[105707] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: ICANN opens up Pandora's Box of new TLDs
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Frank Bulk - iNAME)
Sun Jun 29 16:39:55 2008
From: "Frank Bulk - iNAME" <frnkblk@iname.com>
To: "'Stephane Bortzmeyer'" <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>,
<nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <20080629163213.GB10417@sources.org>
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 15:36:41 -0500
Reply-To: frnkblk@iname.com
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
You do have a choice if you're not concerned about the deliverability of
your e-mail. Remember, the Internet remains a group of service
providers/organizations/subscribers that voluntarily work together and can
choose what goes in or out. And so if they decide not to receive traffic
from you, for any reason at all, there's no legal requirement. If they
require that all e-mail servers that want to send e-mail to them have rDNS
entries then persons who want to deliver e-mail to that entity need to
comply.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer [mailto:bortzmeyer@nic.fr]
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 11:32 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: ICANN opens up Pandora's Box of new TLDs
<snip>
We already see this in the email world, where a self-appointed cartel
like the MAAWG can decide technical rules and policies, bypassing both
IETF and ICANN. Even if only one half of the big operators enforce
these rules, they will become de facto regulations, since noone can
afford to have his email refused by this half. (To take a recent
example, I configure rDNS on every email server I managed, even if I
find the rule stupid and unfair, because I have no choice.)
<snip>
