Discuss mailing list

[Fusl Dash <opennic AT lists.dedilink.eu>]

> I'm replying to multiple people to not spam the list with individual emails.
It's always better to write individual emails for each reply as anything else 
would break the thread view on mailing lists and email clients:

https://scr.meo.ws/snapshot/1482606341393585705.png

On 12/24/2016 06:44 PM, Amunak wrote:
> Chiming in after some Christmas-y goodness. I'm replying to multiple people 
> to not spam the list with individual emails.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> On 24.12.2016 1:38, Jonah Aragon wrote:
> 
>> I would consider the whole idea a success if they even READ any letter we 
>> sent them, but I have my doubts against that. It's a useless cause that 
>> will either go unheard or uncared about. We have no leverage, so to speak.
>>
>> I'd like to hear what other people think about the letter, but personally 
>> I believe it's ridiculous.
>>
> I agree that it's kind of ridiculous and I'd also agree that even getting 
> /any reply/ would be a success on its own. But we have literally nothing to 
> lose and it'd be interesting to see if (and potentially what) they respond. 
> And if they don't respond we at least know for sure that they don't care.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> On 23.12.2016 21:43, Jeff Taylor wrote:
> 
>> If you're worried about a precedent being set, you're about a decade too 
>> late.
>>
> True, but it's different now since there are hundreds of TLD applications 
> to ICANN and they accept tons of them, potentially "endangering" /all/ of 
> our TLDs. If we bow now and they manage to conflict with all our TLDs in a 
> year or two, what will we do? Do we keep migrating (which means breaking 
> links, certs, websites,  essentually most of our existence that already is 
> pretty minor)? I'd like to see an actual /solution/, perhaps even some end 
> goal or something, not just /existing/ however we can. One specific 
> solution that comes to mind would be not allowing registration of any 
> domains already registered on Amazon's .free, but resolving ours if it was 
> registered first (and didn't expire). It's not ideal but it's better than 
> picking one root or another.
> 
>> Apparently if something doesn't have the backing of major corporations and 
>> billions of dollars, then it must be the cause of all things bad...
> 
> Well... They are (understandably) watching their backs. We have nothing to 
> offer them, they would only have to expend money and give out control  to 
> us and I doubt they want to do that. And they are also right that DNS roots 
> carry a huge responsibility and can potentially break the whole internet.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> On 23.12.2016 20:53, vv AT cgs.pw wrote:
> 
>> I think it is a good idea to write to those organizations, even just for 
>> the perspective that a response might offer. However, I wonder who would 
>> write such a letter. If you do it then perhaps post the text here for 
>> comment.
>>
> As for writing the letter I think some of our senior members who fully 
> recognize the issues with dropping or keeping a conflicting TLD /as well 
> as/ providing both T1 and T2 servers for some time should write it (if they 
> want), and perhaps we as community could/should chime in. Also because I'm 
> lazy.
> 
>> As for ICANN watching this list, I'm not sure if you're kidding or not, 
>> but I would suggest that there is an extremely small chance that it could 
>> be the case. :)
>>
> Icann, even though it's a nonprofit, still has upwards of 400 employees 
> worldwide. I find it very likely that at least some of them are aware of 
> OpenNIC and watching what we do (even if it's just their own personal 
> initiative). There are not that many DNS roots and we are the biggest (and 
> arguably most "practical" one) so it's in their interest to at least 
> sometimes look at what we do. We may seem irrelevant but what it takes is 
> really just any "fan" of OpenNIC being in a place of power of any ISP and 
> we could gain thousands of users - something they should (want to) watch 
> out for.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> On 22.12.2016 18:09, nnnn20430 wrote:
> 
>> how about .lib ? or is it too short? if not .lib then .libre
>>
> I'd like to point out that (according to Wikipedia 
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_DNS_root#Emercoin>) .lib is 
> provided by Emercoin and peered /already/ by us. I can't check if that's 
> really the case so feel free to correct me (and the article).
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Merry Christmas everyone.
> 
> Amunak
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------
> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
> You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org
> 

-- 
Best regards

Fusl - root AT meo.ws - http://meo.ws/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature