Paul and Karl going at it again -- don't read this (Re: Domain Rant. )

This message is entirely worthless. Don't waste your time on it. Hit D now.

> IAHC's proposal fixes the problem folks are seeing with NS today.

No it doesn't.

Yes, it does. Nyaa, nyaa.

If you register with someone, pay them, and they claim never to have
received payment you're just as screwed. They hold or delete your
record and you end up paying again.

With 28 competing registries all able to handle the accounting for a *.gTLD
second level name -- and we expect that COM will be made into one such after
the cooperative agreement expires in 1998 -- I expect world class professional
billing to be the norm. After all, if customers can switch registry providers
WITHOUT CHANGING THEIR DOMAIN NAME, I think that providers will have a little
more incentive to mark down when someone makes a payment.

(ISC.ORG was put on hold recently. I faxed NS the cancelled check, and they
unheld me. This is clearly a case of a networking company trying to do
accounting. There's probably a broken AWK script at the root of this idiocy.)

What is it that you dislike about eDNS Paul? I'd love to see some actual
substantive criticism (as opposed to "IAHC is God") of the policy points.

eDNS is a coup attempt by disgruntled loop seekers who, having been told the
rules in the real sandbox, pouted for a while and then went off to form their
own, and are now trying to convince onlookers that theirs is the real one.

You should spend some time volunteering at your local kindergarten -- once you
have seen how 5-year-olds play together, a lot of the mystery goes right out
of DNS politics.