[63624] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: News coverage, Verisign etc.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Patrick W. Gilmore)
Wed Oct 8 15:45:02 2003
Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2003 15:40:49 -0400
From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>
To: nanog@merit.org
Cc: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net>, up@3.am
In-Reply-To: <6.0.0.22.0.20031008152347.09c9e698@209.112.4.2>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
-- On Wednesday, October 8, 2003 15:28 -0400
-- Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net> supposedly wrote:
> At 03:06 PM 08/10/2003, up@3.am wrote:
>
>
>> In these days of corporate malfeasance scandal coverage, you'd think that
>> Verisign's tactics would have whetted the appetite of some bright
>> investigative reporter for one of the major publications.
>
> Too difficult and obscure a topic to make interesting. Its even worse
> than the S&L scandal of the 80s. Things like ice statues pissing vodka
> at private million dollar parties are easy to cover in that a picture
> says it all.... There is no easy way to convey this issue to the general
> public in just a few words and at the same time not put them to sleep....
"The company which manages all .com & .net domain names recently decided to
redirect any and all type-os to their own servers, angering every Network
Operator on the planet. They did this with absolutely no advanced warning
or public comment period.
This has the makings of a war which could shake the foundations of the web
and change the way users get to web pages."
Hrmm, yer right, probably not spicy enough for today's tabloids. Maybe a
reporter could say something about "lining their pockets using a monopoly"
or "battling titans like AOL and Microsoft", but those are not very
technical arguments.
--
TTFN,
patrick
