On Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 18:04:03 +1100, O Plameras wrote: >Penedo wrote: >>On 07/12/06, O Plameras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Because you don't understand that to be authoritative it involves >technical as >well as bureaucratice processes. You only know the technical aspect of it. >The technical aspect of the job is the easiest.
Please tell me the bureaucratic process. A link to some site explaining it. People set up nameservers and names all the time, it must be published somewhere. Please enlighten us! >If everybody can be authoritative by doing what J Waugh had done there >will be chaos on the internet. CHAOS ON THE INTERNET! SNAKES ON A PLANE ! But seriously, the internet is like this, and it seems to work reasonably well. >The whole point: > >perkypants.org is not authoritative for plammered.perkypants.org. >I know how he does this. Yes it is that is the whole point. The nameserver that is associated with perkypants.org is authoritative for plammered.perkypants.org Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_name_system) explains this quite well. Ok, lets just turn this all around, if Jeff's nameserver is *not* authoritative for plammered.perkypants.org please tell me which server is. >But fortunately, perkypants.org cannot make a >commercial proposition out of these activities. If perkypants.org >makes money by using someone else public ip address without authority >this is stealing. I'm not sure where money came into this. How / why would Jeff be making a commercial proposition out of these activities? >Again, just because you can, you do. Just as because you can >hack someones Server you do. I don't. You might. -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
