Re: DNS: defining "official" domains

Re: DNS: defining "official" domains

From: Rick Welykochy <rick§dot.net.au>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 14:35:28 +1000 (EST)
On Fri, 19 Jun 1998, Adam Todd wrote:

> At 11:39 19/06/98 +1000, you wrote:
> >Rick Welykochy wrote:
> >
> >> > Rick points out that no fees need to be paid to renew the domain.
> >>
> >> Hmmm ... I don't recall pointing that out.
> >
*****************************************
*
* > >I think there's a terminology issue here, perhaps I'm the one that has
* > >it wrong.  The point is that some domains don't need fees paid in
* > >order to keep them in existence: .com, .com.au, .au.  Of course, their
* > >*subdomains* attract fees.
*
******************************************
> 
> BWHWHAHAHA Leni, that's a laugh!

Adam ...

I did not write the part above marked with
asterisks. Please redirect your comments to the appropriate
writer and withdraw your comments about me. 
If you continue to misquote people and companies
you could face legal action.

R Welykochy
Received on Fri Jun 19 1998 - 15:25:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Sep 02 2014 - 12:00:06 UTC