RE: [DNS] Now I am ANGRY

RE: [DNS] Now I am ANGRY

From: Mark Hughes <effectivebusiness§pplications.com.au>
Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 11:38:47 +1100
I believe that for old domains created before AUNIC existed, the creation
date is the date the record was added into AUNIC, not the date the domain
name was created.

As a proportion of the total number of domains, the ones created before say
1996, would be small.

Regards, Mark

Mark Hughes
Effective Business Applications Pty Ltd
effectivebusiness&#167;pplications.com.au
www.pplications.com.au
+61 4 1374 3959

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kim Davies [mailto:kim&#167;cynosure.com.au]
> Sent: Saturday, 2 March 2002 11:27
> To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
> Subject: Re: [DNS] Now I am ANGRY
>
>
> Quoting Mark Hughes on Saturday March 02, 2002:
> |
> | > If the creation date is known then people can tell what version of
> | > the name policy was in effect at the time the domain was created.
> |
> | So far, I can't see a reason why the creation date needs to be visible.
>
> It is worth noting that the creation date is unreliable for old domains.
> Speaking from personal experience, my domain name (cynosure.com.au)
> shows as being registered in 1998, when it was in fact registered around
> 1994.
>
> If I query a number of other .com.au domain names I know of in existence
> pre-1995, AUNIC contains a creation date of 1995 or later.
>
> I don't know how many domains this affects.
>
> kim
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> List policy, unsubscribing and archives =>
> http://www.auda.org.au/list/dns/
> Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of the
> author, further information at the above URL.  (334 subscribers.)
>
Received on Fri Oct 03 2003 - 00:00:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:05 UTC