Domain registrars (was Re: signing + mailing lists)

Michael H. Warfield
Thu Sep 20 23:56:02 2001

On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 01:19:38PM -0700, Rich Burroughs wrote:

> On Thu, 20 Sep 2001, John A. Martin wrote:

> > someone besides you will spot a PGP message that does not verify. In
> > my experience the only significant mail based process that has been
> > persistently unable to handle PGP signed mail was the domain
> > registration services at NAI but that problem was easily solved when
^^^^^^ Huh? John, do you mean NSI? NAI is Network Associates, associated with flavors of PGP but not domain registration. NSI is Network Solutions Inc who use to be THE Internic (after NSF let it go into public hands and after SRI managed it for years). They implimented the PGP guardian object which I immediately took advantage of and never had a single hickup or miss fire even though I've manged several dozen domains and been, at times, technical contact for over a hundred. I've never had them be "persistently unable to handle PGP signed mail" and have had it work every time. Well, every time I used it properly... :-)
> > other registrars became available.

> Any other registrars that use PGP/GnuPG? The others I've seen all do web
> forms, and some don't even use SSL...
Don't know, but, trueth be told, that's why I have had no incentive to migrate to any of the cheaper spred. PGP guardian objects have worked perfectly well (and I've screwed up a couple of times and known it was my fault - OK, OK, I FORGOT to sign the damn thing) to know it works in the negative sense as well. That's in my minimum set of features for a registrar. And I really DON'T like the web interfaces, SSL or not. Tough as hell to script and automate.
> Rich
Mike -- Michael H. Warfield | (770) 985-6132 | (The Mad Wizard) | (678) 463-0932 | NIC whois: MHW9 | An optimist believes we live in the best of all PGP Key: 0xDF1DD471 | possible worlds. A pessimist is sure of it!