[34348] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Roeland Meyer)
Sat Feb 3 17:55:21 2001
Message-ID: <9DC8BBAD4FF100408FC7D18D1F092286039C41@condor.mhsc.com>
From: Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>
To: 'Patrick Greenwell' <patrick@cybernothing.org>,
Paul A Vixie <vixie@mfnx.net>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 14:35:23 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> From: Patrick Greenwell [mailto:patrick@cybernothing.org]
> Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2001 2:14 PM
> You mentioned in your pre-announcement TLD operators being
> eligible for
> this new list, but made no mention of domain name registrars.
>
> I count 141 ICANN "fully: accrediated domain name registrars, with an
> unknown number of secondary registrars due to systems like OpenSRS.
>
> These organizations collectively handle second-level name
> resolution for
> the overwhelming majority of the millions of .com, .net, and
> .org domains
> in use on the Internet. And while I haven't done a survey, I'd surmise
> that they overwhelmingly use BIND.
>
> Will these 141 organizations many of whose business relies on BIND be
> eligible for your fee-based list? Do they consitute providers
> of "critical
> infrastructure" in your eyes?
Considering that they have a positive revenue model (vs TLD registries that
don't, or have negative revenue models) I would suggest that they pay for it
and help support ISC/BIND.
