I must admit, I had a laugh at the guy who said his software can't create A records for customer domains - Only wildcards. If I were him I'd be asking myself exactly why I'm using this piece of software.

Its a popular control panel software. Google it and you'll see...

Just about everything similar on the market does the same thing... Unfortunately we decided to use 3rd party software instead of developing something ourselves. What's so bad in that???

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: James Davis 
  To: kim§cynosure.com.au 
  Cc: dns§dotau.org 
  Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 5:48 PM
  Subject: Re: [DNS] Use of wildcard resource records




  <<snip>>
  |They were previously blocked, but the auDA Names Policy Review Panel in
  |2004 determined that "the technical basis for maintained the restriction
  |is no longer relevant". I'm not sure what study was performed to come to
  |the conclusion, but their final report reads:
  |
  |Recommendation 4: Restriction on domain names that match existing TLDs
  |
  |Recommendation 4:
  |
  |The Panel recommends that the restriction on domain names that match
  |existing TLDs be removed. Current policy: The auDA Reserved List
  |contains existing ccTLDs and gTLDs, which means that people cannot
  |register two-letter domain names such as "uk", "nz" and "jp", or other
  |domain names such as "com", "name" and "museum". The basis for reserving
  |gTLDs and ccTLDs is to comply with IETF standard RFC 1535 (refer to
  |http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1535.txt?number=1535.)
  |
  |Rationale:
  |
  |The Panel notes that the technical basis for maintaining the restriction
  |is no longer relevant due to DNS technology developments since RFC 1535
  |was drafted over 10 years ago. The Panel further notes that in the
  |past the restriction has been imposed inconsistently, and hence some
  |restricted names are in fact being used with no apparent ill effect.

  Well obviously they were wrong. The RFC may 10 years old, but it's still more than valid. As I stated in previous emails, not everyone has a decent sysadmin, or patched machines or correctly set up networks.

  Again does anyone see a valid use for these domains? Knowing that more than likely they will end up as link farms and utterly devoid of any useful content.

  Restricting these small subset of domains removes the need for auda to enforce a draconian policy of "If we don't like you, or the * reference you are using on your domain then we will remove the domain from your possession."
  Is there going to be some sort of mediation process? Or is the time frame set in concrete.. You may be using 30,000 virtual hosts off one domain (extreme end of scale) I can just imagine how long that would take to replace with actual entries rather than a wildcard.. Don't get me wrong I'm not against wildcards or for them, they have their place and I've used them plenty of times. My gripe is when domains like uk.com.au, com.com.au, au.com.au are wildcarded.


  What defines "against the best interest of .au" ??

  I must admit, I had a laugh at the guy who said his software can't create A records for customer domains - Only wildcards. If I were him I'd be asking myself exactly why I'm using this piece of software.

  Regards
  James



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://dotau.org/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.cynosure.com.au/mailman/private/dns/attachments/20061204/961f2025/attachment-0001.htm