[no subject]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[no subject]
>
>There was no open process.
We haven't started yet.
>There were no public nominations.
We are not running for office.
>There ARE people on the committee (one in particular comes to mind) who have
> made a practice of insinuating that people are committing CRIMINAL
> acts by supporting eDNS (specifically, allegations of "fraud")
If you can send me private mail about this incident I will try to
talk to the individual in question. Nothing will get accomplished
by name calling and threats.
>There is no "resume", or curriculum vitae, on the members available.
By Monday (hopefully) it will be out there for you to review.
>There is no public process, mechanism for public comment, nor public record
> of discussions and vote(s) within the committee.
There will be a public process. Give us till Monday to get
the charter and framework out there and you may be pleasently
suprised. We are here to get this done in the best possible way
including soliciting actual proposals.
>
>None of this speaks highly towards this being an "open" process.
>
>Quite to the contrary.
To form a committee and get off the ground and bootstrap ourselves
takes 7-10 days. Can you give us that leeway?
Hank
>
>--
>--
>Karl Denninger (karl at MCS.Net)| MCSNet - The Finest Internet Connectivity
>http://www.mcs.net/~karl | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service
> | 32 Analog Prefixes, 13 ISDN, Web servers $75/mo
>Voice: +1 312 803-MCS1 x219| Email to "info at mcs.net" WWW: http://www.mcs.net/
>Fax: +1 312 248-9865 | 2 FULL DS-3 Internet links; 400Mbps B/W Internal
Received: from ietf.org by ietf.org id aa18925; 7 Nov 96 15:03 EST
Received: from vm.biu.ac.il by ietf.org id aa18570; 7 Nov 96 15:00 EST
Received: from VM.BIU.AC.IL by VM.BIU.AC.IL (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
with BSMTP id 1478; Thu, 07 Nov 96 21:57:47 IDT
Received: from VM.BIU.AC.IL (NJE origin HANK at BARILVM) by VM.BIU.AC.IL (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2964; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 21:57:47 +0200
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 96 21:43:34 IDT
Sender:ietf-request at ietf.org
From: Hank Nussbacher <HANK at vm.biu.ac.il>
Subject: RE: IAHC
To: Jim Fleming <JimFleming at unety.net>,
'Dave Crocker' <dcrocker at brandenburg.com>
cc: 'Donald Heath' <heath at linus.isoc.org>,
"ietf at ietf.org" <ietf at ietf.org>, 'New Newdom' <newdom at vrx.net>
In-Reply-To: Message of Thu, 7 Nov 1996 13:26:52 -0600 from
<JimFleming at unety.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Message-ID: <9611071500.aa18570 at ietf.org>
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.
On Thu, 7 Nov 1996 13:26:52 -0600 you said:
>Can you explain why this is November 7, 1996 and as far as
>I know, there has not been any formal announcement of the
>members of the IAHC ?
We are in the bootstrap process. We have existed as a group for
about 9 days and members have to send in their resume, it has
to be reworded, and a polished press release, charter and operational
framework has to be written before we can announce ourselves.
Give us 3 more days. We exchange about 40 pieces of mail a day
between 10 people. We are working around the clock (literally)
to get this up and for the IAHC to be successful.
>
>Don Heath, the President of the ISOC has stated that he does
>not want to use the open forums of the Internet for IAHC deliberations
>because he does not want to "waste people's time". He prefers
>to announce conclusions that have been reached by the IAHC.
It was decided within the IAHC to have a public IAHC discussion
list and to solicit proposals from the greater Internet community.
Give us 3 days before jumping to any conclusions.
>Has Don considered that he is causing a lot of people's time
>to be wasted while everyone dances around the issue of who
>is on the IAHC, how they were selected, who selected them,
>what is their agenda, etc. etc. ?
>
>Now, most people know that Don is relatively new to the
>Internet and just recently became President of the ISOC
>last Summer. Have any of the members of the IAHC, who are
>familiar with the Internet, pointed out to Don that time will be
>SAVED using this wonderful tool to host an open forum ?
Can you hold off on the critisim for just 72 hours? Once we
make our official announcements, I will then hope to see you
begin tearing them apart.
>Rather than having IHAC members flying to Washington, D.C.
>or wherever, the Internet can be used to bring those members
>together with other experts in the field to discuss the issues.
Much has been done via email and extensive conference calls.
>Speaking of Washington, D.C., rumor has it that there was
>an IAHC meeting this week.
> Is that true ?
A partial IAHC meeting.
> Did you attend ?
No I did not. I could not.
> If so, are there meeting notes ?
Not yet.
> Do you have a list of the IHAC members ?
It will be there within 72 hours.
>
>In summary, why hasn't the Internet been used as a tool to
>get things moving with the IAHC ? Why haven't the organizations
>that have appointed members used the Internet to notify people?
>You point out that you were selected by the IANA (Jon Postel
>and Joyce Reynolds). Why hasn't the IANA used the Internet
>to notify people ?
The Internet has been used exclusively to get this running.
The committee is still finishing off its charter and framework.
All you are doing is jumping the gun. Patience - it is a virtue.
>I must say that I take my hat off to Brian Carpenter of the IAB,
>who after some discussion finally came forward with their
>appointments.
>
>I guess my bottom line question is...
>Is there any reason why this is taking so long and
>why the Internet is NOT being used effectively...?
It is being used. There will be a web site to house all the
competing proposals and a discussion list and public review
and almost everything you are asking for and more. 72 hours.
Hank
>
>----------
>From: Brian Carpenter CERN-CN[SMTP:brian at dxcoms.cern.ch]
>Sent: Thursday, November 07, 1996 2:38 AM
>To: Jim Fleming
>Cc: iab at isi.edu; newdom at vrx.net
>Subject: Re: IAB and the IAHC
>
>Jim,
>
>>--------- Text sent by Jim Fleming follows:
>>
>> On Thursday, November 07, 1996 2:13 AM, Brian Carpenter
> CERN-CN[SMTP:brian at dxcoms.cern.ch] wrote:
>> @ Jim,
>> @
>> @ Please address the iab at our email address, iab at iab.org
>> @ in future.
>> @
>> @ > Can members of the IAB clarify the role of the IAB
>> @ > and the IAHC...?
>> @
>> @ The IAB is collegial. Please don't ask for the members
>> @ to reply as individuals.
>> @
>>
>> I see. Should we conclude that you are speaking
>> for all of the members ?
>
>I always try to indicate clearly when something is my
>personal opinion or when it is an IAB consensus. But my
>previous message was purely factual in any case.
>>
>> @ The role of the IAB with respect to the IAHC is
>> @ explained in draft-postel-iana-itld-admin-02.txt
>> @
>> @ >
>> @ > Did the IAB approve the members of the IAHC...?
>> @
>> @ We appointed two members, as explained in
>> @ draft-postel-iana-itld-admin-02.txt
>> @
>>
>> Can you tell people who those members are...?
>
>It's no secret:
>The IAB considered more than 14 possible candidates
>from 10 different countries for the two slots
>it was requested to fill on the IAHC, and after
>intensive discussion and several rounds of ballotting,
>the two candidates nominated by the IAB are
>
> Geoff Huston
> Hank Nussbacher
>
>
> -- Brian Carpenter
>
>----------
>From: Brian Carpenter CERN-CN[SMTP:brian at dxcoms.cern.ch]
>Sent: Thursday, November 07, 1996 3:09 AM
>To: Jim Fleming
>Cc: iab at isi.edu; newdom at vrx.net
>Subject: Re: IAB and the IAHC
>
>Jim,
>>
>> Thanks for the update. I am a little surprised that
>> people have not announced the complete list of
>> IAHC members via the Internet.
>
>I have made this point myself to Don Heath who is
>acting as convenor of the IAHC.
>
>>
>> Also, can we assume that the 14 candidates, and 10
>> countries, and the minutes of the discussions
>> as well as the balloting will all be made part of
>> the public record according to the guidelines in...?
>>
>> @@@@@ ftp://ds.internic.net/rfc/rfc2026.txt
>>
>No, we decided to keep the names confidential, in
>line with the guidelines in rfc2027, which were
>thoroughly discussed in poised95.
>
>My personal opinion: if we ever have to do it again, we should
>also make an open call for nominations, again as in rfc2027.
>We were under deadline pressure this time, so we couldn't
>consider this.
>
> Brian Carpenter
>
>@@@@@@
>
>
>--
>Jim Fleming
>UNETY Systems, Inc.
>Naperville, IL
>
>e-mail:
>JimFleming at unety.net
>JimFleming at unety.net.s0.g0 (EDNS/IPv8)
>
Received: from ietf.org by ietf.org id aa19328; 7 Nov 96 15:04 EST
Received: from vm.biu.ac.il by ietf.org id aa18910; 7 Nov 96 15:03 EST
Received: from VM.BIU.AC.IL by VM.BIU.AC.IL (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
with BSMTP id 1484; Thu, 07 Nov 96 22:00:47 IDT
Received: from VM.BIU.AC.IL (NJE origin HANK at BARILVM) by VM.BIU.AC.IL (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2974; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 22:00:47 +0200
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 96 21:58:09 IDT
Sender:ietf-request at ietf.org
From: Hank Nussbacher <HANK at vm.biu.ac.il>
Subject: Re: The cartel begins to crumble?
To: karl at mcs.net, Hank Nussbacher <HANK at taunivm.tau.ac.il>
cc: ietf at ietf.org
In-Reply-To: Message of Thu, 7 Nov 1996 13:52:55 -0600 (CST) from
<karl at Mcs.Net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Message-ID: <9611071504.aa18910 at ietf.org>
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.
On Thu, 7 Nov 1996 13:52:55 -0600 (CST) you said:
>> >Bad assumption.
>> >
>> >If a TLD is desirable, it will have NEW customers.
>> >
>> >If it has no customers, there is no disruption when it disappears.
>>
>> What do you do with the 100 or so unlucky customers that did sign
>> up and pay with the "undesirable" TLD that went down the sinkhole?
>> Do we need to care about them, or just forget it as noise and move on?
>> Hank
>
>What do you do with the unlucky customers that sign up with someone for
>service now when the firm fails?
There is a difference between that and what can be seen as an international
resource like an iTLD. If I were to dial 001 to get to the USA and that
stopped working - that is not the same ballgame as isp.com going down or
even Sprint failing. -Hank
>--
>--
>Karl Denninger (karl at MCS.Net)| MCSNet - The Finest Internet Connectivity
>http://www.mcs.net/~karl | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service
> | 32 Analog Prefixes, 13 ISDN, Web servers $75/mo
>Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| Email to "info at mcs.net" WWW: http://www.mcs.net/
>Fax: [+1 312 248-9865] | 2 FULL DS-3 Internet links; 400Mbps B/W Internal
Received: from ietf.org by ietf.org id aa21092; 7 Nov 96 15:29 EST
Received: from taunivm.tau.ac.il by ietf.org id aa20516; 7 Nov 96 15:21 EST
Received: from VM.TAU.AC.IL by VM.TAU.AC.IL (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
with BSMTP id 6081; Thu, 07 Nov 96 21:37:58 IST
Received: from VM.TAU.AC.IL (NJE origin HANK at TAUNIVM) by VM.TAU.AC.IL (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0739; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 21:37:58 +0200
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 96 21:32:47 IST
Sender:ietf-request at ietf.org
From: Hank Nussbacher <HANK at vm.tau.ac.il>
Subject: Re: The cartel begins to crumble?
To: Karl Denninger <karl at mcs.net>,
Hank Nussbacher <HANK at vm.biu.ac.il>
cc: ietf at ietf.org
In-Reply-To: Message of Thu, 7 Nov 1996 10:17:10 -0600 (CST) from
<karl at Mcs.Net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Message-ID: <9611071524.aa20516 at ietf.org>
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.
On Thu, 7 Nov 1996 10:17:10 -0600 (CST) you said:
>> The way out of this is to eliminate the ability to trade in DNs. If
>> the rule was that a DN is not transferrable, then there would be
>> no value to doing a large DN grab. See the Israeli DN policy
>> at www.isoc.org.il If we find that a company trades in DNs, they
>> lose all existing DNs.
>
>How do you prove it?
In one case, a customer taped his phone conversation with the company
trying to sell the DN.
>Are you willing to get sued if you're wrong, and potentially be liable no
>only for real lost business (millions of US $) but ALSO punitive damages?
So what is your solution to the person who will buy up 25,000
personal names or 10,000 corporate domain names? I would assume that
a number of the awardees of new iTLDs will want to offer DNs in
their TLD free of charge for a year or so so as to create critical
mass. How do you stop the college senior from massive name
grabbing? Tell him there is a limit per day? Not let him? Do you
have the right to refuse a customer?
Hank
>Why does ANYONE want that kind of liability.
>
>Three standards to adhere to:
>
>1) Verifyability
>2) Objectivity
>3) Serves the purpose
>
>You need to meet all three.
>
>--
>--
>Karl Denninger (karl at MCS.Net)| MCSNet - The Finest Internet Connectivity
>http://www.mcs.net/~karl | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service
> | 32 Analog Prefixes, 13 ISDN, Web servers $75/mo
>Voice: +1 312 803-MCS1 x219| Email to "info at mcs.net" WWW: http://www.mcs.net/
>Fax: +1 312 248-9865 | 2 FULL DS-3 Internet links; 400Mbps B/W Internal
Received: from ietf.org by ietf.org id aa21448; 7 Nov 96 15:32 EST
Received: from hal.iodesign.com by ietf.org id aa21212; 7 Nov 96 15:31 EST
Received: (chris at localhost) by hal.iodesign.com (8.6.8.1/SCA-6.6)
id UAA00510; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 20:17:01 GMT
Return-Path: <chris>
Message-Id: <199611072017.UAA00510 at hal.iodesign.com>
Sender:ietf-request at ietf.org
From: Christopher Ambler <chris at hal.iodesign.com>
X-Mailer: SCO OpenServer Mail Release 5.0
To: HANK at vm.biu.ac.il, JimFleming at unety.net, dcrocker at brandenburg.com
Subject: RE: IAHC
Cc: heath at linus.isoc.org, ietf at ietf.org, newdom at vrx.net
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 96 12:17:01 PST
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.
Please, Jim, calm down for a couple days, okay?
Nobody is more anxious than I am to see the IAHC fully formed and working,
as a prospective registry owner. I've waited over a year now for IANA, I
can surely find something to occupy my time for 72 hours while the IAHC
bootstraps themselves.
--
Christopher Ambler
President, Image Online Design, Inc.
Received: from ietf.org by ietf.org id aa21672; 7 Nov 96 15:33 EST
Received: from [207.32.128.130] by ietf.org id aa21416; 7 Nov 96 15:32 EST
Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by doorstep.unety.net (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id NAA25220; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 13:55:44 -0600
Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail
id <01BBCCB3.A20269A0 at webster.unety.net>; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 13:57:37 -0600
Message-ID: <01BBCCB3.A20269A0 at webster.unety.net>
Sender:ietf-request at ietf.org
From: Jim Fleming <JimFleming at unety.net>
To: 'Hank Nussbacher' <HANK at vm.biu.ac.il>, "ietf at ietf.org" <ietf at ietf.org>
Cc: 'New Newdom' <newdom at vrx.net>
Subject: RE: More iTLD thread
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 13:57:35 -0600
Encoding: 105 TEXT
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.
On Thursday, November 07, 1996 3:15 PM, Hank Nussbacher[SMTP:HANK at taunivm.tau.ac.il] wrote:
@ On Thu, 7 Nov 1996 08:43:48 -0600 you said:
@ >Also discussed on that list is a "round table" decision
@ >making model, where the owners of those root name
@ >servers, in concert with the ISPs and top level domain
@ >registries, will work together to decide which top level
@ >domains to support.
@
@ That will just cause a balkanization of the Internet. We need
@ for the roots to have all the iTLDs. The main problem has
@ been the NSI monopoly and the cramming in .com. Give the IAHC
@ some time (4 months) and we will solve your problems so that
@ everyone benefits.
I do not think that you 4 months. Have you read Paul Vixie's
postion statement giving you a January 15, 1997 deadline
before he goes "ballistic" (whatever Paul means by that).
In my opionion, the main problem has been an inability of
the IANA to "manage" the processes and procedures that
they put on their plate. They mislead people that they had
the authority and the ability to manage the transition. Now
they have passed the "hot potatoe" to the ISOC and you,
as a member of the IAHC.
Some claim that the people are at fault for believing that
the IANA had authority and blindly following their lead.
The same thing can happen with the IAHC. People have
to decide whether they think that you have any real
authority and whether you will accomplish anything as
part of the non-profit operation of the ISOC which is
limited by IRS rules.
NSI and other companies continue to build their infrastructure
and make money. For some reason, people continue to
look to the IANA, the ISOC and the IETF for leadership.
When the leadership does not materialize, delays occur,
and a new set of leaders are selected to "have their turn".
Anyone that has been on this carnival ride can see that
the pattern is repeating. Sure, new people will sign up and
debate all of the same topics debated over the past year.
Many people can have fun and pontificate about the
fact that they think they are making multi-billion dollar
decisions.
Business people can not tolerate these processes.
People are losing money by waiting and being mislead
by people who clearly have no intention of standing up
for their actions. In my opinion, the only people who can
solve these problems are the people who own and operate
the companies and systems that serve the customers.
Those people need to move forward and not waste 4
more months of valuable time.
@ >
@ >In my opinion, the round table model allows natural
@ >market forces to control the evolution as opposed to
@ >a few people. Customers have input into the process
@ >by the economic support of the ISPs and registries
@ >via their registration fees.
@
@ The round table model can easily be usurped as well as sued.
@
Anyone with a root name server can participate.
With a simple synchronization plan an agreement
will be reached on what top level domains are supported.
Who are people going to sue...?
All of the root name servers, ISPs, and registries ?
Have you considered that it might be easier for people
to sue the ISOC and the members of the IAHC...?
that is a much smaller number of people
If litigation is going to drive all decisions, then people
might as well turn this whole thing over to the respective
governments, because no company will get involved
unless the liabilities are widely distributed or buffered
by governments.
@ >If you are interested in following those discussions
@ >on the newdom list, there is a web site with more
@ >information.
@
@ I am aware of all the arguments but won't have time to monitor
@ all the newdom lists. The IAHC will have a list out there very
@ soon for you and others to submit proposals.
@
How long have you been following "all of the arguments" ?
Can you provide people with your background
and expertise in this area ?
--
Jim Fleming
UNETY Systems, Inc.
Naperville, IL
e-mail:
JimFleming at unety.net
JimFleming at unety.net.s0.g0 (EDNS/IPv8)
Received: from ietf.org by ietf.org id aa23679; 7 Nov 96 15:50 EST
Received: from Kitten.mcs.com by ietf.org id aa23117; 7 Nov 96 15:48 EST
Received: from Mailbox.mcs.com (Mailbox.mcs.com [192.160.127.87]) by Kitten.mcs.com (8.8.2/8.8.Beta.3) with ESMTP id OAA09351; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 14:06:21 -0600 (CST)
Received: from Jupiter.Mcs.Net (karl at Jupiter.mcs.net [192.160.127.88]) by Mailbox.mcs.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) with ESMTP id OAA28271; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 14:06:18 -0600 (CST)
Received: (from karl at localhost) by Jupiter.Mcs.Net (8.8.2/8.8.2) id OAA17202; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 14:06:17 -0600 (CST)
Sender:ietf-request at ietf.org
From: Karl Denninger <karl at mcs.net>
Message-Id: <199611072006.OAA17202 at Jupiter.Mcs.Net>
Subject: Re: The cartel begins to crumble?
To: Hank Nussbacher <HANK at vm.biu.ac.il>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 14:06:17 -0600 (CST)
Cc: karl at mcs.net, HANK at taunivm.tau.ac.il, ietf at ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <199611072002.OAA27472 at Mailbox.mcs.com> from "Hank Nussbacher" at Nov 7, 96 09:58:09 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
Content-Type: text
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.
> On Thu, 7 Nov 1996 13:52:55 -0600 (CST) you said:
> >> >Bad assumption.
> >> >
> >> >If a TLD is desirable, it will have NEW customers.
> >> >
> >> >If it has no customers, there is no disruption when it disappears.
> >>
> >> What do you do with the 100 or so unlucky customers that did sign
> >> up and pay with the "undesirable" TLD that went down the sinkhole?
> >> Do we need to care about them, or just forget it as noise and move on?
> >> Hank
> >
> >What do you do with the unlucky customers that sign up with someone for
> >service now when the firm fails?
>
> There is a difference between that and what can be seen as an international
> resource like an iTLD. If I were to dial 001 to get to the USA and that
> stopped working - that is not the same ballgame as isp.com going down or
> even Sprint failing. -Hank
Again, a registry that has real penetration doesn't have this problem.
If there were 100 people in the USA and 001 didn't work you'd hear about it,
but it wouldn't be an international disaster.
--
--
Karl Denninger (karl at MCS.Net)| MCSNet - The Finest Internet Connectivity
http://www.mcs.net/~karl | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service
| 32 Analog Prefixes, 13 ISDN, Web servers $75/mo
Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| Email to "info at mcs.net" WWW: http://www.mcs.net/
Fax: [+1 312 248-9865] | 2 FULL DS-3 Internet links; 400Mbps B/W Internal
Received: from ietf.org by ietf.org id aa23654; 7 Nov 96 15:50 EST
Received: from Kitten.mcs.com by ietf.org id aa23329; 7 Nov 96 15:49 EST
Received: from Mailbox.mcs.com (Mailbox.mcs.com [192.160.127.87]) by Kitten.mcs.com (8.8.2/8.8.Beta.3) with ESMTP id OAA10689; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 14:36:39 -0600 (CST)
Received: from Jupiter.Mcs.Net (karl at Jupiter.mcs.net [192.160.127.88]) by Mailbox.mcs.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) with ESMTP id OAA04051; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 14:36:36 -0600 (CST)
Received: (from karl at localhost) by Jupiter.Mcs.Net (8.8.2/8.8.2) id OAA18018; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 14:36:35 -0600 (CST)
Sender:ietf-request at ietf.org
From: Karl Denninger <karl at mcs.net>
Message-Id: <199611072036.OAA18018 at Jupiter.Mcs.Net>
Subject: Re: The cartel begins to crumble?
To: Hank Nussbacher <HANK at vm.biu.ac.il>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 14:36:34 -0600 (CST)
Cc: karl at mcs.net, HANK at taunivm.tau.ac.il, ietf at ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <199611072027.OAA02441 at Mailbox.mcs.com> from "Hank Nussbacher" at Nov 7, 96 10:20:11 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
Content-Type: text
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.
> On Thu, 7 Nov 1996 14:04:54 -0600 (CST) you said:
> >(1) You have to have operational nameservers for the domain you are
> > requesting. That is ALREADY a requirement of many of the eDNS
> > registries (ours included). The check for those authoritative NS
> > lines is automatic.
> >
> > We have stopped *hundreds* of attempted grabs in the eDNS tlds we
> > run ALREADY, and doing so took no manpower. The computer did the
> > work for us.
>
> So you discriminate between those with the technical knowledge
> to be able to set up a NS and add a few SOAs vs those who don't
> have a clue and simply call up and want to grab a name?
Domains are used to provide mapping between hosts and monikers which people
give them.
A domain set up without nameservers does not fill the essential purpose for
which it is requested to be delegated.
If you want to call that "discrimination", be my guest. That your debate
with me on this point degenerated into a perjorative phrase this quickly
says much (in my opinion anyway).
I refer you to the THOUSANDS of ISPs who *do* have a clue and *can* do this
for you if you are incapable of doing so.
> >
> >(2) You have to pay (presumably) for the registrations you file. This
> > is a check and balance in and of itself.
>
> $50 per domain is nothing for a valuable DN.
>
> Hank
Sure.
But $50 X 250,000 is more money than I believe people will gamble to try to
"corner" a particular part of this market.
BTW, that's $12.5 Million in US terms.
--
--
Karl Denninger (karl at MCS.Net)| MCSNet - The Finest Internet Connectivity
http://www.mcs.net/~karl | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service
| 32 Analog Prefixes, 13 ISDN, Web servers $75/mo
Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| Email to "info at mcs.net" WWW: http://www.mcs.net/
Fax: [+1 312 248-9865] | 2 FULL DS-3 Internet links; 400Mbps B/W Internal
Received: from ietf.org by ietf.org id ab23692; 7 Nov 96 15:50 EST
Received: from Kitten.mcs.com by ietf.org id aa23138; 7 Nov 96 15:48 EST
Received: from Mailbox.mcs.com (Mailbox.mcs.com [192.160.127.87]) by Kitten.mcs.com (8.8.2/8.8.Beta.3) with ESMTP id OAA09291; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 14:04:56 -0600 (CST)
Received: from Jupiter.Mcs.Net (karl at Jupiter.mcs.net [192.160.127.88]) by Mailbox.mcs.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) with ESMTP id OAA27926; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 14:04:55 -0600 (CST)
Received: (from karl at localhost) by Jupiter.Mcs.Net (8.8.2/8.8.2) id OAA17158; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 14:04:54 -0600 (CST)
Sender:ietf-request at ietf.org
From: Karl Denninger <karl at mcs.net>
Message-Id: <199611072004.OAA17158 at Jupiter.Mcs.Net>
Subject: Re: The cartel begins to crumble?
To: Hank Nussbacher <HANK at taunivm.tau.ac.il>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 14:04:54 -0600 (CST)
Cc: karl at mcs.net, HANK at vm.biu.ac.il, ietf at ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <199611071938.NAA22466 at Mailbox.mcs.com> from "Hank Nussbacher" at Nov 7, 96 09:32:47 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
Content-Type: text
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.
> On Thu, 7 Nov 1996 10:17:10 -0600 (CST) you said:
> >> The way out of this is to eliminate the ability to trade in DNs. If
> >> the rule was that a DN is not transferrable, then there would be
> >> no value to doing a large DN grab. See the Israeli DN policy
> >> at www.isoc.org.il If we find that a company trades in DNs, they
> >> lose all existing DNs.
> >
> >How do you prove it?
>
> In one case, a customer taped his phone conversation with the company
> trying to sell the DN.
Try that in the US and you may run afoul of CRIMINAL statutes, depending on
the state you're calling from and to.
It would be a *real* bad idea to attempt to do this in many countries -- the
United States included.
> >Are you willing to get sued if you're wrong, and potentially be liable no
> >only for real lost business (millions of US $) but ALSO punitive damages?
>
> So what is your solution to the person who will buy up 25,000
> personal names or 10,000 corporate domain names? I would assume that
> a number of the awardees of new iTLDs will want to offer DNs in
> their TLD free of charge for a year or so so as to create critical
> mass. How do you stop the college senior from massive name
> grabbing? Tell him there is a limit per day? Not let him? Do you
> have the right to refuse a customer?
>
> Hank
(1) You have to have operational nameservers for the domain you are
requesting. That is ALREADY a requirement of many of the eDNS
registries (ours included). The check for those authoritative NS
lines is automatic.
We have stopped *hundreds* of attempted grabs in the eDNS tlds we
run ALREADY, and doing so took no manpower. The computer did the
work for us.
(2) You have to pay (presumably) for the registrations you file. This
is a check and balance in and of itself.
(3) If you damage someone, you are asking to get sued (somewhere).
If you do for the purpose of *EXTORTION*, you could end up with
criminal charges laid against you.
I don't care if someone registers 25,000 personal names. If there is enough
diversity in the registry and TLD busines, it is *irrelavent* provided that
you enforce actual physical service provision.
Operating nameservers to serve 25,000 zones is not trivial. Trying to do so
to serve 250,000 zones is SERIOUSLY non-trivial (which is about what
"critical mass" is if you have significant diversity; with 1,000 TLDs,
someone grabbing 250,000 entries only gets 250 in any registry!)
Try running a nameserver that has 2.5 million zones in it (even just the
NS lines for them). Come check back with us when you have achieved a stable
operating configuration for this :-)
--
--
Karl Denninger (karl at MCS.Net)| MCSNet - The Finest Internet Connectivity
http://www.mcs.net/~karl | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service
| 32 Analog Prefixes, 13 ISDN, Web servers $75/mo
Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| Email to "info at mcs.net" WWW: http://www.mcs.net/
Fax: [+1 312 248-9865] | 2 FULL DS-3 Internet links; 400Mbps B/W Internal
Received: from ietf.org by ietf.org id aa23705; 7 Nov 96 15:50 EST
Received: from Kitten.mcs.com by ietf.org id aa23126; 7 Nov 96 15:48 EST
Received: from Mailbox.mcs.com (Mailbox.mcs.com [192.160.127.87]) by Kitten.mcs.com (8.8.2/8.8.Beta.3) with ESMTP id OAA09119; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 14:00:06 -0600 (CST)
Received: from Jupiter.Mcs.Net (karl at Jupiter.mcs.net [192.160.127.88]) by Mailbox.mcs.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) with ESMTP id NAA26918; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 13:59:59 -0600 (CST)
Received: (from karl at localhost) by Jupiter.Mcs.Net (8.8.2/8.8.2) id NAA17027; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 13:59:58 -0600 (CST)
Sender:ietf-request at ietf.org
From: Karl Denninger <karl at mcs.net>
Message-Id: <199611071959.NAA17027 at Jupiter.Mcs.Net>
Subject: Re: IAHC
To: Hank Nussbacher <HANK at taunivm.tau.ac.il>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 13:59:58 -0600 (CST)
Cc: karl at mcs.net, HANK at vm.biu.ac.il, ietf at ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <199611071931.NAA20932 at Mailbox.mcs.com> from "Hank Nussbacher" at Nov 7, 96 09:24:03 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
Content-Type: text
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.
>
> On Thu, 7 Nov 1996 10:22:50 -0600 (CST) you said:
> >How did the COMMITTEE get the authority?
>
> >From ISOC, IANA, IAB, IETF, INTA, WIPO, ITU and hopefully soon from
> >the FNC. All have agreed to have the IAHC get this done fast and well.
In other words, from people who (1) haven't spent nickel 1 on the
infrastructure out there to date, (2) have no claim on this in the first
place (especially the ITU and WIPO; its nice to PRETEND they do, but they
don't) and I've yet to see any OPEN documents according to ISOC and IETF
operating procedures that back up THAT claim.
Further, the IAB has not responded to our formal complaint regarding the
IANA attempts to circumvent procedure.
> >There was no open process.
>
> We haven't started yet.
The process started when the "committee" as "formed".
> >There were no public nominations.
>
> We are not running for office.
On the contrary. If you wish to claim the right to influence public policy,
you darn well are in public office. Instead of running for that office, and
listing criteria and taking nominations, we are just supposed to let people
*APPOINT* a crew to do this?
> >There ARE people on the committee (one in particular comes to mind) who have
> > made a practice of insinuating that people are committing CRIMINAL
> > acts by supporting eDNS (specifically, allegations of "fraud")
>
> If you can send me private mail about this incident I will try to
> talk to the individual in question. Nothing will get accomplished
> by name calling and threats.
Read the history and archives of the lists which have been discussing this
topic. Perry Metzger, to be specific. I've called nobody a name; his
postings speak for themselves and require no embellishment.
> >There is no "resume", or curriculum vitae, on the members available.
>
> By Monday (hopefully) it will be out there for you to review.
>
> >There is no public process, mechanism for public comment, nor public record
> > of discussions and vote(s) within the committee.
>
> There will be a public process. Give us till Monday to get
> the charter and framework out there and you may be pleasently
> suprised. We are here to get this done in the best possible way
> including soliciting actual proposals.
>
> >
> >None of this speaks highly towards this being an "open" process.
> >
> >Quite to the contrary.
>
> To form a committee and get off the ground and bootstrap ourselves
> takes 7-10 days. Can you give us that leeway?
>
> Hank
Sure. But I won't give you 4 (or more) months.
--
--
Karl Denninger (karl at MCS.Net)| MCSNet - The Finest Internet Connectivity
http://www.mcs.net/~karl | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service
| 32 Analog Prefixes, 13 ISDN, Web servers $75/mo
Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| Email to "info at mcs.net" WWW: http://www.mcs.net/
Fax: [+1 312 248-9865] | 2 FULL DS-3 Internet links; 400Mbps B/W Internal
Received: from ietf.org by ietf.org id aa23663; 7 Nov 96 15:50 EST
Received: from Kitten.mcs.com by ietf.org id aa23113; 7 Nov 96 15:48 EST
Received: from Mailbox.mcs.com (Mailbox.mcs.com [192.160.127.87]) by Kitten.mcs.com (8.8.2/8.8.Beta.3) with ESMTP id NAA08831; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 13:52:58 -0600 (CST)
Received: from Jupiter.Mcs.Net (karl at Jupiter.mcs.net [192.160.127.88]) by Mailbox.mcs.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) with ESMTP id NAA25478; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 13:52:57 -0600 (CST)
Received: (from karl at localhost) by Jupiter.Mcs.Net (8.8.2/8.8.2) id NAA16825; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 13:52:55 -0600 (CST)
Sender:ietf-request at ietf.org
From: Karl Denninger <karl at mcs.net>
Message-Id: <199611071952.NAA16825 at Jupiter.Mcs.Net>
Subject: Re: The cartel begins to crumble?
To: Hank Nussbacher <HANK at taunivm.tau.ac.il>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 13:52:55 -0600 (CST)
Cc: karl at mcs.net, HANK at vm.biu.ac.il, ietf at ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <199611071911.NAA16764 at Mailbox.mcs.com> from "Hank Nussbacher" at Nov 7, 96 09:09:57 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
Content-Type: text
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.
> >Bad assumption.
> >
> >If a TLD is desirable, it will have NEW customers.
> >
> >If it has no customers, there is no disruption when it disappears.
>
> What do you do with the 100 or so unlucky customers that did sign
> up and pay with the "undesirable" TLD that went down the sinkhole?
> Do we need to care about them, or just forget it as noise and move on?
> Hank
What do you do with the unlucky customers that sign up with someone for
service now when the firm fails?
--
--
Karl Denninger (karl at MCS.Net)| MCSNet - The Finest Internet Connectivity
http://www.mcs.net/~karl | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service
| 32 Analog Prefixes, 13 ISDN, Web servers $75/mo
Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| Email to "info at mcs.net" WWW: http://www.mcs.net/
Fax: [+1 312 248-9865] | 2 FULL DS-3 Internet links; 400Mbps B/W Internal
Received: from ietf.org by ietf.org id aa25963; 7 Nov 96 16:18 EST
Received: from zephyr.isi.edu by ietf.org id aa25866; 7 Nov 96 16:16 EST
Received: from zen.isi.edu (zen-a.isi.edu) by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
id <AA06771>; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 13:15:33 -0800
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 13:15:26 -0800
Sender:ietf-request at ietf.org
From: postel at isi.edu
Posted-Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 13:15:26 -0800
Message-Id: <199611072115.AA03933 at zen.isi.edu>
Received: by zen.isi.edu (5.65c/4.0.3-6)
id <AA03933>; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 13:15:26 -0800
To: ietf at ietf.org
Subject: RE: IAHC
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.
Hello:
The two people appointed by the IANA to the committee for new
registries and new international top level domains, the "ad hoc"
committee of draft-postel-iana-itld-admin-02.txt, now called the IAHC
are:
Dave Crocker <dcrocker at brandenburg.com>
Perry E. Metzger <perry at piermont.com>
There maybe some perception that the IANA is distancing itself from
this activity. This is not true. The IANA proposed a process that
involved setting up a committee, pushed hard to get the committee
appointed, now that the committee has finally been appointed, fully
supports it, and urges that it move swiftly (with due process,
openness, and public input) to reach some conclusions.
Thank you.
--jon.
Received: from ietf.org by ietf.org id aa26509; 7 Nov 96 16:25 EST
Received: from vm.biu.ac.il by ietf.org id aa26356; 7 Nov 96 16:23 EST
Received: from VM.BIU.AC.IL by VM.BIU.AC.IL (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
with BSMTP id 1505; Thu, 07 Nov 96 22:17:11 IDT
Received: from VM.BIU.AC.IL (NJE origin HANK at BARILVM) by VM.BIU.AC.IL (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3011; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 22:17:11 +0200
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 96 22:06:20 IDT
Sender:ietf-request at ietf.org
From: Hank Nussbacher <HANK at vm.biu.ac.il>
Subject: RE: More iTLD thread
To: Jim Fleming <JimFleming at unety.net>,
"ietf at ietf.org" <ietf at ietf.org>
cc: 'New Newdom' <newdom at vrx.net>
In-Reply-To: Message of Thu, 7 Nov 1996 13:57:35 -0600 from
<JimFleming at unety.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Message-ID: <9611071623.aa26356 at ietf.org>
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.
On Thu, 7 Nov 1996 13:57:35 -0600 you said:
>I do not think that you 4 months. Have you read Paul Vixie's
>postion statement giving you a January 15, 1997 deadline
>before he goes "ballistic" (whatever Paul means by that).
Once you see our timetable you will understand why we need
4 months to solicition proposals, create or adopt the official
one, place it in the public for review, solicit comments,
modify the doc, have the award process, get the submissions,
judge them and assign the new iTLDs. That entire process cannot
be condensed to 2 months. But wait 72 hours to see the milestones
and I believe you will agree. We have been talking to Paul.
>Some claim that the people are at fault for believing that
>the IANA had authority and blindly following their lead.
>The same thing can happen with the IAHC. People have
>to decide whether they think that you have any real
>authority and whether you will accomplish anything as
>part of the non-profit operation of the ISOC which is
>limited by IRS rules.
Will you give us a chance before deciding on your own? Or are
we condemned to death before we even open our mouth?
>Anyone that has been on this carnival ride can see that
>the pattern is repeating. Sure, new people will sign up and
>debate all of the same topics debated over the past year.
>Many people can have fun and pontificate about the
>fact that they think they are making multi-billion dollar
>decisions.
I did not come here to join the debate that I have followed
silently for the past year. I am here to get the new iTLDs
out there, to do it as fast as is humanly possible and to
walk away.
>Business people can not tolerate these processes.
>People are losing money by waiting and being mislead
>by people who clearly have no intention of standing up
>for their actions. In my opinion, the only people who can
>solve these problems are the people who own and operate
>the companies and systems that serve the customers.
>Those people need to move forward and not waste 4
>more months of valuable time.
That is your opinion.
>Can you provide people with your background
>and expertise in this area ?
It will be in the announcement. What you won't find there is
that I set the existing policy for the Israeli domain name
space, I selected the TLDs, and I still arbitrate cases when
the registrar has a question. You can find more about it
at www.isoc.org.il.
Hank
>--
>Jim Fleming
>UNETY Systems, Inc.
>Naperville, IL
>
>e-mail:
>JimFleming at unety.net
>JimFleming at unety.net.s0.g0 (EDNS/IPv8)
>
Received: from ietf.org by ietf.org id aa26862; 7 Nov 96 16:29 EST
Received: from vm.biu.ac.il by ietf.org id aa26411; 7 Nov 96 16:24 EST
Received: from VM.BIU.AC.IL by VM.BIU.AC.IL (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
with BSMTP id 1507; Thu, 07 Nov 96 22:23:37 IDT
Received: from VM.BIU.AC.IL (NJE origin HANK at BARILVM) by VM.BIU.AC.IL (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3015; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 22:23:38 +0200
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 96 22:20:11 IDT
Sender:ietf-request at ietf.org
From: Hank Nussbacher <HANK at vm.biu.ac.il>
Subject: Re: The cartel begins to crumble?
To: karl at mcs.net, Hank Nussbacher <HANK at taunivm.tau.ac.il>
cc: ietf at ietf.org
In-Reply-To: Message of Thu, 7 Nov 1996 14:04:54 -0600 (CST) from
<karl at Mcs.Net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Message-ID: <9611071627.aa26411 at ietf.org>
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.
On Thu, 7 Nov 1996 14:04:54 -0600 (CST) you said:
>(1) You have to have operational nameservers for the domain you are
> requesting. That is ALREADY a requirement of many of the eDNS
> registries (ours included). The check for those authoritative NS
> lines is automatic.
>
> We have stopped *hundreds* of attempted grabs in the eDNS tlds we
> run ALREADY, and doing so took no manpower. The computer did the
> work for us.
So you discriminate between those with the technical knowledge
to be able to set up a NS and add a few SOAs vs those who don't
have a clue and simply call up and want to grab a name?
>
>(2) You have to pay (presumably) for the registrations you file. This
> is a check and balance in and of itself.
$50 per domain is nothing for a valuable DN.
Hank
Received: from ietf.org by ietf.org id aa27195; 7 Nov 96 16:34 EST
Received: from [207.32.128.130] by ietf.org id aa27105; 7 Nov 96 16:32 EST
Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by doorstep.unety.net (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id PAA25452; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 15:03:03 -0600
Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail
id <01BBCCBD.094F5560 at webster.unety.net>; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 15:04:55 -0600
Message-ID: <01BBCCBD.094F5560 at webster.unety.net>
Sender:ietf-request at ietf.org
From: Jim Fleming <JimFleming at unety.net>
To: 'Per Gregers Bilse' <bilse at eu.net>, Karl Denninger <karl at mcs.net>
Cc: "ietf at ietf.org" <ietf at ietf.org>, 'New Newdom' <newdom at vrx.net>
Subject: The Internet Tree
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 15:04:54 -0600
Encoding: 180 TEXT
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.
On Thursday, November 07, 1996 12:46 PM, Per Gregers Bilse[SMTP:bilse at eu.net] wrote:
@ On Nov 7, 10:22, Karl Denninger <karl at mcs.net> wrote:
@ > How did the COMMITTEE get the authority?
@ >
@ >[...]
@ >
@ > None of this speaks highly towards this being an "open" process.
@ >
@ > Quite to the contrary.
@
@ How does your, Fleming's, et als "process" line up?
@
@ --
@ ------ ___ --- Per G. Bilse, Mgr Network Operations
@ ----- / / / __ ___ _/_ ---- EUnet Communications Services B.V.
@ ---- /--- / / / / /__/ / ----- Singel 540, 1017 AZ Amsterdam, NL
@ --- /___ /__/ / / /__ / ------ tel: +31 20 5305333, fax: +31 20 6224657
@ --- ------- 24hr emergency number: +31 20 421 0865
@ --- Connecting Europe since AS286 --- http://www.EU.net e-mail: bilse at EU.net
@
@
The process I have proposed is VERY simple. It is
driven by standard business partnership practices,
economics and a direct correlation with customer
opinions via their decisions in an open, competitive
market place.
At the "bottom" of the process are the ROOTs, just
like on a tree. Someone has to step forward to
handle the thankless job of providing public service
machines that hand out references to the authoritative
servers for the top level domains.
Working up from the roots, are the registries. (We
could call this the trunk of the tree) These organizations
bring legitimacy to a top level domain by maintaining
data bases and the facilities needed to allow people
to register second level domains.
The registries (trunk) primarily service the ISPs (the
branches of the tree). The ISPs bring the marketplace
to the registries and help to promote one top level
domain over another. Via the advice of an ISP,
customers can be steered to registries for various
business, political or technical reasons. If a registry
does not do a good job, the ISPs should be allowed
to vote via "standard business partnership practices".
In the current system, the ISPs have no choice, they
have to play the InterNIC game. This puts ISPs at
the mercy of the InterNIC, which can be dangerous
because the InterNIC handles more than just domain
names.
Continuing...we have roots, a trunk and branches.
It is now time to add the most important part, the
leaves. These are the customers, they attach to
the branches (ISPs) and their opinions are funneled
via free market dynamics to the trunk (registries)
and then to the roots (root name servers).
Now, you are probably asking, "How does this
work?" In my mind it is quite simple, firstly there
are not that many people or companies that really
want to be root name server providers. It is a dirty
job and there is not much to be gained. Let's
assume that we find enough people to help with
that part of the infrastructure. (As an aside, it
appears that some of the volunteers that run the
current 9 "popular" root name servers may not
want this thankless job, especially now that they
see that ISPs rely on them for operations)
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions
of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.
Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.
