Re: A question about protocol

["Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>]

Kent Crispin writes:
> I think *everybody* agrees that a 60 day *publication* period is a good
> idea.  I have yet to see a cogent set of reasons, by a legal person or
> anyone else, why the DNS should be inactive during that time

A publication period is meaningless if the name is already in the DNS
during that time. If so, what distinguishes these 60 days from any
other 60 days? After all, the information is published forever once
the name is in the DNS, so what would make the first 60 days
different?

Perry