[164296] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: .nyc - here we go...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Kyle Creyts)
Wed Jul 3 19:44:11 2013
In-Reply-To: <CANQy6FaXatTF7R6MqY4MT=tbgc5FP9bunCQuAdgVAhmvOy03TQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 16:43:36 -0700
From: Kyle Creyts <kyle.creyts@gmail.com>
To: Paul Ferguson <fergdawgster@gmail.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
+10
On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 10:04 PM, Paul Ferguson <fergdawgster@gmail.com>wrote:
> Why does this discussion have to always be "one or the other"?
>
> We have multiple problems here, friends.
>
> Focus.
>
> - ferg
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Andrew Sullivan <asullivan@dyn.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 12:15 AM, Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon@cox.net>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Makes me wonder if concern for routing table size is worrying about the
> >> right thing.
> >>
> >
> > Because obviously, the problems of scaling router memory and scaling DNS
> > servers are the same kind?
> >
> > Yes, having many many new TLDs introduces new problems. (If you're not
> > scared enough, I encourage you to go read the output of the Variant
> Issues
> > Project. Full disclosure: I had a hand in.) Why are we talking about
> this
> > non-news now? We all knew about three years ago, at the latest, that
> ICANN
> > was planning to do this. If we didn't, shame on us.
> >
> > A
>
>
>
> --
> "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson
> fergdawgster(at)gmail.com
>
>
--
Kyle Creyts
Information Assurance Professional
BSidesDetroit Organizer
