Re: Future of IANA (and IETF)

To: ietf at ns.ietf.org
Subject: Re: Future of IANA (and IETF)
From: Kent Crispin <kent at songbird.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 1998 15:06:13 -0800
Delivery-date: Tue, 03 Feb 1998 19:15:26 -0500
In-reply-to: <19980203163446.26920@mcs.net>; from Karl Denninger on Tue, Feb 03, 1998 at 04:34:46PM -0600
References: <6974.wsimpson@greendragon.com> <19980203130121.21259@songbird.com> <19980203163446.26920@mcs.net>

On Tue, Feb 03, 1998 at 04:34:46PM -0600, Karl Denninger wrote:
[..]
> 
> And, of course, since the US Government historically has funded the
> primary root server and the IANA functionality which support(ed) it, that
> means that the US Government gets to set those rules, right?

As has been carefully pointed out, "funding" is not the same as "control".

-- 
Kent Crispin, PAB Chair			"No reason to get excited",
kent at songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html

References:
- Re: Future of IANA (and IETF)
  - From: William Allen Simpson
- Re: Future of IANA (and IETF)
  - From: Kent Crispin
- Re: Future of IANA (and IETF)
  - From: Karl Denninger

Prev by Date: Re: Last Call: IP Payload Compression ...
Next by Date: Re: COM names != US trade marks (was Re: Future of IANA)
Previous by thread: Re: Future of IANA (and IETF)
Next by thread: Re: Future of IANA (and IETF)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

Re: Future of IANA (and IETF)

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.