3 ms·
This is essentially a hijacking of the DNS as far as I’m concerned. The sale of .org is heinous; And I’m an unabashed capitalist. There is absolutely nothing d
by davidu 7y ago
This is essentially a hijacking of the DNS as far as I’m concerned. The sale of .org is heinous; And I’m an unabashed capitalist.
There is absolutely nothing defensible about this move that I can see.
Is there any argument that this is beneficial to anyone except Ethos and Internet Society? Is it even clear they have the right to sell it?
Has every person at ISOC submitted conflict statements? Are they willing to commit to never benefit financially from Ethos controlled entities for 10+ years?
- Proven 7y ago> The sale of .org is heinous; And I’m an unabashed capitalist. It's fascist, if anything. The system was built by governments and government organizations. It is operated (milked) by the private sector. There are hundreds of crypto currencies. Each works well for someone, some work great for many. All are private. A capitalist DNS system could work without state interference.
- 3xblah 7y ago"This is essentially a hijacking of the DNS as far as I'm concerned." At the last NANOG, the keynote speaker described three instances where companies have "hijacted" the DNS. https://blog.apnic.net/2019/11/04/dns-wars/ https://blog.apnic.net/2019/11/04/dns-wars/ The first "hijack" was Versisign wildcarding unregistered .com and .net domains (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Site_Finder https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Site_Finder). The second was OpenDNS redirecting Google searches to an OpenDNS proxy (http://web.archive.org/web/20120518025819/http://www.opendns.com:80/support/article/111 http://web.archive.org/web/20120518025819/http://www.opendns...).[1] The third is the EDNS client subnet extension.[2] 1. Acording to the keynote this led to the creation of Google Public DNS "within 45 days". 2. If I am not mistaken, OpenDNS was an early proponent of EDNS client subnet adoption.