Martin and all,
Well Martin there are many reasons why early termination of
a government contract may occur, your suspicion not withstanding.
It appears that you are either attempting to assign some sort of
conspiracy associated with that comment made in the www.asensio.com
document to which you are paraphrasing from. As someone who
has a legal background it seems fairly reasonable to assume that either
you are being cute here or you have a huge gap in your legal training.....
However I would venture a guess here that the former, is likely the
case in this instance on your part, Martin as you have been an
advocate for WIOP and their RFC-3....
Martin B. Schwimmer wrote:
> The basis for Asensio's misinformation charge is explained in its web site
> at www.asensio.com in a document other than the press release cited by
> Yahoo. One sentence caught my eye:
>
> "There is no reasonable basis to expect that NSOL's DNS contract will not
> completely be terminated on or before its scheduled termination date."
>
> Why is it reasonable to expect that the contract will be terminated before
> its scheduled termination date?
>
> I would be interested in knowing if Asensio has a short position in NSOL.
>
> At 06:39 PM 3/25/99 -0000, you wrote:
> >As far as I can see, the InterNIC site was where NSI fulfilled their duties
> >to the USG and the networksolutions.com site was where they offered a value
> >added service.
> >It is of course entirely self serving that NSI now claims the InterNIC site
> >as a Registrar site rather than a Registry site. Well, of course they would,
> >but the USG shouldn't let them get away with it.
> >Every time NSI claims an absolute truth, you need to look at the spin and
> >the re-writing of history.
> >
> >And read http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/990325/ny_asensio_1.html for
> >background.
> >I quote 'We believe that NSOL's management has purposely disseminated
> >misleading information, and failed to disclose material negative
> >information'.
> >
> >Ivan
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >> Sent: Thursday, March 25, 1999 1:09 PM
> >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Subject: RE: [IFWP] FYI
> >>
> >>
> >> I know many refuse to accept this, but the old InterNIC was
> >> a hybrid site involving both registry (DNS) and registrar
> >> (customer) functions and it is very easy to establish that
> >> most of the functions on the InterNIC site were registrar
> >> related. InterNIC was not a registry. There was no
> >> registry, but there will be shortly.
> >>
> >> Chuck
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: John B. Reynolds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 1999 11:46 PM
> >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Subject: RE: [IFWP] FYI
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> A.M. Rutkowski wrote:
> >> >
> >> > At 05:44 PM 3/24/99 , John B. Reynolds wrote:
> >> > >The old InterNIC site is still up (presumably maintained
> >> in case NSI is
> >> > >forced to pull down the new one): It's at
> >> http://198.41.0.5/ or
> >> > >http://rs0.internic.net/.
> >> >
> >> > It actually looks like the site for the new registry
> >> > home page, doesn't it?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --tony
> >> >
> >>
> >> If that were the case, it would be appropriate for
> >> http://www.internic.net
> >> and http://rs.internic.net to continue to point to it, since
> >> InterNIC is the
> >> registry (the registrar is WorldNIC).
> >>
> >> ________________________________________________________
> >> NetZero - We believe in a FREE Internet. Shouldn't you?
> >> Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
> >> http://www.netzero.net/download.html
> >>
> >
> >
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
