)
- Re: no whois info ? Janet Sullivan (Dec 11)
- Re: no whois info ? william(at)elan.net (Dec 12)
- Re: no whois info ? Janet Sullivan (Dec 12)
- Re: no whois info ? william(at)elan.net (Dec 12)
- Re: no whois info ? Michael . Dillon (Dec 13)
- Re: no whois info ? Robert E . Seastrom (Dec 13)
- Re: no whois info ? Jack Bates (Dec 13)
- Re: no whois info ? Rich Kulawiec (Dec 12)
- Re: no whois info ? Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine (Dec 12)
- Re: no whois info ? Janet Sullivan (Dec 12)
- Re: no whois info ? Steve Gibbard (Dec 12)
- Re: no whois info ? Alex Bligh (Dec 12)
- Re: no whois info ? Peter John Hill (Dec 09)
- Re: no whois info ? Raymond Dijkxhoorn (Dec 09)
- Re: no whois info ? Mike Tancsa (Dec 09)
- Re: no whois info ? Peter John Hill (Dec 09)
- Re: no whois info ? Elmar K. Bins (Dec 10)
- Re: no whois info ? william(at)elan.net (Dec 10)
- Re: no whois info ? Peter Corlett (Dec 10)