UK Parliament Domain Without Registrar 312
asobala writes "According to this story at The Register, the UK parliament is using the domain www.parliament.uk. It's a top-level domain because it was registered before August 1996, before Nominet handled .uk domains. But since there is no registrar, they can't prove that they own it."
.uk (Score:3, Funny)
Re:.uk (Score:1, Troll)
Blimey!
Re:.uk (Score:2)
More ontopic, back in the day, my domain was whatever my (and a few friends) hosts file said it was. That sums up how the whole internet worked. It's a shame that the system couldn't/didn't scale so well.
The great thing is, we can still tell all the registars to go fsck themselves and do it a different way.
Innocent till proven guilty (Score:2, Informative)
Innocent till proven guilty
they cant prove they own it because they dont have to, its up to others to prove they don't own it or are not entitled to it
simple
Re:Innocent till proven guilty (Score:2)
Re:Innocent till proven guilty (Score:5, Informative)
They were trying to register an SSL certificate with Thawte, and Thawte needed them to prove it was their own domain. Nobody could actually prove that..
So, in this case, it's up to them to prove that they are entitled to it, though nobody forces them to. They can just not sign up with Thawte..
Creative... (Score:2)
Alex
Re:Innocent till proven guilty (Score:2)
Re:Innocent till proven guilty (Score:2)
Re:Innocent till proven guilty (Score:2)
Re:Innocent till proven guilty (Score:2)
Well, mostly wrong. We used to have a culture of "innocent until proven guilty", but that is slowly being undermined [homeoffice.gov.uk]
Of course... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Of course... (Score:4, Funny)
Oh no it isn't (Score:2)
Or at least Tony Blair is GWB's poodle, or America's foreign secretary according to Jaque Chirac.
frickin cybersquaters (Score:4, Funny)
Everyone knows they are just a bunch of cybersquaters who registered parliament.uk so all the people who don't know how to spell it the right way (Parlament) will get to their site.
oh wait... that is the right spelling? never mind.
I own slashdot.org (Score:4, Funny)
£90 (Score:2, Informative)
Re:£90 (Score:2)
If you renew through one of the agents (They are registry agents and not registrars as we don't hold any part of the registry) you can get huge discounts as the Nominet members' price is far lower thanks to the savings passed on through a members' use of the automation tools and Nominet not having to chase for money.
This charge can be as low as £5 - 6 for 2 years!
Also note that if you register with Nominet directly or fail to allow your existing agent to renew for you you must provide your own name servers.
This is because Nominet is not in competition with it's members - unlike the
Visit http://www.nominet.org.uk and Nominet claim that to register a domain you need to use a member.
Thanks to slashdot... (Score:5, Funny)
Several options to solve this problem... (Score:5, Interesting)
1. Setup www.parliment.govt.uk, and have the webserver that handles www.parliment.uk redirect
2. Sign their own cert.
3. Farm out the credit card transactions themselves to another site.
I guess if they got smart about it they could go through some sort of legal process that confirms that they have "ownership" of the netblock that the DNS servers for parliment.uk are on, and therefore they are the defacto owners (posession is 9/10ths of the law?) of parliment.uk.
Nonetheless, an interesting situation.
Re:Several options to solve this problem... (Score:3, Interesting)
[just my daft ruminations though, feel free to explain why this wouldn't work]
Re:Several options to solve this problem... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Several options to solve this problem... (Score:2)
Re:Several options to solve this problem... (Score:3, Interesting)
The only problem is to get Thawte (or, rather, their British representative) to *technically* recognize them, so they can instruct their machines to approve the certificates. The obstacle is not a legal one, but rather a policy of Thawte itself. Thawte's policy is presumably strict so that its other clients can trust that spoofing won't be likely to happen.
Re:Several options to solve this problem... (Score:2)
There is a reason why they use parliament.uk and not parliament.gov.uk, and that is that parliament is not government. From http://www.parliament.uk/faq/parlgov_faq.cfm [parliament.uk]
"The Government is the institution that runs the country. It is also known as the Executive. The Government formulates policy and introduces legislation in Parliament. Members of the Government are usually either members of the House of Commons or House of Lords. This enables Parliament to keep a check on their work by asking questions or debating the issues."
The job of Parliament is to make the law, the job of government is to produce draft bills to put before parliament, to implement the law and to run public services.
You can't have it both ways... (Score:2)
Parliment's not part of the government? I'm confused. I always thought it was.
Re:You can't have it both ways... (Score:2)
Read the FAQs I put a link to in my previous post.
Re:Several options to solve this problem... (Score:2)
Err... Have you heard of seperation of executive and legislature? *.parliament.uk is a cross-party independent web-site to do with the Commons, the Lords, and general matters of legislation, as opposed to execution of law and formulation of government policy. Of course, there's HMSO.gov.uk, which is the printer of *.parliament.uk... Ah well.;-)
Hah (Score:2, Interesting)
It's the same thing that makes me wonder why is that the case.
How can all these second level domain operators exist but not an operator of the 1st level?
Why don't they give it to the sum of the second level operators to decide?
If the matter is really on the air, that's the most sane solution I can think of
Re:Hah (Score:5, Informative)
Nominet controls the uk. TLD and most of the xxx.uk. SLDs.
Nominet doesn't control parliament.uk. The authoritive name servers for uk. (Nominet's servers) return NS delegation records for parliament.uk., and those servers do not appear to be Nominet servers. Therefore, Parliament controls it's own SLD.
Why this is difficult to deal with I don't know. Nominet should only have to confirm to Thawte that Parliament owns the SLD. Nominet controls uk. and, in turn, the UK government controls parliament.uk., what's the problem here?
no, somebody else owns it. duh. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:no, somebody else owns it. duh. (Score:1)
Even more obvious, maybe the UK parliament owns the domain because they ARE the UK parliament?
Re:no, somebody else owns it. duh. (Score:5, Funny)
True. That's the same reason that the US Whitehouse owns www.whitehouse.com
Re:no, somebody else owns it. duh. (Score:2)
Re:no, somebody else owns it. duh. (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:no, somebody else owns it. duh. (Score:2)
Yes, but this is DIGITAL. Like software, that means you have to keep the reciepts forever and ever, or you must have stolen it!
Who they stole it from way back in 1996, I'm not sure. But I'm sure ICANN can find someone willing to claim that the UK Government is squatting their domain.
Let's not be hasty... (Score:5, Funny)
We don't want the Royal Marines raiding the VA Software headquarters looking for alleged terrorists Abdul Hemos and the commander of the cell, Hashish Taco.
Re:Let's not be hasty... (Score:2)
Sorry, we're too busy building up to a war on Iraq to go after actual terrorists threats.
.co.uk (Score:5, Interesting)
I know that co stands for commercial but why doesn't Nominet allow plain .uk to be registered anymore?
Re:.co.uk - GB not UK (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:.co.uk - GB not UK (Score:5, Informative)
The official name of the UK is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. "Great Britain" is the island that includes England, Wales, Scotland and the multitude of little islands, which includes the Isle of Wight (part of England), the Isle of Man (not really part of the UK at all), and doesn't include the Channel Islands (which are closest to Normandy, which the French refer to as the Anglo-Norman islands, but otherwise are as British as the Isle of Man).
"GB" would be a useful code, except that it excludes Northern Ireland, and if you've followed Northern Irish history at all you'll know that the the protestants / Unionists in Northern Ireland are very fond of being part of the UK, and would vehemently protest to the UK being known by a code, "GB", that explicitly did not include them.
So, way before ICANN's official policy to use the ISO country codes for ccTLDs, and even though Ukraine had a strong claim to
Re:.co.uk - GB not UK (Score:2)
Re:.co.uk - GB not UK (Score:2)
Re:.co.uk - GB not UK (Score:2)
That's for Eire, or The Republic of Ireland, which has the same sort of relationship to Northern Ireland as the US has to Canada: same language, common border, totally different culture.
Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom and is much closer culturally to Scotland, even down to its internal religion-based troubles, than to "The South".
TWW
Re:.co.uk - GB not UK (Score:2)
The ie. domain does not make distinctions between the South and North.
As for culture and NI not having anything in common with the South, that really depends on your perspective. There are lots of Northern Irish down here, many of whom'd be of the more orange persuasion, and they get on fine. but i'd still say they're closer in culture to the South than to those in England. (same applies to Scotland). There is one cultural aspect that Northern Ireland and Scotland share which the south does not, and which i'm glad of, and that is the secterian bigotry that sadly still infects the two.
There's a reason that orange is one of the colours of the flag of the Republic: Irish independence was originally a middle-class protestant cause and many of the well-known names involved in gaining that independence were protestant. Orange for the Orangemen in the North, Green for the south and white for peace between them.
And imo, the unionists in NI would ultimately be better off sitting in Dail Eireinn than in English Parliament. They'd have a lot more seats and influence for a start - ~25%. However, strange sentimentalities for a dutch prince who lived 400 years ago seem to have clouded their thinking.
And btw, I have a protestant dutch father, and i've lived in scotland.
1. 3.5 million people in the south, ~2.5M in the north. Presuming 60% of the NI population votes for some unionist party, then 1.5M/6M = 25%. Lot better than the measly representation NI has in English parliament. (course, on occassion the unionists will hold balance of power and the "orange card" will be played).
Re:.co.uk - GB not UK (Score:2)
Eire? I dont know of a country called Eire.
Well, according to article 4 of its constitution, it's the official name of the country where you live in its native language. Now you know!
The ie. domain does not make distinctions between the South and North.
That's a matter of opinion...
There are lots of Northern Irish down here, many of whom'd be of the more orange persuasion, and they get on fine.
Having different cultures does not have to mean not getting on.
Irish independence was originally a middle-class protestant cause and many of the well-known names involved in gaining that independence were protestant.
I think you're confusing "independance" and "wanting to be able to bully anyone they like with no fear of public opinion". Rather like today's "Loyalists": their cause was one of convienience in which only a few intellectuals had any genuine interest. Most people, then and now, would prefer them all to piss off and leave them to earning enough cash to retire on.
They'd have a lot more seats and influence for a start - ~25%.
Yes, and zero influence on the EU, just like the people in Northern Ireland. Big deal! Ireland votes the "wrong way"? Have another vote. Keep on having votes until they give in and vote the "right way". Still, as long as the hand-outs keep coming who gives a toss about independance now, eh?
And btw, I have a protestant dutch father, and i've lived in scotland. :)
I have a mildly protestant Northern Irish family, I'm an athest and my girlfriend's family is Catholic and we live (at the moment) in Surrey although we would move to NI if the government ever decided to lock the criminals up (again) and stop pretending that crack sellers are politically motivated.
TWW
Re:.co.uk - GB not UK (Score:2)
So it is and all. I always thought Eire was the name the english mistakingly used instead of Eireann, which i thought was the correct name in irish. Hmm.. (i was exempt from irish in school).
That's a matter of opinion...
It isnt, the IEDR dont. Applications are as welcome fron NI as from the south. The general criteria for a ie. domain apply to all 32 counties. (Those criteria may be rubbish, and the IEDR may have a tendency to change its rules
Having different cultures does not have to mean not getting on.
Well, i meant that even those in the north who would consider themselves more english than irish get on fine down south. And in general i feel the scots, northern irish and irish have more in common with each other culturally than they do with the english. Finally, you seem to forget that a significant part of the population of Northern Ireland are "Taigs" and
I think you're confusing "independance" and "wanting to be able to bully anyone they like with no fear of public opinion". Rather like today's "Loyalists": their cause was one of convienience in which only a few intellectuals had any genuine interest. Most people, then and now, would prefer them all to piss off and leave them to earning enough cash to retire on.
I was talking more of the likes of Erskine Childers, the first president of the Free State, Sir Roger Casement, yer man who married Kitty O'Shea and many many other men who were involved in the long struggle for indepedence but whose names i cant remember (was O'Connell protestant? probably not, but OTOH he was rich and in his times it was nearly impossible to be rich and catholic).
Your view on the modern paramilitaries i'd agree on. They're a curse.
Yes, and zero influence on the EU, just like the people in Northern Ireland. Big deal! Ireland votes the "wrong way"? Have another vote. Keep on having votes until they give in and vote the "right way". Still, as long as the hand-outs keep coming who gives a toss about independance now, eh?
Well, the president of the European Parliament is an Irish man (like yourself
Anyway, on the national level, 25% of Dail Eireann beats 2% of English parliament anytime. And the unionists'd be welcomed the same as any other to it. Didnt Pat Kenny have Ian Paisley on his Friday night talk show on RTE1 once upon a time?
stop pretending that crack sellers are politically motivated.
Actually, one of the best arguments i've heard for the 6 counties / Northern Ireland ceding from the UK and joining "Ireland" was that immediately all reasons for republican paramilitarism would cease, and presumably loyalist too, if they wanted this. This argument actually came from a sitting Unionist MP, who was promptly kicked out of his party
Re:.co.uk - GB not UK (Score:2)
My own domain is in .cx (Christmas Island); it is pushing it to say that .cx "applies" to people from NI even though they can buy such domains.
Well, i meant that even those in the north who would consider themselves more english than irish get on fine down south
Such people are vanishingly rare in NI; it is a common belief amoungst Southern Irish and even Northern Catholics that non-Catholic Northerners think of themselves as more English than Irish. In fact, Ireland's Rugby team (for example) will be cheered on in any pub especially when playing England. England is regarded very poorly for obvious reasons. I have never met anyone in NI of any background (other than born in England) that would not be insulted by your idea that they would regard themselves as more English than Irish. But I have met plenty that are more British than Irish.
I was talking more of the likes of Erskine Childers, the first president of the Free State, Sir Roger Casement, yer man who married Kitty O'Shea and many many other men who were involved in the long struggle for indepedence
That's the people I meant too: politicians and other low-lifes that want the high-life.
Well, the president of the European Parliament is an Irish man (like yourself :) ).
I'm no more Irish than a Canadian is American and I don't see why that's a problem.
But who has influence in the EU anyway? That's a general problem with the EU at the moment, very little accountability and even lower perception of the accountability there is.
Certainly, I didn't mean that it was a particular issue for Ireland. The EU is a fundimentally undemocratic organisation for all its "citizens".
we were able to get some concessions, chiefly on neutrality.
Ah, Irish neutrality. I often wonder about a country that's still proud that it refused to stand up to the Nazis. I can't imagine why anyone would even want to talk about such a disgraceful act against humanity let alone try to ensure that it could happen again.
we / agreed/ to enter the EU and to the processes, overseeing institutions and international law that go with it, just as has the UK i'll note.
I think that once you are contributing instead of receiving it will start to dawn just how poor a bargain it is, just as the UK is.
we're still a sovereign state,
For sufficently small values of "sovereign".
Personally, i rate the leader of the PUP (the guy with the moustache) very very highly.
You must know very little about him, then; I would be more than happy to see him behind bars. Unfortunately, he's always been very careful. Internment was invented for people like him.
Actually, one of the best arguments i've heard for the 6 counties / Northern Ireland ceding from the UK and joining "Ireland" was that immediately all reasons for republican paramilitarism would cease, and presumably loyalist too, if they wanted this.
This is not true. The Ireland that republican "true-believers" want to join no longer exists (ie a truly Catholic country) and the vast majority of the ones causing the trouble are no longer interested in the issue of a united Ireland. They're making their money from drugs, protection rackets and prostitution. What relevance has a united Ireland to them? They same applies to the loyalist gangs.
This is a problem that can never be solved by politics. Historically, the only thing that has lessened the troubles over the 3-4000 years that they've been going has been low unemployment: idle hands and all that. Poverty breeds discontent and discontent make people easy to manipulate into joining "the cause". If there was zero unemployment in NI the troubles would just end. Until the next economic downturn.
TWW
Re:.co.uk - GB not UK (Score:2)
Re:David Crosby Is My Cousin (Score:2)
Re:.co.uk (Score:5, Interesting)
Wonder what the regulations really are.
The DNS system is pretty much full of inconsistencies anyway (.tv,
Re:.co.uk (Score:2, Insightful)
Nominet chooses to have the subdomains (which is
fair enough).
Using UK rather than GB is an historical accident, but I usu. feel compelled to point it out
As for countries selling there domains, well, that's their choice.
Re:.co.uk (Score:2)
.us (Score:2)
Re:.co.uk (Score:2)
All UK domain names (with three exceptions) are within one of the following:
and the three oddities,
Re:.co.uk (Score:2)
I've not heard of Nominet being upset about uk.com - it confuses some users, but it's basically ripping off its own customers; no skin off Nominet.uk's nose.
Re:.co.uk (Score:2)
Re:.co.uk (Score:2)
It's amazing isn't it. (Score:2)
No matter what the rules are, it's pretty obvious to anyone that parliament.uk belongs to the UK parliament.
Expert network security analysis: http://www.arhont.com/ [arhont.com]
Re:It's amazing isn't it. (Score:2)
OK, I accept the challenge. (Score:5, Funny)
Obviously, I'll need a 155Mb pipe, and all the leggy blondes I can eat. (So to speak.) Oh, and a nice quiet office somewhere
Time to think (Score:5, Insightful)
This is 2003. It's not 1988 when USA had 90% of the inet.
Is it a flame bait? Or is a bait to all sane people the fact that I stress?
Re:Time to think (Score:4, Insightful)
The naming conventions in use now have been in use in the US for 20+ years. Changing existing addresses would be confusing, add little value, and would largely be an exercise in political correctness. Anyone is largely free to use the existing tlds if they want to register. The country domains have been popular as a means of differentiating a domain, and associating it with a place, not necessarily because they have to. There are
You could treat our use of the current naming conventions as a minor tribute for funding and developing the internet. Or, if it makes you feel any better, you can view it as implied that
Of course, I suppose that the day will come when America will be bashed for internet address imperialism. Our unbounded use of domain names outside of
Ah, well,
Of course that would lead to howls about American pr0n embargos, and threats of trade sanctions until we reopen the internet pr0n pipes. Of course, there will be world-wide joy AND rage over both actions. Violence will ensue. Counter-violence will follow the violence.
Sigh. I guess we can't win.
The only reasonably safe course of action is to not change anything.
Re:Time to think (Score:2, Insightful)
It's not just the US that uses
The only exception (in our case) is Japan... always
Possession (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Possession (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, but Parliament is 10/10 of the law, and it's not helping them. Thawte is a private company, and it can set whatever qualifications it wants for a cert.
All a little silly. (Score:2)
Actually I'm sure it *will* help them out. The fact that they ARE the law means that someone high up enough at Thawte to make a decision will decide to acknowledge Parliment's ownership of their domain. Or parliment can pass a law that simply says "we own parliment.uk" - If that is not enough for Thawte Parliment could pass a law that says "Any entity failing to recongise parliments sole ownership of 'Parliment.uk" shall have it's assets frozen and executives held in custody until such time as they recongise said ownership". I'm sure Thawte would come around, it doesn't pay for a commercial entity to get into a fight with the legislative body of a country they want to do business in.
Re:All a little silly. (Score:2)
Re:All a little silly. (Score:2)
I'm not sure I get your point. What law is Parliment not abiding by? It's their domain, they not only own the domain under the law as it exists but they write the laws about
Re:All a little silly. (Score:2)
Any entity failing to recongise parliments sole ownership of 'Parliment.uk" shall have it's assets frozen and executives held in custody until such time as they recongise said ownership".
They wouldn't even have to worry about the second part, contempt of Parliament, is up there with contempt of court or treason, pretty dam serious.
Contempt of Parliament (Score:2)
Any action taken by either a Member of Parliament or a stranger which obstructs or impedes either Parliament in the performance of its functions, or its Members or staff in the performance of their duties, is a contempt of Parliament.
The Commons has the power to order anyone who has committed a contempt of Parliament to appear at the Bar of the House and to punish the offender.
If the offence has been committed by an MP he or she may be suspended or expelled.
Re:Contempt of Parliament (Score:2)
Re:All a little silly. (Score:2)
Sure you do, Parliment has written many laws that require the detention of people for all sorts of (mostly) good reasons. Of course my example is silly but it is still the case that if Parliment *really* wants their domain recognized and Thwate for some unaccountable reason doesn't want to do so Parliment has all sorts of ways to require Thawte to do so - at least if Thawte wants to do business in the UK.
The argument about some detentions in the US is that they are *illegal* - against both our laws and our constitution - in some cases that appears to be a perfectly valid criticism, in others it is debatable, all of which is beside the point. In my hypothetical situation it would be legal because Parliment wrote a law making it so - as for "constitutional" well I don't exactly understand the complexities of "constitutionality" in the UK but I'm pretty sure that Parliment has some impact on what is considered legal and on how the government is "constituted".
Re:Possession (Score:5, Informative)
No, that's where you're quite wrong [housedeals.co.uk].
Since we're talking about the UK, squatters rule [bbc.co.uk]. In fact, this attitude seems to pervail in about 25% of the world (europe). AFAIK, the idea that squatters have no rights at all is part of an EXTREME minority of the world (about 5% of the world's population).
Posession is very much 9/10s of the law. Any lawyer will tell you that, and it's about the only true thing they'll ever tell you.
I had this discussion earlier: What if part of the space shuttle that just blew up landed on your property and you chose to keep it, violating laws against meddling with federal investigations? What powers does the government have to recover it (no, not just put you in jail, but actually recover the item)? And if they do recover it, how much will you be able to sue for?
Posession of anything that isn't outright illegal is 9/10s of the law. That's why there's special "drug war" laws that allow the government to take your drug paraphenalia. Without them, upon release from prison, they'd have to hand your bong/crack pipe back, because they're yours.
Re:Possession (Score:2)
Re:Possession (Score:2)
Re:Misquote (Score:2)
Who am I quoting? Nobody. I've never heard the 9 points version before, though it does appear to be the correct legal term. That's not going to stop people from saying it the way it is most commonly known, as "nine tenths".
Anyways, I did find an interesting essay [essaybank.co.uk] on the subject.
[OT] a check on "most common" (Score:2)
I ran a quick googlefight between "possession is nine points" and "possession is nine tenths", and the former was the overwhelming [googlefight.com] winner (by an order of magnitude). So, it seems you're wrong -- while "nine tenths" is common, it isn't even close to being most common.
Simple solution (Score:3, Funny)
"Right. What's all this then about you impingin' on our Parliment's sovereignty, eh?"
Re:Simple solution (Score:3, Insightful)
But the problem on hand that it's not humans rejecting parliament.uk; it's the ssl certification routines used by lots of browsers. And they won't be able to read a piece of paper with a law on it, will they?
The real solution is that the organizations involved get their act together and fix their files so that ssl certificates work for this domain.
Of course, there's then the problem that this makes it obvious how arbitrary it all is, and how a bit of talking (perhaps with a bit of money changing hands) behind the scenes can "fix" any problem with the certification system.
Time for a bit of Kevin Mitnick's social engineering
Re:Simple solution (Score:2)
It's Thawte that won't issue a cert because they can't - through traditional means - verify the ownership of parliament.uk.
It's not that a cert has been issued and won't be recognised it's that Thawte will not issue the cert.
This is very much a human issue and not a technological one.
Does Clinton know about this? (Score:2, Funny)
"Under the guiding hand of mastermind George Clinton, the affiliated groups Parliament and Funkadelic established funk as an heir to and outgrowth of soul. If James Brown is funk's founding father, Clinton has been its chief architect and tactician. Over the decades, he's presided over a musical empire that's included Parliament and Funkadelic, plus numerous offshoots (such as the Brides of Funkenstein and Parlet), solo careers (Clinton's and bassist Bootsy Collins' being the notable) and aggregates (the P-Funk All-Stars). The pioneering work of Parliament and Funkadelic in the Seventies--driven by Clinton's conceptually inventive mind and the band members' tight ensemble playing and stretched-out jamming--prefigured everything from rap and hip-hop to techno and alternative. Clinton's latter-day disciples include Prince and the Red Hot Chili Peppers. "
if it doesn't exist.. (Score:2)
My question is..how does my ISP's DNS server have an entry for it if it doesn't technically exist?
Re:if it doesn't exist.. (Score:4, Informative)
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
uk. 2D IN NS NS1.NIC.uk.
uk. 2D IN NS NS0.JA.NET.
uk. 2D IN NS NS.UU.NET.
uk. 2D IN NS SEC-NOM.DNS.UK.PSI.NET.
uk. 2D IN NS NS2.NIC.uk.
% dig -t ns @NS1.NIC.uk parliament.uk
;; ANSWER SECTION:
parliament.uk. 2D IN NS ns0.netforce.net.
parliament.uk. 2D IN NS ns1.netforce.net.
parliament.uk. 2D IN NS relay.parliament.uk.
parliament.uk. 2D IN NS relay2.parliament.uk.
;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
relay.parliament.uk. 2D IN A 194.60.38.10
relay2.parliament.uk. 2D IN A 194.60.38.11
% dig -t a @ns0.netforce.net www.parliament.uk
;; ANSWER SECTION:
www.parliament.uk. 1D IN A 194.60.38.75
The whole domain landgrabbing is ridiculous (Score:3, Interesting)
I remember a similar story where someone was able to "register" yahoo.com, amazon.com and some others just because of a fault in some registrar's web-based software. The situation was resolved quickly but still the guy claimed that he had been the owner of these domains, even if just for a few hours, as if it was something to be proud of. In essence it was an absolutely pointless story but still many big news agencies carried it, something that nicely illustrates how over-board all this is.
I just wish people had more common sense about all this.
They're the frickin' parliament... (Score:2)
Re:They're the frickin' parliament... (Score:2)
John BULL (Score:4, Insightful)
Have it engrossed on parchment, signed sealed by Liz II and whoever, and send it to Thwaite. Also remind them that if they wish to continued to do business in/with the UK, then "Do Not Fuck with the Parliament!"
I'm Confused... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:I'm Confused... (Score:3, Informative)
parliament.uk is delegated on the original
The reason it can't be found in the
As such nominet.org.uk is in there but parliament.uk, co.uk, police.uk etc aren't in there because they're a level below that which the whois servers operate for.
Re:I'm Confused... (Score:2)
What appears to be the problem here is that no legal relationship exists between Nominet and Parliament which would allow a third party to verify ownership of parliament.uk. In particular, there is no WHOIS record for parliament.uk, or, for that matter, any of the others listed above.
NHS.uk (Score:2, Funny)
And the question of MOD.uk [www.mod.uk], I'm suprised it doesn't just forward to Qatar considering the rest of the military establishment has moved over there.
There's also an existential question for Nominet, if they don't control the main UK root does that mean that they [www.nic.uk] actually exist?
Just pass a law (Score:3, Insightful)
On the other hand, it wouldn't work for them to pass a law saying that they are the CA for the .parliament.uk domain. Certificate authorities are a technical entity, not a legal one. They might be legally a CA, but until most web browser manufacturers include their root CA in their CA list, the law would do them about as much good as a law that pi was now exactly 3.141.
On the other hand, thawte is not the only CA in existence. Parliament could always go to a different root CA that is recognized by most browsers and get a certificate from them. Mozilla lists about 24 root CAs in it's security preferences page.
Re:Just pass a law (Score:2)
Hear Ye. Hear Ye.
Let it be known henceforth, that in the UK, The Commonwealth and all other regions under the rule of the British Crown, all browsers not recognizing the British Parliament as a Certificate Authority are illigal to use, posess, distribute or in any way, shape or form interact with.
Any person, company, legal entity and other in breach of this law will be stripped of ALL legal rights, labled a terrorist, subject to up to 20 years in solitary confinement AND sentened a fine of 1,000£ for every byte the browser in question takes up (wrt integrated browsers, the entire OS will count).
Give them about a weeks notice and see if that won't get them recognized rather quickly
Re:Just pass a law (Score:2)
"atlest" is not a word
"amasing" is not a word
And you need to use capitalized letters at the beginning of every sentence.
Do not accelerate geological fragments when you take up recidence in a transparant and fragile domicile.
paging Paul Vixie (Score:2)
Something sort of similar happened to me (Score:5, Interesting)
Anyway, we wanted to buy a printer/plotter for our VAX 4.1BSD system, which of course needed driver software. The $20,000 device was duly delivered, but because the driver software incorporated some Unix code, the vendor could not ship us the software until we sent them a copy of our Unix license. Um, Unix license? This is Bell Labs, Unix was written here, would you like to talk to the authors?
But it was nothing doing. Bell Labs had never bothered issuing itself a license to run Unix, even though it was running on every computer in the place (this was before PC's). Better not let the BSA find out. And the vendor had to stick to procedures to stay out of trouble with Western Electric (the licensing entity for the outside world, and maybe for us too).
I don't remember exactly how we got the problem straightened out, except that it took a while. We may have had to get the Western Electric legal department to issue us a license or otherwise tell the hardware vendor it was ok.
Lots of Domains Like This. (Score:2, Insightful)
there was no contract between Nominet and the registrants of domain names registered by the "Naming Committee" - the loose assortment of tech-heads that existed prior to Nominet.
Since, at one point you didnt have to pay for
There was also a 'limbo' of about 24 hours when the Naming commity handed over to Nominet, where people could register anything (No more voting by the committee), for free(Because Nominet werent charing yet).. but there is no paper work of any kind for these domains. (One of which I own - But cann't prove and not sure how to go about getting it back into my full control!)
There's also been several court cases I know about because of this lack of paperwork, and people selling domains they may or may not have been the owners off.
Since you never have to pay for these domains, you dont even have the invoices, no renewal fees etc. They just exist. Some are no doubt lost forever because people have just left them behind, and theres nothing to remind anyone about them.
For goodness sake, pass a law... (Score:2)
How can they possibly run a country if they can't even organise a domain name for thenselves. Well I ask you!
So who owns scottish.parliament.uk? (Score:2)