Ken Freed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Below is the rewritten paragraph from
> http://www.media-visions.com/icann-gtld.htm
> "Evidently showing his displeasure with the situation,
> Jon Postel at IANA issued an electronic directive that
> "reoriented" or redirected routing on some root servers.
*sigh*
It's still wrong.
"Redirecting routing" has a specific meaning in Internet literature.
Jon Postel did *not* do that.
> By temporarily disrupting portions of Internet traffic, his
> statement could not be ignored.
As I said before, it is one thing to temporarily establish a new
master root server, and another to disrupt traffic. "disrupt" has a
connotation that goes beyond Postel's actions.
dis.rupt \dis-'r*pt\ \-'r*p-sh*n\ vt [L disruptus, pp. of disrumpere,
fr. dis- + rumpere to]break - more at RUPTURE 1a: to break apart :
RUPTURE 1b: to throw into disorder 2: to cause to break down -
dis.rupt.er n
About the only thing I would agree with is that Postel's actions could
be considered politically unwise. In my opinion, in the context of a
research Internet, Postel's actions are acceptable. In the context of
a multipurpose Internet, in the midst of a serious controversy that
concerns root servers, I can understand why his actions would arouse
suspicion.
Why don't you just say exactly what he did, in plain English?
> Why not use the list for more substantial comment, like whether
> ICANN is illegitimate, like whether the U.S. Government has a right
> to privatize our global Internet without any kind of a public vote?
Perhaps now that there has been mainstream exposure of what NSI,
ICANN, NTIA, etc. have been doing, there are enough people who are
informed that a vote will have meaningful results.
> Don't you agree there's been way too many personal attacks on the
> lists and not enough real dialogue on the issues that count? Please
> show your leadership.
In my opinion, it is not a personal attack to correct a journalistic
error.
--gregbo
