Hi James, Quoting James Davis on Monday July 24, 2006: | | I'm not sure if many of you have noticed, although I'm sure many have. | Recently Auda lifted the ban on registering a domain names that matches | existing top-level domain names. | | as many LARGE companies do, they generally have the following | settings on there SOE or in GPO | srchlist=local.foo.com.au/foo.com.au/com.au (even without this setting, | certain settings on the network interface cause the same behaviour. | | And finally, who in their right mind at auda, allowed this policy to be | passed.. It's idiotic. | | I welcome anyone's opinions, and to find out if anyone else has seen the | above behaviour, and if there's anything we can do to petition Auda to | actually consider third party applications before they do something like | this. The reason policies like this existed was exactly to prevent against this problem. It was indeed prevalent about 10 years ago to perform suffix searches in the resolver, and to whack in things like ".com.au", ".com" and ".au" in there. I argued against removing the restriction on the auDA Board because, even though anecdotally very few do this any more, I didn't see a compelling reason to release them when the risk still existed. The first time it was raised was in 2001, when I explained why the restriction was there, and the matter was dropped. It was raised again last year, and some others argued the problem didn't exist at all, but couldn't support this with any research as I recall. To be fair, almost every other TLD registry that had the same restriction has removed it, so auDA is one of the last places that had it existing. Whilst I don't really agree with the removal of the restriction, I think what this really highlights is the lack of a suitable mechanism for the operators who would be affected by the change to be advised in advance. Presumably just sticking it on auDA's webpage is not enough, and it is not clear to me what education campaign might have been conducted to explain to corporate enterprises they need to correct these kind of configurations. kimReceived on Mon Jul 24 2006 - 17:20:16 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:08 UTC