At any time, the browsers could in theory eliminate that choice at any time by placing in their redirects. ISPs can also redirect responses back from the registry. In addition, the feasibility of using other browsers (especially in businesses), is not as easy as your statement makes it sound. Many intranets within businesses are dependent either on Microsoft or Netscape. But lets play along with the argument that a consumer looses the choice of how to see his or her error message. Help answer the next question....what is the negative consequences? -----Original Message----- From: Milton Mueller [mailto:Mueller@syr.edu] Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 3:36 PM To: council@dnso.org; roessler@does-not-exist.org; Jeff.Neuman@Neustar.us Subject: RE: [council] ALAC statement on resolution of non-existing domainnames While I am sympathetic to Jeff's argument on this:

...

...

"Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@Neustar.us> 09/16/03 03:05PM >>>

Rather than giving the "technical purist" argument (i.e., the Internet is a sacred animal and anything that alters some of the functionally of the past is "grave"), please provide us with concrete examples, which you have

Let me note in respect of this:

What users do you know that "choose" how they get an error message back. For example, do those who use MSN browser "choose" to get an MSN search redirect rather than an error message?

In effect, yes. A user can install another browser relatively easily if they don't like the services or destinations associated wtih error messages in a particular browser. However, no such user choice is available when querying the .com zone file. --MM