On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 6:16 AM S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Stephane,
At 01:26 AM 19-02-2025, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>Process remark: it is informational while the IDNA draft asks for
>Standards Track.
Ok.
>OK, if there is a serious discussion about business issues in every
>RFC (HTTP cookies…).
A serious discussion may happen if people have some incentive to do it.
I came across a 2023 blog post which was written
by an ICANN director, Security, Stability and
Resiliency Research. Here's an excerpt from it:
"Some evidence suggests, for example, that malicious actors may prefer
registrars that provide low registration prices or that accept specific
payment methods. They also may look for registrars that offer free
application programming interfaces (APIs) for bulk registrations or
avoid registrars that require certain
information in the purchasing process.
Nonetheless, no study has systematically examined the preferences of
attackers."
It's hardly a surprise that those who do a lot of registrations prefer registrars
with low prices. Surely you're not asking the IETF to take the position
that high registration prices are good.
-Ekr
-- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
