On Sun, 24 Nov 2002, Vernon Schryver wrote: > > From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu > > > ... > > The truly interesting question would be: How much of their traffic is > > "value-added", and not just acting as a caching name server for the current > > root? If they have 150M users, but only 379 of them use it as > > anything other > > than a cache for the existing root, they're no more interesting than any > > of the other alt.roots that you label "peanuts". > > ... > > It seems likely for several reasons that spammers would be among the > organizations most likely to buy names from the other roots if they were oh no spam. no one was talking about spam. were just talking about root. your the first to mention spam and your right no one would buy domains in the alt universe for smtp service. http for sure is used today. the alternative roots have spam free domains on the internet. but then how many spammers use ficticious domain names in the USG internet. Alot! And I take exception to you claiming these roots are ficticious. They are the future of root service. regards joe baptista