talideon

78 ms·

871.
by talideon 11y ago
Also, if you update any contacts associated with the domain.
872.
by talideon 11y ago
Potentially, you can have your registration revoked, but usually the address information isn't checked. If you don't want your information appearing in WHOIS, go with your registrar's WHOIS service, if they provide one. Don&#
873.
by talideon 11y ago
Registrars don't get domain names from ICANN. Registrars get domains from registries. ICANN is simply the regulatory body for registrars and registries. Registrars have to be accredited with ICANN before they can contract as registrars
874.
by talideon 11y ago
Fadi quitting has nothing to do with this. The 2013 RAA was done and dusted before he even started.
875.
by talideon 11y ago
I don't blame ICANN for this: this demand came from the law-enforcement agencies. I know that internally, ICANN would've been happy sticking with the existing WDRP process.
876.
by talideon 11y ago
Some registrars do it differently to minimise the junk that gets sent out. For instance, the registrar I work for groups domains by email address when sending out WDRP emails, so if you have, say, ten domains with the same expiration date,
877.
by talideon 11y ago
If you don't mind being charged a fortune for your domains, given that would wipe out the thin margin domain registrars work on.
878.
by talideon 11y ago
If you think the current WAP is bad, you should've seen what the LEAs were originally demanding registrars implement! shudders
879.
by talideon 11y ago
eNom are owned by Demand Media, so that's pretty much what you can expect!
880.
by talideon 11y ago
That's fine until they go rogue and use that to seize your domain as you've effectively established them as a contact. Then you're screwed.
881.
by talideon 11y ago
No irony: the registrar has to validate the details they have on record. If you have WHOIS privacy set with the registrar, they still have your unmasked details, in which case they contact you on that address, not the one presented in WHO
882.
by talideon 11y ago
A throwaway email address would be a bad idea, as you periodically have to confirm the address works.
883.
by talideon 11y ago
It is indeed useless, but it's much more involved than just contacting you the once: registrars are required to contact you at least yearly and after any contact updates, and if your mailserver isn't up and running, and you don&#x
884.
by talideon 11y ago
WDRP is different from the Whois Accuracy Program. All that's required there is that registrars email registrants and admin contacts a reminder showing the current WHOIS information for their domains. No confirmation is needed. The Who
885.
by talideon 11y ago
The whois accuracy program is such an enormous pain in the arse. It's worthless junk law-enforcement agencies demanded be included in the 2013 RAA that will have no useful impact on anything. It's just a massive resource drain o
886.
by talideon 11y ago
DANE can at least partly mitigate this, though that assumes that you've DNSSEC set up, along with TLSA records for your mailservers. Setting up DNSSEC is another kettle of fish, mind.
887.
by talideon 11y ago
It's an IDN: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internationalized_domain_name
888.
by talideon 11y ago
It's a bit half-assed, at least on phones, especially with its SMS handling.
889.
by talideon 12y ago
Which ports system? I can't say anything about OpenBSD ports, but aside from some stuff that gets very little love from people, most of the FreeBSD ports tree is kept bang up to date, and binary packages appear shortly thereafter. pkgs
890.
by talideon 12y ago
The ebook is a lot cheaper on the No Starch Press site, and DRM free, so if you're looking the ebook, buy it directly from them.
891.
by talideon 12y ago
Until supports for DANE and DNSSEC becomes widespread, unless it's a site for personal use, self-signed certs can't really be trusted by third parties. (BTW, if you're not using a conventional CA, you'd best off being yo
892.
by talideon 12y ago
This is more of an Amdahl's Law thing though.
893.
by talideon 12y ago
Hence 'deprecating': they're not getting rid of HTTP, it's just that HTTPS will be preferred, with HTTP sticking around for legacy purposes.
894.
Deprecating Non-Secure HTTP(blog.mozilla.org)
340 points by talideon 12y ago|304 comments
895.
by talideon 12y ago
I'm guessing the small text.
896.
by talideon 12y ago
DNSSEC is meant to solve the integrity issue. Now, whether you feel it actually does the job is another matter. Personally, I use it on three domains, one which was done for testing purposes, and the other two because there are DNS records
897.
by talideon 12y ago
By dodging the vote, they effectively voted for it. Cowards.
898.
by talideon 12y ago
Even where there's no constitutional requirement to have a quorum for votes, it's still possible to have a rule of order requiring a quorum before a vote can take place. Ireland is an example of this: for there to be a quorum in e
899.
by talideon 12y ago
In the French system, a quorum has to be requested, but if it can't be assembled in 15mins, the vote goes ahead anyway: http://www2.assemblee-nationale.fr/decouvrir-l-assemblee/rol...
900.
by talideon 12y ago
Apparently, you have to request a quorum, and even then the quorum has to be assembled in 15mins, or else it's ignored and the vote goes ahead anyway to prevent 'obstruction': http://www2.assemblee-nationale.fr&#x2

More ›