nanog mailing list archives
Re: Wacky Weekend: The '.secure' gTLD
From: Michael Thomas <mike () mtcc com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 17:57:11 -0700
On 05/31/2012 05:43 PM, Grant Ridder wrote:
I think this is an interesting concept, but i don't know how well it will hold up in the long run. All the initial verification and continuous scanning will no doubtingly give the .secure TLD a high cost relative to other TLD's.
Countries would never all agree on what the definition of "secure" was, so clearly we'll have to have secure.ly secure.it secure.us secure.no ... Mike
Current thread:
- Wacky Weekend: The '.secure' gTLD Jay Ashworth (May 31)
- Re: Wacky Weekend: The '.secure' gTLD Jay Ashworth (May 31)
- Re: Wacky Weekend: The '.secure' gTLD Rubens Kuhl (May 31)
- Re: Wacky Weekend: The '.secure' gTLD Grant Ridder (May 31)
- Re: Wacky Weekend: The '.secure' gTLD Michael Thomas (May 31)
- Re: Wacky Weekend: The '.secure' gTLD Fred Baker (May 31)
- Re: Wacky Weekend: The '.secure' gTLD Michael Thomas (May 31)
- Re: Wacky Weekend: The '.secure' gTLD John Levine (May 31)
- Re: Wacky Weekend: The '.secure' gTLD Rubens Kuhl (May 31)
- Re: Wacky Weekend: The '.secure' gTLD Jay Ashworth (May 31)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Wacky Weekend: The '.secure' gTLD Hal Murray (May 31)