Re: Security

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz (Shmuel@acm.org)
Date: Mon Mar 19 2001 - 05:26:53 CST


In <Pine.LNX.4.10.10103181705430.11069-100000@spock.peak.org>, on
03/18/2001
   at 05:24 PM, John Stanley <stanley@peak.org> said:

>By saying that .invalid is what you add
>to an address you have no rights to use, you approve that action.

It doesn't say that ".invalid is what you add to an address you have
no rights to use". It doesn't even suggested appending ".invalid" to a
valid address.

>Don't be silly. Of course the fact that you can get a valid address
>from the string by removing .invalid changes whether or not that
>address belongs to someone. It belongs to Kent.
 
You're the one being silly. It does not belong to Kent, any more than
nospamkent@landfield.com or kent@landfield.com.uk does.

>So it will have a negative impact on innocent people. Is this not a
>bad thing in your corner of the world?

So do you propose getting rid of the distributed DNS and going back to
a global name space? Do you really believe that would be a good thing?

 

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------
     Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
     Atid/2
     Team OS/2
     Team PL/I
-----------------------------------------------------------


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29.