On Mon, 5 Jan 2004, Roger Marquis wrote:
On Mon, 5 Jan 2004, Doug Barton wrote:
There's already been a lot of discussion about why this is a good thing,
so I won't reiterate it all.
Thanks Doug. Are those discussions available on the net? If so
could you post the URL?
The
On Sun, Jan 04, 2004 at 09:13:39PM -0500, Leo Bicknell wrote:
I don't think I'm going out on a limb to suggest that names like
example.com should be used by _everybody_ in documentation examples,
least they pick something that might actually be used in the future.
To wit, the point is not
A) They don't own example.com and,
Who says they don't? RFC never says IANA can or cannot own.
B) this is the crux of the issue.
IANA was not granted special privileges by RFC2606 nor do they have
any more claim to these domains than Verisign does to unregistered
domains or expired
On Sun, 4 Jan 2004, Roger Marquis wrote:
Does anyone know why IANA has assigned NS and A records to the
example.{com,org,net,...} domains? They even put up a website
at the IP explaining RFC 2606.
* Why did they assign NSs and a valid IP to these invalid domains?
There's already been a
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Roger Marquis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 3:05 PM
Subject: Re: example.com/net/org DNS records
On Sunday, January 04, 2004 4:43 PM [GMT-5=EST], Roger Marquis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If UCE happens to contain a forged sender
of roble.com, would you consider that even remotely useful in a filter?
Yes. Roble manages several email gateways for companies other than
ourselves and we've
On Monday 05 January 2004 11:46 am, Doug Barton wrote:
On Sun, 4 Jan 2004, Roger Marquis wrote:
* Are they breaking anti-UCE filters by doing this? (yes)
This is an unfortunate side effect, but we believe that the user
education benefits are worth the cost.
As long as IANA isn't sending
On Mon, 5 Jan 2004, Doug Barton wrote:
Does anyone know why IANA has assigned NS and A records to the
example.{com,org,net,...} domains? They even put up a website
at the IP explaining RFC 2606.
There's already been a lot of discussion about why this is a good thing,
so I won't
Does anyone know why IANA has assigned NS and A records to the
example.{com,org,net,...} domains? They even put up a website
at the IP explaining RFC 2606.
* Why did they assign NSs and a valid IP to these invalid domains?
* Are they breaking the RFC by doing this?
* Are they breaking
Roger Marquis [1/4/2004 10:06 PM] :
Does anyone know why IANA has assigned NS and A records to the
example.{com,org,net,...} domains? They even put up a website
at the IP explaining RFC 2606.
Perhaps because at least some people don't know about RFC2606 (and they
don't know RFC1918 as well,
On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 08:36:17 PST, Roger Marquis said:
* Why did they assign NSs and a valid IP to these invalid domains?
So they can put up an explanatory website that says Don't do that,
you idiot. This is similar to the choice of one of the RFC1918 address
blocks because a major vendor used
Does anyone know why IANA has assigned NS and A records to the
example.{com,org,net,...} domains? They even put up a website
at the IP explaining RFC 2606.
because they are owned by the IANA.
* Why did they assign NSs and a valid IP to these invalid domains?
they are
* Are they breaking anti-UCE filters by doing this? (yes)
How? They own example.com. If UCE happens to contain a forged sender
of roble.com, would you consider that even remotely useful in a filter?
Why should example.com be any different? they will likely never use the
domain name, so
* Are they breaking anti-UCE filters by doing this? (yes)
How? They own example.com. If UCE happens to contain a forged sender
of roble.com, would you consider that even remotely useful in a filter?
Why should example.com be any different? they will likely never use the
domain name,
* Are they breaking anti-UCE filters by doing this? (yes)
How? They own example.com.
A) They don't own example.com and, B) this is the crux of the issue.
IANA was not granted special privileges by RFC2606 nor do they have
any more claim to these domains than Verisign does to unregistered
On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Why did they assign NSs and a valid IP to these invalid domains?
So they can put up an explanatory website that says Don't do that,
you idiot.
This is the best explanation I've read so far. Problem is, it's
not a compelling rational. Is this
Roger Marquis [1/5/2004 3:19 AM] :
This is the best explanation I've read so far. Problem is, it's
not a compelling rational. Is this really the only reason for
assigning NS and A records, violating the RFC, and breaking thousands
of spam filters in the process?
What spam did you see that
On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 13:43:36 PST, Roger Marquis said:
Example.dom was placed in the pubic domain by a public and open RFC
process. It seems that IANA has violated this process and in so
doing exceeded the authority vested in them by their contract with
DARPA (and the DOC?).
Erm. No,
On Mon, 5 Jan 2004, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
What spam did you see that forged example.* in the sender envelope / rDNS?
reject: RCPT from 123-58-189-66.wo.cpe.charter-ne.com[66.189.58.123]: 554 [EMAIL
PROTECTED]: Recipient address rejected: Relay access denied; from= to=[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
Does anyone know why IANA has assigned NS and A records to the
example.{com,org,net,...} domains? They even put up a website
at the IP explaining RFC 2606.
because they are owned by the IANA.
pedantic point:
no, they are not 'owned' by anybody. they are *reserved*, and
should not be
In a message written on Sun, Jan 04, 2004 at 05:51:40PM -0800, Randy Bush wrote:
pedantic point:
no, they are not 'owned' by anybody. they are *reserved*, and
should not be used by anybody.
To be really pedantic, from http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2606.html:
] 2. TLDs for Testing,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Leo Bicknell wrote:
In a message written on Sun, Jan 04, 2004 at 05:51:40PM
-0800, Randy Bush wrote:
pedantic point:
no, they are not 'owned' by anybody. they are *reserved*, and
should not be used by anybody.
To be really pedantic, from
Does anyone know why IANA has assigned NS and A records to the
example.{com,org,net,...} domains? They even put up a website
at the IP explaining RFC 2606.
because they are owned by the IANA.
pedantic point:
no, they are not 'owned' by anybody. they are *reserved*, and
should
23 matches
Mail list logo
