[RFCI-Discuss] abuse: fr.colt.net

[Derek J. Balling]

On Dec 8, 2006, at 3:54 PM, Hans Spaans wrote:
> Sorry, but I disagree since fr.colt.net is a different domain from
> colt.net. We can see this when we check for the authoritive  
> nameservers
> and we also see this for mailservers. IMHO I would strongly advise to
> list fr.colt.net for this reason.

DNS does not determine "domain ownership", it determines "domain  
delegation". To use your logic, if a company had something  like

	BIGCORP.COM
	NYC.BIGCORP.COM
	DET.BIGCORP.COM
	LA.BIGCORP.COM
	
and each subdomain had local DNS servers (for convenience purposes  
and local delegation of hostnames), then by YOUR logic, there would  
need to be an "abuse at la.bigcorp.com" to handle complaints that come  
from "user at BIGCORP.COM" simply because their mail had come through  
the convenience-relay MAIL.LA.BIGCORP.COM.

That makes absolutely no sense.

> I also realise with this statement that RFCI may be listing domains  
> that
> shouldn't be listed, but simple are listed because a parent is  
> listed as
> well.

Our policies are based entirely on things which can be determined  
empirically without any "insider information", or "personal judgement  
calls". Whether or not "fr.colt.net" is a separate organization is a  
judgement call. And our policies are based on reducing as close to  
zero as possible the number of judgement calls involved in the process.

Thus, it's the delegation points for the purposes of the INVARIANTS  
clause of RFC2142 are interpreted as being where the "internet  
authorities", so to speak, have drawn them -- at the interface  
between registrar and registrant.

cheers,
D


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2419 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.megacity.org/pipermail/rfci-discuss/attachments/20061208/50ffba27/smime.bin