[IFWP] Re: [Hague-jur-commercial-law] CNNews, ICANN role over jurisdiction and enforcement of court orders over domain names
(http://www.eff.org/Cases/Heathmount_v_Technodome.com/20011205_eff_pr.html ). Eff recently decided to file a brief in the CNNews.com case, where part of the case involves a dispute over who has personal jurisdiction. Apparently ICANN has become involved in the case to tell an ICANN regulated registrar that they should hand the domain over to Time Warner. This surprised quite a few persons, including at least one ICANN board member, because (a) ICANN was supposed to stay neutral in legal disputes between domain holders, and (b) ICANN's main outside counsel Joe Sims of Jones, Day, Reavis Pogue (also the former employer of ICANN general counsel Louis Touton), represents Time Warner, on antitrust issues. Is the perjurer Sims and his gang-buddy Touton going to be allowed to get away with this? M.S.
[IFWP] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] HP/Compaq vote and .org reassignment
It would seem to us to be fairly simple to allow every .org domain holder to vote to express preferences with regard to who should get the .org bid. Unlike the at large election, there is a known list of potential voters, and also a ready and inexpensive way to contact them and to verify who they are. James, You are correct, One way to do this might be to put a TXT record in the zone file. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Mar 22 10:35:40 /etc/namedb # dig mbz.org. txt @ns1 ; DiG 8.1 mbz.org. txt @ns1 ; (2 servers found) ;; res options: init recurs defnam dnsrch ;; got answer: ;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 10 ;; flags: qr aa rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 3, ADDITIONAL: 5 ;; QUERY SECTION: ;; mbz.org, type = TXT, class = IN ;; ANSWER SECTION: mbz.org.2D IN TXT I vote for xxx to run .org -- /\ ASCII RIBBON / [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ / CAMPAIGN AGAINST / http://open-rsc.org http://cr.yp.to/dnsroot.html X HTML MAIL / http://chrono.faq http://watch.gallery http://mbz.org / \ AND POSTINGS / http://font.gallery http://dnso.com http://watch.prices
[IFWP] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] HP/Compaq vote and .org reassignment
Do we need a sanction from anyone to run such an election? If the voter EMail addresses are openly available, it should be easy enough to issue a voter ID (DVC) to each and let them vote via the Internet. See http://mysafevote.com/ Perhaps IFWPlist would like to give it a try for IFWP subscribers? Cheers...\Stef At 10:38 AM -0500 3/22/02, Richard J. Sexton wrote: It would seem to us to be fairly simple to allow every .org domain holder to vote to express preferences with regard to who should get the .org bid. Unlike the at large election, there is a known list of potential voters, and also a ready and inexpensive way to contact them and to verify who they are. James, You are correct, One way to do this might be to put a TXT record in the zone file. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Mar 22 10:35:40 /etc/namedb # dig mbz.org. txt @ns1 ; DiG 8.1 mbz.org. txt @ns1 ; (2 servers found) ;; res options: init recurs defnam dnsrch ;; got answer: ;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 10 ;; flags: qr aa rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 3, ADDITIONAL: 5 ;; QUERY SECTION: ;; mbz.org, type = TXT, class = IN ;; ANSWER SECTION: mbz.org.2D IN TXT I vote for xxx to run .org -- /\ ASCII RIBBON / [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ / CAMPAIGN AGAINST / http://open-rsc.org http://cr.yp.to/dnsroot.html X HTML MAIL / http://chrono.faq http://watch.gallery http://mbz.org / \ AND POSTINGS / http://font.gallery http://dnso.com http://watch.prices
RE: [IFWP] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] HP/Compaq vote and .org reassignment
Excellent! If practicable, let's do it. Joanna -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Einar Stefferud Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 2:45 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Jim Fleming; ncc; James Love; @Quasar; Ellen Rony; Jay@Fenello. com; Jefsey Morfin; Joanna Lane; karl@cavebear. com; Simon Higgs; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [IFWP] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] HP/Compaq vote and .org reassignment Do we need a sanction from anyone to run such an election? If the voter EMail addresses are openly available, it should be easy enough to issue a voter ID (DVC) to each and let them vote via the Internet. See http://mysafevote.com/ Perhaps IFWPlist would like to give it a try for IFWP subscribers? Cheers...\Stef At 10:38 AM -0500 3/22/02, Richard J. Sexton wrote: It would seem to us to be fairly simple to allow every .org domain holder to vote to express preferences with regard to who should get the .org bid. Unlike the at large election, there is a known list of potential voters, and also a ready and inexpensive way to contact them and to verify who they are. James, You are correct, One way to do this might be to put a TXT record in the zone file. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Mar 22 10:35:40 /etc/namedb # dig mbz.org. txt @ns1 ; DiG 8.1 mbz.org. txt @ns1 ; (2 servers found) ;; res options: init recurs defnam dnsrch ;; got answer: ;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 10 ;; flags: qr aa rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 3, ADDITIONAL: 5 ;; QUERY SECTION: ;; mbz.org, type = TXT, class = IN ;; ANSWER SECTION: mbz.org.2D IN TXT I vote for xxx to run .org -- /\ ASCII RIBBON / [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ / CAMPAIGN AGAINST / http://open-rsc.org http://cr.yp.to/dnsroot.html X HTML MAIL / http://chrono.faq http://watch.gallery http://mbz.org / \ AND POSTINGS / http://font.gallery http://dnso.com http://watch.prices
Re: [IFWP] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] HP/Compaq vote and .org reassignment
At 11:45 AM 3/22/02 -0800, Einar Stefferud wrote: Do we need a sanction from anyone to run such an election? If the voter EMail addresses are openly available, it should be easy enough to issue a voter ID (DVC) to each and let them vote via the Internet. You don't even need that. If every owned of an .org domain were to add a TXT resource record to their zone file, a simple program could tally the opinions of what .org owners really want to happen to .org. -- Clique \Clique\, n. [F., fr. OF. cliquer to click. See Click, v. i.] A narrow circle of persons associated by common interests or for the accomplishment of a common purpose; -- generally used in a bad sense. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [IFWP] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] HP/Compaq vote and .org reassignment
- Original Message - From: Einar Stefferud [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [IFWP] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] HP/Compaq vote and .org reassignment Do we need a sanction from anyone to run such an election? If the voter EMail addresses are openly available, it should be easy enough to issue a voter ID (DVC) to each and let them vote via the Internet. See http://mysafevote.com/ Perhaps IFWPlist would like to give it a try for IFWP subscribers? It would seem that you first need a ballot, or slate of candidates. Then, you are not running an election but more of a straw-poll. In order to assemble a slate of candidates, you would likely have to go through the expensive ICANN screening process, where Arthur Andersen decides if the candidates have enough money and the ICANN legal staff gets their fees for making sure the candidates meet all of the criteria they set up. Then you have to allow enough time to have the I* society insiders jockey to get on the payrolls of the candidates. At that point you are ready for the big vote. If the straw-poll turns out to the liking of the 15 hand-selected insiders, they will of course declare their agreement. If not, then they will do the .WEB shuffle and claim to be doing everyone a favor by waiting until the next round (which never comes) when there is more consensus. While all of this is going on, the candidates (unlike individuals) of course can reorganize and completely change the companies involved. Once that happens, then your straw-poll candidate can be declared the winner, and it will be the same I* society insiders who have moved behind the scenes to sit in the winner's seat. You are dealing with a group of people who swim at the shallow end of the ethical gene pool. Go ahead and vote, poll, etc. and watch the swamp 32-bit DNS swamp churn under your feet. -- JF
Re: [IFWP] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] HP/Compaq vote and .org reassignment
- Original Message - From: Richard J. Sexton [EMAIL PROTECTED] If the voter EMail addresses are openly available, it should be easy enough to issue a voter ID (DVC) to each and let them vote via the Internet. You don't even need that. If every owned of an .org domain were to add a TXT resource record to their zone file, a simple program could tally the opinions of what .org owners really want to happen to .org. You might want to do that on the Next Generation Internet with 128-bit DNS. That could be done along with whois handled via TXT records. I think it will be more likely that people using 128-bit DNS (with IPv4++) will have direct control of their DNS servers. At the moment, I bet you would find that very few .ORG owners have any idea what a TXT record is and they have no access to their nameservers, because all of that has been pushed behind the scenes with the ICANN MLM machine, that handles all of that. In some cases, you may find the view that ICANN and/or the Registrars own the .ORG names, so the customers have no say. In that case, you may find that the TXT records are added as proxies. As an alternative to your approach, it might save everyone a lot of time, if people were to just vote for all of the I* society insiders who should then go off and run .ORG. That is probably 20 to 30 people who will no doubt game the system this time around, like the last time. It will save a lot of time to just forfeit the 32-bit DNS .ORG to them, and focus on the 128-bit .ORG DNS, along with the 128-bit .COM Registry. -- JF
Re: [IFWP] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] HP/Compaq vote and .orgreassignment
Hey Jim -- Let's not be silly about this. We don't need no stinking candidates to vote on whether we like or dislike something. I do not propose to run an election for ICANN board seats without ICANN's knowledge. In fact, my position is that we should not do anything to help ICANN do anything that they can and should do for themselves, including jumping of a handy cliff someplace. Yes, we need a ballot in any case, and as someone noted, a TXT record in your domain name's ZONE file can act as a voting tool if someone wishes to organize such a thing. A major issue is to define an electorate, and if it is defined as People who control a Zone File, then using the zone file as the ballot is simple enough. If the Zone File's owner is not smart enough to figure out how to follow instructions to vote, then I think we can consider it a none vote. Using that same information to organize a more normal looking ballot election should also be possible if there is reason to do it, perhaps as a demonstration of the ability to do it without screwing it up as ICANN is wont to do. Cheers...\Stef At 2:19 PM -0600 3/22/02, Jim Fleming wrote: - Original Message - From: Einar Stefferud [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [IFWP] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] HP/Compaq vote and .org reassignment Do we need a sanction from anyone to run such an election? If the voter EMail addresses are openly available, it should be easy enough to issue a voter ID (DVC) to each and let them vote via the Internet. See http://mysafevote.com/ Perhaps IFWPlist would like to give it a try for IFWP subscribers? It would seem that you first need a ballot, or slate of candidates. Then, you are not running an election but more of a straw-poll. In order to assemble a slate of candidates, you would likely have to go through the expensive ICANN screening process, where Arthur Andersen decides if the candidates have enough money and the ICANN legal staff gets their fees for making sure the candidates meet all of the criteria they set up. Then you have to allow enough time to have the I* society insiders jockey to get on the payrolls of the candidates. At that point you are ready for the big vote. If the straw-poll turns out to the liking of the 15 hand-selected insiders, they will of course declare their agreement. If not, then they will do the .WEB shuffle and claim to be doing everyone a favor by waiting until the next round (which never comes) when there is more consensus. While all of this is going on, the candidates (unlike individuals) of course can reorganize and completely change the companies involved. Once that happens, then your straw-poll candidate can be declared the winner, and it will be the same I* society insiders who have moved behind the scenes to sit in the winner's seat. You are dealing with a group of people who swim at the shallow end of the ethical gene pool. Go ahead and vote, poll, etc. and watch the swamp 32-bit DNS swamp churn under your feet. -- JF
Re: [IFWP] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] HP/Compaq vote and .org reassignment
- Original Message - From: Einar Stefferud [EMAIL PROTECTED] I do not propose to run an election for ICANN board seats without ICANN's knowledge. Stef, I was under the impression that .ORG people wanted to vote on what company they wanted to run the IPv4 32-bit DNS .ORG Registry that Verisign has given up in a horse-trade for the, ten times larger, IPv4 32-bit DNS .COM Registry. Note the end of the Subject line saysorg reassignment... As for Board seats, it is my impression that those will be 15, hand-selected, people, who have proven over the years to be 100% loyal to the I* society. That will make it easier for the ICANN staff and legal team to do as they please with a rubber stamp bigger than what they have now. Five of the 15 will supposedly have the endorsement of some government, but not be directly from the government. That will help to insure it is an I* society insider with no loyalty back to the government, just a one-way endorsement to fool the press and the general public. -- JF
[IFWP] Re: Moving up the ladder
Imagine ICANN controlling the numbering space. Well, let me think. Over the last decade or so of my life, I have had probably five different phone numbers which were assigned to me by a variety of entities. I've never really cared who assigned them or what the numbers were, and have a hard enough time remembering my own phone number anyway. Does this ENUM thing mean that I'll be paying a registration fee to ICANN for a telephone number or what?
Re: [IFWP] Re: Moving up the ladder
On Thu, 21 Mar 2002, at 13:05 [=GMT-0500], John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D. wrote: Imagine ICANN controlling the numbering space. Well, let me think. Over the last decade or so of my life, I have had probably five different phone numbers which were assigned to me by a variety of entities. I've never really cared who assigned them or what the numbers were, and have a hard enough time remembering my own phone number anyway. Does this ENUM thing mean that I'll be paying a registration fee to ICANN for a telephone number or what? I guess they will levy their usual 'tax'. But forget about numbers, use _names_. The special DNS records will work with all domains, not just 1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.0.e164.arpa, but also phone.vlier.net. Type that in your browser. Right now just a special service of one registrar (Enom), and only working for US cell phones, AFAIK, but still.
[IFWP] RE: IFWP_LIST V1 #973
On Tue, 19 Mar 2002, at 18:49 [=GMT-0500], Joanna Lane wrote: And this does what exactly? www.enum.org Because ENUM puts telephone numbers into the DNS, it allows for a wide range of applications based solely on a phone number. Probably the most exciting application is an improvement in Voice over IP, in which telephone calls can be made over the Internet. Just imagine, someday you'll be able to dial a number and then actually speak with someone at a remote location. What will they think of next. Because ENUM puts telephone numbers into the DNS, it triggers a profound paradigm shift from PSTN to internet (ICANN?) jurisdiction and policy control. Imagine ICANN controlling the numbering space. J --- -- Judith Oppenheimer http://JudithOppenheimer.com http://ICBTollFreeNews.com 212 684-7210, 1 800 The Expert --- --
[IFWP] Re: Nothing has changed....
At 08:39 PM 3/16/02 -0600, you wrote: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/199504/msg2.html This part looks interesting: 12:00-13:30--Lunch -- With foxes we must play the fox. - unknown /\ / http://www.vrx.net \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN / http://killifish.vrx.net X AGAINST HTML MAIL/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1 (613) 473-1719 / \ AND POSTINGS/ http://www.mbz.org http://www.dnso.com
Re: [IFWP] Re: Four more years?
Jay Fenello wrote: What we have is a systemic problem, one that can be described by field theory To fix it, we'll need a comprehensive approach I agree with Jay, and I think we must view the USG's approach to ICANN in the light of the USG's approach in general to international politics, which the Internet is a part of The DoC is not primarily concerned with how the domain name system, or the Internet, is run What they are concerned with is retaining control If they allow the Internet to become democratized, that control goes out of their hands because the Internet user public is international The USG is currently in activist mode regarding international institutions That goes for the UN, the WTO, the Hague, and all other multi- and international organisms The USG is taking control of them And the USG sees the Internet as an international institution, or at least as an international mechanism So it won't do anything that diminishes its control over it The rest is just spin MS
Re: [IFWP] Re: ICANN President proposes end to At-Large public elections
When pray tell did the Govt pay for my piece of the Internet. I do not recall ever getting any funds from them to pay for it. I sure would appreciate getting back my $70,000 spent on Internet stuff over the years. Somehow I expect you are not counting anything spent by non-govt people to mount the current Internet. Your arguments are totally bogus;-)...\Stef At 23:06 -0700 01/03/02, Ken Freed wrote: Examples are any nation on earth where the government owns the phone company, India for example. I'm more of a free marketeer than a socialist, to be sure, but by natural law, if the people rightfully own the government that constructs the network of interconnected networks, like a city builds roads that connect the private homes, this makes the Internet public. Let me raise a related issue, mostly to gather information to educate myself. Who can give details of development of Internet2, the next generation of the Internet? Where is the money coming from? What about its governance? Thanks for wisdom. -- ken At 04:19 PM 3/1/02 -0700, you wrote: And outside of the USA, Internet development mostly was funded by governments. An interesting assertion. Can you back it up? First of all there really wasn't that much Internet development to speak of. In fact it didn't exists. Perhaps you're thinking of the ARPAnet. At any rate, the UUCP network, which remains larger than the TCP/IP ARPAnet, was larger then the arpanet and by the time they'r all merged into what we now refer to as the internet it was about 1996. UUCP was never government funded. -- Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[IFWP] Re: Four more years?
At 2/28/02 02:47 AM, Richard J. Sexton wrote: The problem, Jay as I see it, is this: can ICANN be reformed? I don't think so - not with the people that are in charge of it now. Why are they there then? Ira/the DoC appointed them. Why the DoC? Because in the Inter-agency Domain Name Task force meetings 4 years ago the DoC claimed to have all the answers so when everybody else stopped snickering, they told them sure, go run with it. Why did the DoC want to run is? Large 3 letter corporations lobbied to the tune of tens if not hundreds of millions to make sure DoC got the ball. Follow the money. Remember, this is still all under DoC oversight. ICANN has admitted they're in constant communications with them just like they're in constant communications with foreign governments - which is rightly the job of the State Department. Hi Richard, Can ICANN be reformed? I don't see how, when it is a result of a political process that is every bit as corrupt as ICANN is. That's why I wrote: ICANN taking over the Internet is not the problem. It is merely a reflection of our current system as it has evolved over time. This has manifested itself into, once again, the installation of power of a group, not of the community, over that community - In this sense ICANN is just a recapitulation of the IAHC disaster; sero sum games both. The IFWP consensus documents came very very close to this whole group acting as a coherent one but big monied interests acting through outside forces not really committed to the community it pretended to be a part of couldn't let that happen and the thing was derailed faster then Enron became a national laughing stock. Kill the head and the body will die. Nothing will get done till the DoC is taken out of the position of having absolute power. Or thinking it does. But the DoC is the result of a political process every bit as corrupt as the DoC is. What we have is a systemic problem, one that can be described by field theory. To fix it, we'll need a comprehensive approach. They had their chance, we've suffered 4 years of them screwing up and I think that's enough. Agreed :-) Jay. -- With foxes we must play the fox. - unknown /\ / http://www.vrx.net \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN / http://killifish.vrx.net X AGAINST HTML MAIL/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1 (613) 473-1719 / \ AND POSTINGS/ http://www.mbz.org http://www.dnso.com +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World - The first step is to penetrate the clouds of deceit and distortion and learn the truth about the world, then to organize and act to change it. That's never been impossible and never been easy. -- Noam Chomsky
[IFWP] Re: ICANN President proposes end to At-Large public elections
There goes Internet democracy At 2/25/02 12:08 PM, Chris Chiu wrote: During a private retreat, the President of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, M Stuart Lynn, proposed vast changes to ICANN's governing structure These plans call for the abolition of ICANN public elections and for national governments to select a third of ICANN's reconstituted Board See http://wwwinternetdemocracyprojectorg/#highlights Sincerely, Christopher Chiu Global Internet Liberty Campaign Organizer American Civil Liberties Union +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://wwwFenellocom 678-585-9765 http://wwwYourWebPartnercom Web Support http://wwwAligningWithPurposecom for a Better World - The first step is to penetrate the clouds of deceit and distortion and learn the truth about the world, then to organize and act to change it That's never been impossible and never been easy -- Noam Chomsky
Re: [IFWP] Re: ICANN President proposes end to At-Large public elections
At 01:02 PM 3/1/02 -0700, you wrote: Note: There was never a public vote to privatise the Internet, which is (was) public property. No, it's not. It's a set of interconnected *private* networks. Tony Rutkowski went to a lot of effort to make sure the Internet was, in a formal telecommunications legal sense a private network. If it's a public network (as the MoU people kept asserting) then the ITU has dominion over it. That's why Tony did what he did. -- Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [IFWP] Re: ICANN President proposes end to At-Large public elections
Did not the funds originally come from the government Doesn't that make the Internet, defacto, public property? I have great respect for Tony, but construing the net as private has caused more harm than good, i.e., ICANN. -- ken At 01:02 PM 3/1/02 -0700, you wrote: Note: There was never a public vote to privatise the Internet, which is (was) public property. No, it's not. It's a set of interconnected *private* networks. Tony Rutkowski went to a lot of effort to make sure the Internet was, in a formal telecommunications legal sense a private network. If it's a public network (as the MoU people kept asserting) then the ITU has dominion over it. That's why Tony did what he did. -- Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [IFWP] Re: ICANN President proposes end to At-Large public elections
The Internet started in the military for decentralized communication, then expanded to universities with government research contracts, then expanded to state-sponsored universities, then private colleges universities, then the general public. I stand by my first statement. The net always was public property until it was decided otherwise, as public as the street in front of your house, which no one has a right to declare private without your (our) consent. -- ken No they didn't, not mostly. No it doesn't even if they did if they didn't retain title. ICANN comes fromthe government not the private sector. On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, Ken Freed wrote: Did not the funds originally come from the government Doesn't that make the Internet, defacto, public property? I have great respect for Tony, but construing the net as private has caused more harm than good, i.e., ICANN. -- ken At 01:02 PM 3/1/02 -0700, you wrote: Note: There was never a public vote to privatise the Internet, which is (was) public property. No, it's not. It's a set of interconnected *private* networks. Tony Rutkowski went to a lot of effort to make sure the Internet was, in a formal telecommunications legal sense a private network. If it's a public network (as the MoU people kept asserting) then the ITU has dominion over it. That's why Tony did what he did. -- Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org A. Michael Froomkin |Professor of Law| [EMAIL PROTECTED] U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA +1 (305) 284-4285 | +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) | http://www.law.tm --It's warm here.--
Re: [IFWP] Re: ICANN President proposes end to At-Large public elections
At 02:26 PM 3/1/02 -0700, you wrote: The Internet started in the military for decentralized communication, then expanded to universities with government research contracts, then expanded to state-sponsored universities, then private colleges universities, then the general public. I stand by my first statement. You can stand by it all you want Ken, but absent some legal document that says it's true, it's just fantasy. -- Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [IFWP] Re: ICANN President proposes end to At-Large publicelections
Define Internet. They had to drop URDP and Sunrise from the dotUS proposal (or in the alternative, could have applied to Congress for a variance) because access to a public resource cannot discriminate against any of the groups that own that resource, in this case the US people. So if the ccTLDs are treated as public resources under the control of national governments, that part certainly cannot be said to be an interconnected private network. Who owns the 13 root servers? Regards, Joanna -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ken Freed Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 4:06 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [IFWP] Re: ICANN President proposes end to At-Large public elections Did not the funds originally come from the government Doesn't that make the Internet, defacto, public property? I have great respect for Tony, but construing the net as private has caused more harm than good, i.e., ICANN. -- ken At 01:02 PM 3/1/02 -0700, you wrote: Note: There was never a public vote to privatise the Internet, which is (was) public property. No, it's not. It's a set of interconnected *private* networks. Tony Rutkowski went to a lot of effort to make sure the Internet was, in a formal telecommunications legal sense a private network. If it's a public network (as the MoU people kept asserting) then the ITU has dominion over it. That's why Tony did what he did. -- Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [IFWP] Re: ICANN President proposes end to At-Large public elections
groups that own that resource, in this case the US people. So if the ccTLDs are treated as public resources under the control of national governments, They aren't. rfc1591 waa skillfully worded to prevent that. that part certainly cannot be said to be an interconnected private network. Who owns the 13 root servers? ^ legacy Private companies, educational institutions (not all in the US btw) and the US military. -- Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [IFWP] Re: ICANN President proposes end to At-Large public elections
Am I mistaken, or did the DoC's White Paper call for management of the domain name system by the private sector? And what was that ICANN Article of Incorporation about lessening the burdens of government? Jay Fenello wrote: At 2/25/02 12:08 PM, Chris Chiu wrote: During a private retreat, the President of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, M Stuart Lynn, proposed vast changes to ICANN's governing structure These plans call for national governments to select a third of ICANN's reconstituted Board
RE: [IFWP] Re: ICANN President proposes end to At-Large publicelections
On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, at 16:37 [=GMT-0500], Joanna Lane wrote: Define Internet They had to drop URDP and Sunrise from the dotUS proposal (or in the alternative, could have applied to Congress for a variance) because access to a public resource cannot discriminate against any of the groups that own that resource, in this case the US people So if the ccTLDs are treated as public resources under the control of national governments, that part certainly cannot be said to be an interconnected private network Who owns the 13 root servers? The IP numbers are under control of: a: networksolutions b: isiedu (icann?) c: psinet d: umdedu e: nasa f: mibh (vixie) g: disa (mil) h: us army research lab i: autonomicase (= sunet?), sweden j: networksolutions k: ripe, london, uk l: epnet m: university of tokyo Who owns the root servers depends on your definition and perspective Who owns the root zone? []
Re: [IFWP] Re: ICANN President proposes end to At-Large publicelections
Joanna Lane wrote: They had to drop URDP and Sunrise from the dotUS proposal (or in the alternative, could have applied to Congress for a variance) because access to a public resource cannot discriminate against any of the groups that own that resource, in this case the US people. UDRP and Sunrise are part and parcel of the Neustar agreement to run .us that has been approved by the DoC and is now being implemented. And the US people have neither ownership nor control of .us. M.S. So if the ccTLDs are treated as public resources under the control of national governments, that part certainly cannot be said to be an interconnected private network. Who owns the 13 root servers? Regards, Joanna -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ken Freed Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 4:06 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [IFWP] Re: ICANN President proposes end to At-Large public elections Did not the funds originally come from the government Doesn't that make the Internet, defacto, public property? I have great respect for Tony, but construing the net as private has caused more harm than good, i.e., ICANN. -- ken At 01:02 PM 3/1/02 -0700, you wrote: Note: There was never a public vote to privatise the Internet, which is (was) public property. No, it's not. It's a set of interconnected *private* networks. Tony Rutkowski went to a lot of effort to make sure the Internet was, in a formal telecommunications legal sense a private network. If it's a public network (as the MoU people kept asserting) then the ITU has dominion over it. That's why Tony did what he did. -- Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [IFWP] Re: ICANN President proposes end to At-Large publicelections
Joanna Lane wrote: They had to drop URDP and Sunrise from the dotUS proposal (or in the alternative, could have applied to Congress for a variance) because access to a public resource cannot discriminate against any of the groups that own that resource, in this case the US people UDRP and Sunrise are part and parcel of the Neustar agreement to run us that has been approved by the DoC and is now being implemented And the US people have neither ownership nor control of us MS Michael, I disagree It looks like it was ammended http://wwwntiadocgov/ntiahome/domainname/usrfp/SB1335-02-W-0175-0001htm Reasons explained by NTIA Chief Counsel for Advocacy, Assistant Chief Counsel for Telecommunications and Assistant Chief Counsel for Intellectual Property, the agreement violates both the APA and RFA http://wwwsbagov/advo/laws/comments/doc02_0205html; Which is what I said:-) Joanna
Re: [IFWP] Re: ICANN President proposes end to At-Large public elections
And outside of the USA, Internet development mostly was funded by governments. The U.S department of commerce had no right to make unilateral choices for them. The best way to get public accountability is to assert the Internet is a public utility, the same as the airwaves, subject to the will of the people, respecting our rights. As of now, we have governnment without the consent of the governed. A sham. It's always productive to stir the pot and get us thinking about such issues -- ken False. Today's internet is the amalgam of multiple networks with different histories. Many were private. Stand by what you like. On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, Ken Freed wrote: The Internet started in the military for decentralized communication, then expanded to universities with government research contracts, then expanded to state-sponsored universities, then private colleges universities, then the general public. I stand by my first statement. The net always was public property until it was decided otherwise, as public as the street in front of your house, which no one has a right to declare private without your (our) consent. -- ken No they didn't, not mostly. No it doesn't even if they did if they didn't retain title. ICANN comes fromthe government not the private sector. On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, Ken Freed wrote: Did not the funds originally come from the government Doesn't that make the Internet, defacto, public property? I have great respect for Tony, but construing the net as private has caused more harm than good, i.e., ICANN. -- ken At 01:02 PM 3/1/02 -0700, you wrote: Note: There was never a public vote to privatise the Internet, which is (was) public property. No, it's not. It's a set of interconnected *private* networks. Tony Rutkowski went to a lot of effort to make sure the Internet was, in a formal telecommunications legal sense a private network. If it's a public network (as the MoU people kept asserting) then the ITU has dominion over it. That's why Tony did what he did. -- Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org A. Michael Froomkin |Professor of Law| [EMAIL PROTECTED] U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA +1 (305) 284-4285 | +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) | http://www.law.tm --It's warm here.-- -- Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org A. Michael Froomkin |Professor of Law| [EMAIL PROTECTED] U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA +1 (305) 284-4285 | +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) | http://www.law.tm --It's warm here.--
Re: [IFWP] Re: ICANN President proposes end to At-Large public elections
At 04:19 PM 3/1/02 -0700, you wrote: And outside of the USA, Internet development mostly was funded by governments. An interesting assertion. Can you back it up? First of all there really wasn't that much Internet development to speak of. In fact it didn't exists. Perhaps you're thinking of the ARPAnet. At any rate, the UUCP network, which remains larger than the TCP/IP ARPAnet, was larger then the arpanet and by the time they'r all merged into what we now refer to as the internet it was about 1996. UUCP was never government funded. -- Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [IFWP] Re: ICANN President proposes end to At-Large public elections
Examples are any nation on earth where the government owns the phone company, India for example. I'm more of a free marketeer than a socialist, to be sure, but by natural law, if the people rightfully own the government that constructs the network of interconnected networks, like a city builds roads that connect the private homes, this makes the Internet public. Let me raise a related issue, mostly to gather information to educate myself. Who can give details of development of Internet2, the next generation of the Internet? Where is the money coming from? What about its governance? Thanks for wisdom. -- ken At 04:19 PM 3/1/02 -0700, you wrote: And outside of the USA, Internet development mostly was funded by governments. An interesting assertion. Can you back it up? First of all there really wasn't that much Internet development to speak of. In fact it didn't exists. Perhaps you're thinking of the ARPAnet. At any rate, the UUCP network, which remains larger than the TCP/IP ARPAnet, was larger then the arpanet and by the time they'r all merged into what we now refer to as the internet it was about 1996. UUCP was never government funded. -- Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [IFWP] Re: ICANN President proposes end to At-Large public elections
At 11:06 PM 3/1/02 -0700, you wrote: Examples are any nation on earth where the government owns the phone company, India for example. I'm more of a free marketeer than a socialist, to be sure, but by natural law, if the people rightfully own the government that constructs the network of interconnected networks, like a city builds roads that connect the private homes, this makes the Internet public. The way telco laws work the Internet was in danger of being declared a public utility and therefore subject to ITU regulation and control. Rutkowski made sure it was declared a value added service; besides it dosen't all run over phone lines. Let me raise a related issue, mostly to gather information to educate myself. Who can give details of development of Internet2, the next generation of the Internet? Where is the money coming from? What about its governance? Oh, there's a guy that knows all about it and can help educate you quite a bit. Write to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and ask for Jim. -- Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[IFWP] Re: Setting one record straight....
At 2/26/02 06:25 PM, Jim Fleming wrote: - Original Message - From: Einar Stefferud [EMAIL PROTECTED] What is this? Stef, I believe we agree that the ICANN Monster is out of control. In my opinion, it is important to document where the ICANN Monster came from. People do not seem to understand how such a beast forms and who is responsible. People also do not seem to understand why some people close to the situation would stop what they are doing and step aside to allow the monster to grow and become unchained. Hi Jim, I can remember when many of the people on your cc: list first joined the ICANN debate. I can also remember how, one by one, they slowly came to realize how corrupt the process really was -- just like I did. Before that moment, our actions were driven by mistaken assumptions about the way our world works. But how were we to know? Everything we've been taught, and read, and seen on TV, supported the illusion that kept us stuck. [At least, this was true for me :-] Anyway, I agree with your comments about the Monster. If we really want to stop it, we must first understand how it grows. More below ... The same thing happened with the IAHC. That required people at the highest levels of the U.S. Government to stop it in it's tracks. You may want to enlighten everyone on how all that happened. Most peasants, like me, only saw shadows of the monster and heard the crash when it fell and saw the people running from the scene.We are told later that powerful dragon slayers like yourself fought the battle and won. The Aspen Institute appears to be the Jurassic Park of the Internet. Each time these monsters appear the Aspen Institute pops up as one of the potential breeding grounds. What is odd is that very few people seem to want to admit to being involved. We are now seeing leaders of ICANN who claim not to be accountable for anything that went on while they were running the show. We also see indirect messages from U.S. Government officials that they are not informed or involved. I find it interesting that even the members of Jon Postel's ITAG, who architected ICANN, are now making it appear that they were not involved. Despite all of this, when a critical meeting is called, all of the right people seem to show up and eventually news leaks out that reform is underway, and the monster grows. I suppose everyone has to watch and wait to hear about the fate of the current ICANN monster. I hate to over-simplify, but all that is left is for the insiders to make sure that .ORG becomes their cash cow. Maybe the millions from that will feed the monster and it will become passive and fade from the scene, grazing on the green stuff flowing from the masses...who clearly are kept a long way from the inner circles and inner workings of the Internet ICANN taking over the Internet is not the problem. It is merely a reflection of our current system as it has evolved over time. In actuality, our system is a collection of memes. It's a consciousness that is guiding our collective actions and behaviors. And it's leading us towards disaster ... Instead of fighting the ICANN hydra, let's recognize the beast for what it really is. Once we do, our path will become clear. Comments welcome. Jay. +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World - The first step is to penetrate the clouds of deceit and distortion and learn the truth about the world, then to organize and act to change it. That's never been impossible and never been easy. -- Noam Chomsky
[IFWP] Re: ...
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Paul Garrin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Richard J. Sexton [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: ... Content-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 18:17:18 -0500 Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 likewise. Just a quick followup note to say it was a pleasure talking with you today and I look forward to working with you. Cheers, -- With foxes we must play the fox. - unknown /\ / http://www.vrx.net \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN / http://killifish.vrx.net X AGAINST HTML MAIL/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1 (613) 473-1719 / \ AND POSTINGS/ http://www.mbz.org http://www.dnso.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1 (C) 1997-1999 Network Associates, Inc. and its affiliated companies. (Diffie-Helman/DSS-only version) iQA/AwUBPCPC/UcvOUwYyFuEEQJaXACg2g+qDfysbVXVT2fvuRStn6R6kcsAoNaa Dtmn+I30RMoZdE632qyBiKcL =EnB9 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- With foxes we must play the fox. - unknown /\ / http://www.vrx.net \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN / http://killifish.vrx.net X AGAINST HTML MAIL/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1 (613) 473-1719 / \ AND POSTINGS/ http://www.mbz.org http://www.dnso.com
[IFWP] Re: IFWP_LIST V1 #951
Well, that certainly seems to have woken everyone up. I had speculated that the notice was updated after an outcry, but I made the mistake of giving ICANN the benefit of the doubt. The more fool me. As to the icann.org/www.icann.org thing, it's trivial to default DNS lookups, and obnoxious not to do so. Aliasing the domain to the webserver--its only useful default outside of nslookup etc.--does not unnecessarily foment the web. For an organization whose aim is (or should be) acceptance of its goals, dissuading seekers of their propaganda just because they shortcut the URL is a strategic error. Or, in this case, a humorous oversight. --Blair It's won't be as regular as The Tick, but it'll be just as creepy/funny.
Re: [IFWP] Re: IFWP_LIST V1 #950
I can imagine a new.net handout that would be political, not commercial. Give it a try. According to ICANN, it's free. Patrick Greenwell wrote: The fact is that ICANN has turned down at least one potential sponsor New.net, which would completely remove their ability to share their perspective at the ICANN meeting, even by attempting to pay for the privilege.
[IFWP] Re: IFWP_LIST V1 #950
A short trip to ICANN's website clears it up. http://www.icann.org/mdr2001/ Under Sponsorship Opportunities, they ememphasize/em the words commercial materials in their request for a $5k fee. Political materials would certainly be permissible. Fact is better than rumor when propagandizing, kids. Ob. swipe: If you enter icann.org in your browser, you get an error. You have to enter www.icann.org. Geniuses. Bloody, ironic, geniuses. --Blair
Re: [IFWP] Re: IFWP_LIST V1 #950
The web site was recently changed. It didn't say that originally. Cf. http://www.icannwatch.org/article.php?sid=450 On 10 Nov 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A short trip to ICANN's website clears it up. http://www.icann.org/mdr2001/ Under Sponsorship Opportunities, they ememphasize/em the words commercial materials in their request for a $5k fee. Political materials would certainly be permissible. Fact is better than rumor when propagandizing, kids. Ob. swipe: If you enter icann.org in your browser, you get an error. You have to enter www.icann.org. Geniuses. Bloody, ironic, geniuses. --Blair -- Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org A. Michael Froomkin |Professor of Law| [EMAIL PROTECTED] U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA +1 (305) 284-4285 | +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) | http://www.law.tm --It's very hot and humid here.--
[IFWP] Re: Fw: [Enum] Robert and Douglas' Protocols and Services draft...
I see that nothing has changed on the ICANN/IANA front. In many ways, it is a reflection of what's wrong in the world today. In a recent radio interview, I talk with John Bunzl about his views on this destructive competition. If anyone's interested, you can hear it at: http://www.aligningwithpurpose.com/radio.htm Jay. At 11/1/01 12:11 AM, Jim Fleming wrote: - Original Message - From: Richard Shockey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Judith Oppenheimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 3:18 PM Subject: RE: [Enum] Robert and Douglas' Protocols and Services draft... At 03:45 PM 10/31/2001 -0500, Judith Oppenheimer wrote: Got it ... just a quick reminder, IANA no longer exists. Judith ..please ... this is getting quite tiresome ... the IANA functions are contracted to ICANN and as such it exists as a functional entity. Particularly for those of you who have insisted that ICANN will have nothing to do wth ENUM, what was IANA, is now solely, wholly, ICANN. ICANN staff, ICANN payroll, ICANN politics, ICANN decisions, ICANN policy. ICANN implications and ICANN ramifications. This is a warning .. the co-chairs patience for this kind of Jim Fleming ranting is wearing very thin and as I have stated in the past, we will use our administrative control of the mail list manager if we are pressed. -- Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives NeuStar Inc. 45980 Center Oak Plaza Bldg 8 Sterling, VA 20166 1120 Vermont Ave NW Suite 400 Washington DC 20005 Voice 571.434.5651 Cell : 314.503.0640, Fax: 815.333.1237 mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.neustar.com http://www.enum.org ___ enum mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World --- A new civilization is emerging in our lives, and blind men everywhere are trying to suppress it. -- Alvin Toffler
[IFWP] Re: 219/8 allocated to APNIC
At 10/18/01 12:56 PM, John L Crain wrote: Firstly let me apologies to those on the Cc: list. Unless I hear directly that you are interested in this discussion I will not include you in any future correspondence. Also my apologies if by my replying this got past your .procmail. Long Cc lists are a pain Jim, Simple answer: $0 changed hands between IANA and the APNIC in the allocation of 219/8 The price you quote ($12.000.000)is totally new to me and frankly seems ludicrous. There is no evidence that I can find to collaborate your claim. It's apparently a secret that no-one ever wants to talk about. Please keep me on your cc: list. Thanks, Jay. Could it be that you are talking about one of the other versions of IP, IPv8, IPv16 or IPv256 (Whichever is your latest)? John Crain ICANN/IANA What did APNIC pay for this allocation ? It used to be that /8s were worth about $12,000,000. Jim Fleming +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World --- A new civilization is emerging in our lives, and blind men everywhere are trying to suppress it. -- Alvin Toffler
[IFWP] Re: Spreading the Vision
-- Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 10:49:12 -0400 From: Jay Fenello [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [IFWP] Re: Spreading the Vision Since when has this been the Marxist wing-nut list? --Blair ICANN SUX! -ob. ifwp
Re: [IFWP] Re: Spreading the Vision
At 9/18/01 12:54 AM, Blair P. Houghton wrote: -- Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 10:49:12 -0400 From: Jay Fenello [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [IFWP] Re: Spreading the Vision Since when has this been the Marxist wing-nut list? Why would you think that? Jay. --Blair ICANN SUX! -ob. ifwp +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World --- A new civilization is emerging in our lives, and blind men everywhere are trying to suppress it. -- Alvin Toffler
[IFWP] Re: Spreading the Vision
FYI: At 9/13/01 11:12 PM, Barry Carter wrote: Below is an email that I am sending out to various people that are not aware of Infinite Wealth: Sept 11, was predictable and was predicted in the online book Infinite Wealth http://www.winwinworld.net/book (chapters 8 and 9). As we transition from the Industrial Age to the Information Age terrorism, war, violence and death will increase exponentially. The acts of violence of Sept 11, 2001 as well as the acts of the past 20, years are just the beginning of what will likely be millions and hundreds of millions of deaths, unless we understand what is occurring and take action locally. As we transition from the Industrial Age to the Information Age we are in the greatest transition in all of human history and must understand what is occurring how we are all participating in creating the events of Sept 11. The book Infinite Wealth, which is free online, explains how to get to the root causes of this issue. Infinite Wealth is a vision book. Where there is no vision the people will perish. Where there is vision the people will flourish. http://www.winwinworld.net/book The Industrial Age has been a win/lose era. In our current wealth creation system one must lose in order for another to win. As we transition into the Information Age knowledge is becoming the premier power in the world. Power is, therefore, being decentralized into the hands of individuals including people on the losing side of win/lose. Thus, individuals in the knowledge era have enormous power to create or destroy. If we continue win/lose wealth creation some of the people on the losing side of win/lose are not going to take it any more. Many people world wide have suffered enormously at the hands of this win/lose wealth creation system over the past centuries including a holocaust of 9.6 million Native American dead, tens of millions of African American enslaved, thousands lynched including my uncle Tom Coles, 30,000 children dead each day from poverty and starvation worldwide, millions of poverty stricken Black youths in the inter-cities of the US absorbed with gangs and drugs and oppression world wide. Yes, many people are angry and rightfully so. Individuals on the losing side of win/lose now have the power to kill tens of thousands and millions of people with a single act. We are today transitioning from the Industrial Age to the Information Age and all social transitions, like this, through out history have caused enormous death, destruction and chaos. In order to prevent millions and hundreds of millions of deaths we must transition to win/win wealth creation for the Information Age. If we resist or ignore win/win wealth creation we will pay with the lives of ourselves our friends and/or our family. Take a look at the book Infinite Wealth free on-line http://www.winwinworld.net/book Our politicians, leaders, news media, the military and corporations cannot solve our problems. Only you acting at the local level can solve this. Please read Infinite Wealth free online. See chapters 8 9 in regards to what happened on Sept 11. Barry Carter FWIW, I've read Barry's book, and it resonated with me. I'd highly recommend it. Jay. +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World --- A new civilization is emerging in our lives, and blind men everywhere are trying to suppress it. -- Alvin Toffler
Re: [IFWP] Re: Introduction
Hello Jay, I am very interested in your response, in particular this:- And when you say ... I call upon the mainstream media to investigate and substantiate allegations of deceptive practices and corruption that flow forth in abundance from those monitoring proceedings from within the ICANN organization on a daily basis. If what I hear is true, this story is bigger than Watergate... ... you imply that the media hasn't covered ICANN because they are ignorant about what has been going on. Truth of the matter is, they aren't ignorant, they are simply suppressing the story. I know this first hand, as I have spent hours educating reporters, only to have them transferred, fired, or their stories rejected or changed by their editors. I would be most interested in knowing the facts you have to substantiate these allegations. However, I have to tell you that I am in new York, and as such, deeply affected by recent events, with one missing family member. Understandably, I am taking some time out of ICANN affairs to give priority elsewhere, but wanted to flag this as something deserving of attention in due course. Please send your response on or offlist and I will get back to you when I can. Regards, Joanna
Re: [IFWP] Re: Introduction
Hi Joanna -- For historical snapshots of ICANN and its precedessor, gTLD-MoU, please visit, http://www.media-visions.com/icann.htm and my earlier writings, http://www.media-visions.com/netdemocracy.html. We need to know where we've been to understand where we are now or where we may be going next. Perhaps my efforts (despite primitive layouts) may educate you, so you can view ICANN with your eyes open. -- ken Ken Freed Media Journalist mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Publisher, Media Visions Journal http://www.media-visions.com Deep literacy makes global sense Hello Jay, I am very interested in your response, in particular this:- And when you say ... I call upon the mainstream media to investigate and substantiate allegations of deceptive practices and corruption that flow forth in abundance from those monitoring proceedings from within the ICANN organization on a daily basis. If what I hear is true, this story is bigger than Watergate... ... you imply that the media hasn't covered ICANN because they are ignorant about what has been going on. Truth of the matter is, they aren't ignorant, they are simply suppressing the story. I know this first hand, as I have spent hours educating reporters, only to have them transferred, fired, or their stories rejected or changed by their editors. I would be most interested in knowing the facts you have to substantiate these allegations. However, I have to tell you that I am in new York, and as such, deeply affected by recent events, with one missing family member. Understandably, I am taking some time out of ICANN affairs to give priority elsewhere, but wanted to flag this as something deserving of attention in due course. Please send your response on or offlist and I will get back to you when I can. Regards, Joanna
[IFWP] Re: Introduction
At 9/10/01 09:52 PM, Joanna Lane wrote: Hello Einar, The funny thing about this medium is that while I have no idea who you are, you feel entitled to ask me all kinds of questions without introducing yourself. If this were the phone, I doubt I'd take your call...;-) Hi Joanna, You can read more about Stef and some of the rest of us at: http://www.open-rsc.org/about/who/ At 17:45 -0400 09/09/01, Joanna Lane wrote: Just a note to introduce myself to this list. For those that don't me, please visit http://www.internetstakeholders.com, with particular reference to the ICANN Board Candidate Statement I made yesterday at Montevideo. A very good intro, especially from someone who has been involved with ICANN for only a little over a year. However, I would like to point out a couple of fallacies in your position, at least from my experience. First, that your bid for an ICANN board position would have any impact on the current policies of ICANN. Given the impact of the current At-Large Board members, your impact is likely to be zero. This is not only because the current board can outvote the ALBMs, but because ICANN is now run by an executive committee of the board, and most of the decisions are made by the staff anyway. And when you say ... I call upon the mainstream media to investigate and substantiate allegations of deceptive practices and corruption that flow forth in abundance from those monitoring proceedings from within the ICANN organization on a daily basis. If what I hear is true, this story is bigger than Watergate... ... you imply that the media hasn't covered ICANN because they are ignorant about what has been going on. Truth of the matter is, they aren't ignorant, they are simply suppressing the story. I know this first hand, as I have spent hours educating reporters, only to have them transferred, fired, or their stories rejected or changed by their editors. As unbelievable as these allegations are, they are true ... not only for ICANN, but for many other institutions like the WTO. Just like we have been marginalized and ignored by the powers behind ICANN, others have been marginalized and ignored by the powers behind the WTO. As an example, I have just completed an interview with Dr. Bill Ellis, a long time activist (he's 80 years old) who once worked for the UN and the World Bank. You can hear it online at: http://www.aligningwithpurpose.com/images/BillEllis.ra He describes how they have been meeting in parallel with the G7 meetings for 20 years, and how the media's refusal to cover their positions directly lead to the riots in Seattle, Quebec and Genoa. He also echo's many of Stef's points about chaos theory, edge control and systemic change. Hope this helps, and please let me know if you have any questions. Jay. +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World --- A new civilization is emerging in our lives, and blind men everywhere are trying to suppress it. -- Alvin Toffler
[IFWP] Re: [ga] History (IFWP.ORG)
Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 12:16:52 +0200 (CEST) From: Marc Schneiders [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: William X Walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [ga] History (IFWP.ORG) On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, at 17:48 [=GMT-0700], William X Walsh wrote: Friday, Friday, September 07, 2001, 5:04:12 PM, Marc Schneiders wrote: For those who are into internet history: ifwp.org is in the air again. The mailing list archive can be accessed via http://list.ifwp.org/ Richard Sexton has kept it for us. And still serves it. May it serve the future. God no, may it fade into oblivion. With the anarchist way that Sexton runs his lists, it is pretty much as useless as the NSI domain policy was for anything substantive. There is good anarchy. I see nothing in the archives to indicate that it is serving any purpose lately, The domain was out of the org-tld zone for a year or so. Hope that explains it for you. Now it is alive again. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[IFWP] Re: IFWP_LIST V1 #933
it's up :) nothing ever here tho
Re: [IFWP] Re: CDR: RE: What got censored today... (fwd)
That's www.youcann.org, not "yourcann" At 12:24 PM 11/20/00 -0500, you wrote: -- Forwarded message -- Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 13:43:14 -0500 From: Declan McCullagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Joe Baptista [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: "Carskadden, Rush" [EMAIL PROTECTED], "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: CDR: RE: What got censored today... (fwd) I have an op-ed in today's Wall Street Journal that mentions alternative DNS schemes: http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/11/20/1714249 (html) http://www.politechbot.com/p-01507.html (text) No response yet from ICANN, Esther Dyson, Vint Cerf, etc. -Declan On Fri, Nov 17, 2000 at 12:30:50PM -0500, Joe Baptista wrote: On Fri, 17 Nov 2000, Carskadden, Rush wrote: I can't read it very well. What does it say? It's a little sign that says "USE ORSC DNS" or something like that - see www.yourcann.org for more data. Joe ok, Rush -Original Message- From: Jim Choate [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2000 9:43 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: What got censored today... (fwd) He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -- Forwarded message -- Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 19:27:13 -0800 From: Simon Higgs [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: What got censored today... http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/scripts/rammaker.asp?s=cyberdir=icannfile=ica nn-111600start=0-09-04 Starts at 2:18:20 Lasts about five seconds before Mr Anal-Retentive-Bald-Video-Guy censors it. -- Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster +1 (805) 753-8697 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ph-1.613.473.1719 "The public-private partnership is the essence of fascist economics." --Dan Sullivan
[IFWP] Re: re ICANN Should Approve More Top Level Domains
I agree with Judith on this. Seeing the entire internet - instead of the ICANN restricted internet is as simple as point click and reboot. Further data is available at www.youcann.org and instructions are located here http://www.youcann.org/instructions.html and include a link to a downloadable program that fixes your dns to see the whole internet. point, click, reboot - and astalavista ICANN. regards joe On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Judith Oppenheimer wrote: re ICANN Should Approve More Top Level Domains, http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/11/20/1714249 Great article, but Declan and I have a slightly different take on his mention of alternative servers, as he states it "... requires tech-savvy users to reconfigure their computers..." This is a seemingly minor point, yet it is so significant, perpetuating this myth that only the "tech-savvy" can access the entire Internet. Its counterproductive, and simply not true. I cannot figure out any advanced features on my microwave, my organizer, my cell phone - forget about the VCR ... yet it took me maybe 3 minutes, tops, to upgrade my computer in order to access all of the net. Hardly a "tech-savvy" process, it was more like point, click and reboot, resulting in immediate access to .com/.net/.org PLUS .web/.biz etc. I've written Declan and the WSJ editors suggesting that we dispel, finally, this myth of the hard-to-do, beyond-reach Internet. Telling readers its just point, click, and reboot, would go a long way toward poking a canon-ball sized hole in the ICANN facade. Judith Judith Oppenheimer, 212 684-7210, 1 800 The Expert Publisher, http://www.ICBTollFreeNews.com President, http://www.1800TheExpert.com FREE 800/Domain Classifieds, http://ICBclassifieds.com Domain Name 800 News, Intelligence, Analysis -Original Message- From: Owner-Domain-Policy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Joe Baptista Sent: Monday, November 20, 2000 12:24 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: CDR: RE: What got censored today... (fwd) -- Forwarded message -- Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 13:43:14 -0500 From: Declan McCullagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Joe Baptista [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: "Carskadden, Rush" [EMAIL PROTECTED], "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: CDR: RE: What got censored today... (fwd) I have an op-ed in today's Wall Street Journal that mentions alternative DNS schemes: http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/11/20/1714249 (html) http://www.politechbot.com/p-01507.html (text) No response yet from ICANN, Esther Dyson, Vint Cerf, etc. -Declan -- Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster +1 (805) 753-8697
Re: [IFWP] Re: re ICANN Should Approve More Top Level Domains
Joe Baptista wrote: point, click, reboot - and astalavista ICANN. Lo siento, Joe, pero "hasta la vista" no basta. Hace falta que ICANN desaparece. M.S.
Re: [IFWP] Re: re ICANN Should Approve More Top Level Domains
On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Michael Sondow wrote: Joe Baptista wrote: point, click, reboot - and astalavista ICANN. Lo siento, Joe, pero "hasta la vista" no basta. Hace falta que ICANN desaparece. Estoy en el acuerdo con usted. Pienso que estamos viendo el fin da fiesta de ICANN. regards joe -- Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster +1 (805) 753-8697
[IFWP] Re: Vint Cerf New ICANN Chair
I've had more productive, friendly and constructive exchanges with Vint in the last two days than I had in two years of trying to talk to Esther. Perhaps I'm being co-opted but I sense a new era of a willingness to cooperate here. I am encouraged. -- http://www.hungersite.org/cgi-bin/donate.pl http://www.clearlandmines.com Richard Sexton | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://dns.vrx.net/tech/rootzone http://killifish.vrx.nethttp://www.mbz.orghttp://lists.aquaria.net "Maitland House, Bannockburn, Ontario, CANADA, K0K 1Y0"; 1 613 473-1719
Re: [IFWP] Re: Ken Stubbs @ core deletes vote-auction.com
At 03:00 PM 11/6/00 +, Jim Dixon wrote: On Sat, 4 Nov 2000, Dave Crocker wrote: Whatever can be done to provide diversity and resilience in the management of the Internet should be done. Keeping .EU clear from ICANN's entanglements was a small but real step in this direction. How does another ccTLD in any way "provide diversity" for gTLDs? Several hundred million people live in Europe. .EU is likely to become the TLD of choice in this continent. Jim, I love ya man, but are you on drugs or what? who would otherwise register names in .COM/NET/ORG; it's likely that many millions will register names in .EU. A dollar says ot won't have as many regs as .de in 2 years from it's incept. One option was that .EU would be chartered as a new-style ICANN TLD; this would have given ICANN nominal control over what will become a substantial part of the domain name system. Fortunately the decision was to have .EU classified as a ccTLD. So instead th GAC will have control over it? Um, was this really thought through? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ph-1.613.473.1719 "The public-private partnership is the essence of fascist economics." --Dan Sullivan
[IFWP] Re: IEFT draft changing the dns to serve TM interests
Did I read the draft too quickly? I cannot see any increased serving of TM interests in the paper. Would you care to be more specific? Is it that ccTLD's that operate as an alternative gTLD are required to accept UDRP? Well, most if not all that qualify here, have already done so voluntarily. -- Marc Schneiders (rest in header) --- begin forwarded text Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2000 06:44:00 -0500 (EST) To: ietf-announce: ; Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-klensin-dns-role-00.txt From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : Role of the Domain Name System Author(s) : J. Klensin Filename: draft-klensin-dns-role-00.txt Pages : 10 Date: 13-Nov-00 [...] A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-klensin-dns-role-00.txt
[IFWP] Re: Reply: The idea of the absolute power of ICANN is a myth.(fwd)
confusion .. ? -- Forwarded message -- Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 14:25:09 -0400 (EDT) From: Joe Baptista [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Frederick Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Reply: The "idea" of the absolute "power" of ICANN is a myth. Fred - the internet if simple enough - if you want us to use it - explain it. It's not a lunch thing. Don't try to convence me - convence them. And if they understand so will I. So far all I've seen is marketing and I still have no understanding of it. This is not an invitation for you to explain it to me. Explain it to the group - they are the ones who count. regards Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster +1 (805) 753-8697 On Thu, 17 Aug 2000, Frederick Harris wrote: Hello Joseph, I offered to visit with you and tell you how the eTLDs work. If I rightly understood your reply, you did not wish to meet with me. The offer is still open. I'm not going to disclose to this list how the eTLDs work. Why don't you phone me? Tel: 905-729-4994 Cheers, R. "!Dr. Joe Baptista" wrote: Ross at tucows recntly told me that clarity is a part of zen. Maybe we should all do some zen. Rick - everyone here who is without a technical clue has no idea what your going on about - simply put those of us with a clue have no idea what your going on about. Could you simply provide the name of an eTLD (or domains) and tell us the proceedure for finding it. Becaue have no idea what your talking about and the only way we can evaluate this is with technical documentation or examples. regards Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster +1 (805) 753-8697 On Thu, 17 Aug 2000, Rick Harris wrote: Reply to Michael Sondow: The "Power" of ICANN is a Myth Michael, Others long ago figured out how to bypass ICANN by devising "equivalent tlds" (eTLDS). Etlds resolve inside the root zone architecture of the public internet. In other words, unlike ORSC - which (understandably and rightly) seeks to build the equivalent of a second railway track to offset the monopsony power of ICANN- the actual source of ICANN's power which is monopolization of the "legitimized" root of the DNS, has disappeared with the invention of eTLDs. Apparently the digerati on the DNS Policy List prefer to ignore eTLDs - which is fine. People if they prefer can waste their time and political capital complaining about ICANN procedural matters when ICANN effectively has no further power over the DNS. For that reason - power - ICANN insists on the single-root architecture. However, eTLDs are impervious to ICANN *because* (unlike ORSC) they take the path of least resistance which - in terms of global connectivity - happens to reside for the present *inside* the root. Any physics major, organizational specialist or student of systems theory will tell you the same thing. Innovation (good and bad) always takes the path of least resistance. That being said, the plain fact of the matter is that there is nothing complicated about eTLDs - and they do not require $50,000 to create one. It baffles me that your correspondents on the list do not seem to have grasped that very simple fact. There seems to be a disconnect between the imagined power of ICANN and the reality of the fact that eTLDs effectively make ICANN a political non sequitur. This doesn't defeat the legitimate *technical* argument that having two parallel DNSs might tend to introduce turbulence in the system. But turbulence will happen if - and only if - the two "competitive" systems seek to create universal connectivity from a "single source" or root. The fallcy of the argument that a duality inside the root is a good idea contradicts common sense because any reasonable person understands that more than one *singularity* inside the root will in fact create instability in terms of global connectivity. Therefore, ORSC ought create another root zone if it can - and I expect that with proliferation on the web there will in due course be two or more railway tracks. Which is fine so long as they remain parallel to one another absent a political solution to the problem of accessing the "authoritative" root. Until that solution happens,there is only one doable root. And even then, ICANN still has no real *power* or "authority" in the sense of gatekeeping the authoritative root *because* the idea of eTLDs has been introduced - and the idea of eTLDs can not be uninvented. ICANN may henceforth authorize, legitimatize, accredit and/or sanction as many or as few new TLDs as it prefers. The power of ICANN is a
[IFWP] Re: Reply re: dates (fwd)
On Mon, 13 Nov 2000, William X. Walsh wrote: Hello Joe, Monday, November 13, 2000, 12:58:51 AM, you wrote: more pleadings for an audience .. Hmm, as much as I detest Joe's methods, I have to say that I received several email from Mr Harris as well, asking to talk to me via phone many times about his "proposals." I finally had to make it perfectly clear and spell it out that I was not interested in discussing his plans, and that they made absolutely no sense whatsoever before he stopped. Don't forget the ass kissing. I swear the man is the biggest brown noser I ever came across. I would answer my phone and end up getting a litany of ass kissing platitudes as to how great I am. Ass kissing don't work with me - it annoys me. If I need my ass kissed I use my little black book. In light of that, I believe Joe is telling the truth here, and that Mr Harris is trying to deny things that he has actually become so well known for. Joe always tells the truth. I think that's well known by now. Harris is known by almost all the major admins in the loop. What we have here is a wheeler dealer who wants to sell his way into heaven. Do you believe he actually offered me to run this ICANN business. He actually thought I'd find value in it. And I still don't know what an eTLD is. Maybe someday Mr. harris can take us all to lunch and we'll all find out together. -- Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster
[IFWP] Re: Update on ICANN Meetings in Marina del Rey (13-16 November)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi! This email is an update on the ICANN meetings next week in Marina del Rey, California. The meetings are free to attend, and open to any interested person. We encourage broad participation in our bottom-up consensus-development process -- you can participate either in person, or (for the large meetings) via the Internet. Full details are posted at http://www.icann.org/mdr2000. On the contrary, there are no details whatsoever at that address. The link to "Webcast Remote Participation", for example, leads to a blank page. If this reflects the seriousness with which ICANN takes its communications, we know what to expect from the meetings themselves. Michael Sondow = INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF INDEPENDENT INTERNET USERS http://www.iciiu.org(ICIIU)[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel(718)846-7482Fax(603)754-8927 =
[IFWP] Re: Your on the list ;-)
I think I know why. This is an ancient list. Toru and Eric Jensen are on it too. They don't have those email addresses any more. Some one got this from an ancient distribution list. Who knows where.
[IFWP] RE: Your on the list ;-)
Congrats .. looks like your on the list. Now my question is why is that?? well, I'll be damned. beatsa hell outta me! of course, Esther has been a Loyal EGR Irregular in Good Standing from Jump Street. maybe she stuck me on there. or John Patrick at IBM, whom I used to work with in that illustrious organization (though the latter explanation is highly unlikely). thanks for sending. it's yet another mystery wrapped in an enigma. sorta like a cognitive fajita.
[IFWP] Re: ICBTollFreeNews.Com HEADS UP HEADLINES
Hi: The information in your article is incorrect regarding registrar.com. As of yesturday there were 3,072 multilingual domains registered using the RACE encoding method i.e. bq-- as a prefix. Of these only 466 were registered by register.com. Not thousands. At best INNERWISE is the leader in registrations. 14 DOMAINPEOPLE, INC. 161 DOTSTER, INC. 1 HANGANG SYSTEMS, INC. D/B/A DOREGI.COM 2 IHOLDINGS.COM, INC. D/B/A DOTREGISTRAR.COM 1,796 INNERWISE, INC. D/B/A ITSYOURDOMAIN.COM 158 MELBOURNE IT, LTD. D/B/A INTERNET NAMES WORLDWIDE 124 NETWORK SOLUTIONS, INC. 466 REGISTER.COM, INC. 18 SPEEDNAMES, INC. 331 TUCOWS.COM, INC. = 3,072 TOTAL On Thu, 9 Nov 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: F - MULTILINGUAL DOMAIN DEPLOYMENT IS PREMATURE The Internet Society 'believes the commercial test bed is premature under the technical standards of the Internet' - Verisign moves forward. ICANN denounces pre-registration of domain names - Register.com pre-registers thousands of multilingual names. Beijing has lodged a complaint with the ICANN over the registration of Chinese domain names - ICANN rides Verisign's 'progress' coat-tails, implies Internet Society coordination, claims multilingual domains could bring 'very significant changes to the way the DNS can be used.' Messy messy messy. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=4742 -- Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/
[IFWP] Re: Ken Stubbs @ core deletes vote-auction.com
On Sat, 4 Nov 2000, Dave Crocker wrote: Whatever can be done to provide diversity and resilience in the management of the Internet should be done. Keeping .EU clear from ICANN's entanglements was a small but real step in this direction. How does another ccTLD in any way "provide diversity" for gTLDs? Several hundred million people live in Europe. .EU is likely to become the TLD of choice in this continent. It will attract many who would otherwise register names in .COM/NET/ORG; it's likely that many millions will register names in .EU. One option was that .EU would be chartered as a new-style ICANN TLD; this would have given ICANN nominal control over what will become a substantial part of the domain name system. Fortunately the decision was to have .EU classified as a ccTLD. It had sounded as if you were concerned about that set of domains. I do believe that EuroISPA's comment on the US government green paper on the DNS suggested that the best thing to do with .COM, .NET, and .ORG was to push them under .US. In other words, no, I am not much concerned about the gTLDs. Your original note and latest response continue to ignore the hard work of providing and pursuing detailed plans to remedy the problems you cite. Over the last several years I have spent a great deal of time and done a lot of hard work in lobbying for sensible government policies towards the Internet, both in the UK and in Brussels. In particular, EuroISPA proposed the creation of .EU to the Commission several years ago and has been active ever since in arguing for rational policies in its management. We have tried very hard to avoid the sort of senseless wrangling that has characterized the US-centric DNS wars. Had .EU been classified as an ICANN gTLD, it would have been entangled in those wars. .EU as a European ccTLD is free of ICANN and free of the DNS wars. This is a Good Thing. This is not to say that there will be no problems in the management of .EU. Doubtless there will be problems; but they will be solved by different people in a different way. That is, the management of the DNS will be somewhat more diverse than it otherwise would have been. In my opinion, we don't need grand solutions of the type that you seem to be arguing for. What we need are small, practical steps towards greater diversity in the management of the Internet. This is all becoming a bit repetitious, so with apologies, unless you have something new to say, this will be my last word on this subject. It was good to see you in Yokohama, Dave. -- Jim Dixon VBCnet GB Ltd http://www.vbc.net tel +44 117 929 1316 fax +44 117 927 2015
[IFWP] Re: Roots servers on rise - ICANN's golden egg cracking
On Sun, 5 Nov 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: #Last year alternate roots supported 0.3% of internet traffic. # #This year alternate roots are supporting 5.5% of internet traffic. # #The BIND study this year to date has ennumerated 60,513 dns (15% of #399,937 dns) of which 3,331 report they are using non-USG roots. Don't "alternate roots" have to have a copy of what the main root servers have? Then they are doing a favor by off-loading traffic. Not all the time. I've noticed some corporations (big ones like hyundai) use their own roots to block traffic to their employees. There's a wildcard record in the root so that if an employee goes to www.sex.com they end up at www.hyunai.com - or something to that effect. Separately, I've noticed something on my Solaris 8 box. I often freeze my Netscape browser windows when leaving the computer for a while. That's because FoxNews and NYT (for example) keep reloading themselves again and again. This is unwanted push traffic. It's not costing me anything over my DSL/Cable modems, it's just unwanted by me. Even with browsers frozen... I recently left 'snoop' running, and found I was initiating DNS traffic...to FoxNews and NYT. Looking closer, I had DNS queries regarding non-browser-accessed sites, like ftp. That is odd. DNS can carry alot more then just dns. Maybe that's whats' hapeening. regards joe -- Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster
Re: [IFWP] Re: Ken Stubbs @ core deletes vote-auction.com
On Sat, 4 Nov 2000, jim bell wrote: Nevertheless, what has happened here demonstrates a basic flaw at the heart of the domain name system. ICANN and many essential Internet resources remain subject to US jurisdiction. ICANN itself is just a California corporation, so it is subject to the passing whims of the California legislature as well as those of Congress, the executive branches, and various and sundry US state and federal courts. But that's not the whole problem, here. ICANN may be, arguably, subject to I didn't say that this was the whole problem. I said that it demonstrated a (one) basic flaw. On the other hand, I didn't say that the problem simply involved US law. In this case the problem seemed to be pressure from the executive branch. "those laws," but it isn't clear that those laws (per se) were responsible for the disconnection. Is there a law, somewhere, that said "anybody who we determine appears to be violating the law in America, we 'unaddress' them before they get a trial." That certainly isn't normal procedure: There are probably over a thousand Internet Casinos who are (the thugs would argue) in violation of some American law, yet they are still accessible to us. There is a very large world outside of the United States. There is no reason why issues involving .UK, for example, should be subject to the jurisdiction of California courts. Britain is not a colony of the United States, nor is it a California county. Nor is there any justification for US government control over the allocation of IP address space within Europe. But when you look closely at ICANN, this is what you are getting. ICANN was supposed to replace IANA. IANA had a narrow technical role that depended upon voluntary cooperation. Having IANA arbitrate decisions about .UK actually worked, because IANA did not claim any ultimate legal authority. It was just obvious to everyone that if they didn't cooperate the Internet would not work. It may seem odd, but because IANA was gossamer thin, it had real power and legitimacy. ICANN doesn't and shouldn't. ICANN needs to be taught a very painful lesson: "Even if you feel that you must obey a specific law, you must not do it without initiating a legal process and continuing it through any valid appeal. Given that the election was only a few days away, it is obvious that no such process would be completed before the point becomes moot. You screwed up." ICANN is a California corporation subject to state and US laws. It has an obligation to obey those laws. There is or should be no question about this. ICANN is after all a legal fiction, a body whose very existence rests upon the authority of the state of California. The question is whether the domain name system, the IP address space, and other fundamental Internet infrastructure should be subject to US and California law. These are global, not local, resources. -- Jim Dixon VBCnet GB Ltd http://www.vbc.net tel +44 117 929 1316 fax +44 117 927 2015
[IFWP] Re: Roots servers on rise - ICANN's golden egg cracking
On Sun, 5 Nov 2000, William X. Walsh wrote: Hello Ron, Sunday, November 05, 2000, 5:28:03 PM, you wrote: At 06:34 PM 11/5/00 -0500, !Dr. Joe Baptista wrote: Last year alternate roots supported 0.3% of internet traffic. This year alternate roots are supporting 5.5% of internet traffic. I wonder how long this will be permitted to continue before ICANN, DoC, WIPO, etc *require* everyone to use USG roots...? His statistic is bogus. He has absolutely no real basis for saying how much of the internet traffic is using the alternative roots in this way. Anyone interested in verifying my results is welcomed to do so. The claim is as follows, of the 60,513 dns surveyed 3,331 reported using non-USG roots. A sample of this size has a standard error of +/- 1.6509% with a 95% confidence. So I'm very confident were seeing a trend away from ICANN. William if your willing to provide me with an undertaking that you will verify my data then i'll send you the ip's already tested and you'll see the results are correct. If not - shut your uneducated pie hole. The bottom line here is that my predictions that ICANN would lose market share are right on. Last year it was at 99.7% and this year it's at 94.5%. Regards Joe -- Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster
[IFWP] Re: Re[2]: Roots servers on rise - ICANN's golden egg cracking
On Sun, 5 Nov 2000, William X. Walsh wrote: That is not what you said in the original post, this is: Last year alternate roots supported 0.3% of internet traffic. This year alternate roots are supporting 5.5% of internet traffic. You have no basis for saying how much traffic the servers that may not be using the USG roots are supporting out of the whole internet traffic in the method you used to survey them. The percentage of nameservers does not automatically equate to the percentage of internet traffic. I understand. In fact the estimate is correct. Unfortuantely I don't have the time to teach you statistical analysis. But we can be confident that 5% of internet traffic is non USG. My results are representative and can be extrapolated accordingly with some confidence. I know this is a shock to you william. But thats' life and it don't surprise me. The bottom line here is that my predictions that ICANN would lose market share are right on. Last year it was at 99.7% and this year it's at 94.5%. Again, your statement doesn't jive with the actual results of your "survey". In other words, Joe, you are trying to make this number appear to be more substantive than it is. But I understand why perfectly :) But let's make sure we stick to the actual facts in evidence, ok? The facts are very simple. Of 60,513 dns surveyed, 3,331 reported as non USG. This is a big change from last year. Those are the facts and I can support them. In fact what I have is more then "facts" - it is evidence and proof. Like I said - anyone willing to undertake to test and confirm my results is welcomed. Because evidence like this William can be tested and verified. All your doing is jive turkey talk. If you want to challenge my stats William - accept the undertaking and test them for yourself. We call that process William - the scientific method. regards joe -- Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster +1 (805) 753-8697
[IFWP] Re: Re[4]: Roots servers on rise - ICANN's golden egg cracking
On Sun, 5 Nov 2000, William X. Walsh wrote: I understand. In fact the estimate is correct. Unfortuantely I don't have the time to teach you statistical analysis. But we can be confident that 5% of internet traffic is non USG. My results are representative and can be extrapolated accordingly with some confidence. You have absolutely no basis for making that assumption. The number of nameservers queried is in no way directly representative of the number of nameservers actually used for end user name resolution, nor of the number of queries made on a per server basis. No it in fact does. There are some 300,000 dns in the dot.com file, to date 60,513 have been surveyed (15%). It's easy and completely acceptable to extrapolate from there. And furthermore the existing population enumerated is more then enough to extrapolate from. To make the claim you made, you would need a lot more data than you can get from doing the simple queries you are doing, and as a matter of fact this would require the co-operation of the nameserver operators. Your method is not scientific, and it no statistician would ever make the leap in logic you tried to make here. Get yourself a statistician and I'll be happy to provide him with the numbers. Like I always say - talk is cheap and evidence dont lie '=) regards joe -- Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster +1 (805) 753-8697
Re: [IFWP] Re: Ken Stubbs @ core deletes vote-auction.com
On Sat, 4 Nov 2000, Dave Crocker wrote: At 11:31 PM 11/3/00 +, Jim Dixon wrote: Given the now-crucial role that the Internet plays in the global economy, ICANN's hegemony gives, for example, representatives of small towns in California sitting on the right committee in Sacramento remarkable and truly unique power over the rest of the planet. Let's assume that the situation is as simple and unreasonable as you imply: As usual: 1. it is vastly easier to criticize the status quo than to propose something superior; and 2. it is vastly easier to propose general ideas than to provide detailed plans; and 3. it is vastly easier to specify a plan than to make it happen. So what is the point of offering the criticism, absent having done steps 1 2, and some of 3, above? I do believe that this is called begging the question. Given ICANN's peculiar legal status and vulnerability to law suits, I strongly recommended to the European Commission that steps be taken to ensure that .EU would be delegated as a ccTLD rather than (as proposed) a gTLD under ICANN's new procedures. Fortunately this advice was accepted. That is, we did steps 1, 2, and 3, and in consequence .EU will be largely free from the ICANN mess. ps. Absent a U.N. basis, SOME national jurisdiction why apply. With a U.N. basis, other problems apply. This, of course, leads to the question about any of this line of complaint, rather than seeking to make the current structure work as well as it can. Those involved in actually building the Internet on a day to day basis spend a good deal of time engineering away single points of failure. ICANN is just such a weak point. Having power over the DNS, the Internet address space, and various other essential bits of Internet infrastructure all concentrated in one private company in California -- especially this particular private company -- is simply foolish. Whatever can be done to provide diversity and resilience in the management of the Internet should be done. Keeping .EU clear from ICANN's entanglements was a small but real step in this direction. Need I point out how unnecessary and how destructive your habitual sarcasm and contempt for others is? -- Jim Dixon VBCnet GB Ltd http://www.vbc.net tel +44 117 929 1316 fax +44 117 927 2015
Re: [IFWP] Re: Ken Stubbs @ core deletes vote-auction.com
At 10:31 AM 11/3/00, Jim Dixon wrote: Nevertheless, what has happened here demonstrates a basic flaw at the heart of the domain name system. ICANN and many essential Internet resources remain subject to US jurisdiction. ICANN itself is just a California corporation, so it is subject to the passing whims of the California legislature as well as those of Congress, the executive branches, and various and sundry US state and federal courts. Some argue that ICANN should itself have authority over all of the Internet domain name system and the IP address space and in fact things are creeping in this direction. Given the now-crucial role that the Internet plays in the global economy, ICANN's hegemony gives, for example, representatives of small towns in California sitting on the right committee in Sacramento remarkable and truly unique power over the rest of the planet. Hi Jim, When exploring ICANN's hegemony (aka domination) over the Internet, you can't help but explore how power and control is expressed in the real world. In response to one of my recent postings, someone commented on my latest sig file with this URL: http://cyberjournal.org/cj/rkm/Whole_Earth_Review/Escaping_the_Matrix.shtml To learn more, just "follow the white rabbit" :-) Jay. +++ Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "Wake up, Neo... The Matrix has you..." -- Trinity
[IFWP] Re: Ken Stubbs @ core deletes vote-auction.com
our ol friend Ken is up to no good again. On Fri, 3 Nov 2000, Tom Vogt wrote: it seems that core (i.e. the root servers) has deleted the entry for vote-auction.com - while the whois still works and their primary nameserver (in austria) still resolves, a regular lookup returns with "host unknown". rumour has it that core carved in to demand by most possibly the feds. here in europe the sentiment today is that by doing so core has stopped being (if it ever was) an independent and purely technical instance and has entered the realm of politics. for example, no matter whether or not vote-auction.com is or is not illegal in the US, what business has a US court or lea in blocking the site for *me* (in germany) or, for that matter, the rest of the planet? -- Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster +1 (805) 753-8697
Re: [IFWP] Re: Ken Stubbs @ core deletes vote-auction.com
On Fri, 3 Nov 2000, !Dr. Joe Baptista wrote: our ol friend Ken is up to no good again. On Fri, 3 Nov 2000, Tom Vogt wrote: it seems that core (i.e. the root servers) has deleted the entry for vote-auction.com - while the whois still works and their primary nameserver (in austria) still resolves, a regular lookup returns with "host unknown". rumour has it that core carved in to demand by most possibly the feds. here in europe the sentiment today is that by doing so core has stopped being (if it ever was) an independent and purely technical instance and has entered the realm of politics. for example, no matter whether or not vote-auction.com is or is not illegal in the US, what business has a US court or lea in blocking the site for *me* (in germany) or, for that matter, the rest of the planet? Tom Vogt pointed out in a follow-up email that 'CORE' should be replaced with 'InterNIC'. CORE as the registrar actually still had the name listed. Nevertheless, what has happened here demonstrates a basic flaw at the heart of the domain name system. ICANN and many essential Internet resources remain subject to US jurisdiction. ICANN itself is just a California corporation, so it is subject to the passing whims of the California legislature as well as those of Congress, the executive branches, and various and sundry US state and federal courts. Some argue that ICANN should itself have authority over all of the Internet domain name system and the IP address space and in fact things are creeping in this direction. Given the now-crucial role that the Internet plays in the global economy, ICANN's hegemony gives, for example, representatives of small towns in California sitting on the right committee in Sacramento remarkable and truly unique power over the rest of the planet. -- Jim Dixon VBCnet GB Ltd http://www.vbc.net tel +44 117 929 1316 fax +44 117 927 2015
Sueing ICANN in California (was Re: [IFWP] Re: Ken Stubbs @ core deletes vote-auction.com)
Roeland Meyer wrote: Those who are having problems with ICANN UDRP and other ICANN interventions may look towards California State intervention mechanisms. ICANN is violating quite a number of those regulations. The problem is that one must be a California resident citizen in order to complain. Not so, Roeland. Anyone who is affected by them may complain. All they need do is write to the California Attorney General's Office: State of California Office of the Attorney General Department of Justice P.O. Box 944255 Sacramento, CA 94244-2550 (916) 445-9555 Quicker and more efficacious would be a civil suit filed by a damaged person or entity, based on the California law. This need not necessarily be filed in California, as most states in the U.S. have long-arm statutes that permit people outside the state who have been damaged by a California entity to sue in their own jurisdiction. The URL for information on complaints to the Att'y General against non-profit organizations is: http://caag.state.ca.us/piu/npmb.htm That unit's email address is: [EMAIL PROTECTED] An online complaint form can be found at: http://caag.state.ca.us/piu/mailform.htm -or- http://caag.state.ca.us/piu/npmb.htm Good California law links are: http://www.usc.edu/dept/law-lib/legal/ca.html http://www.callaw.com/ http://california.findlaw.com/CA02_caselaw/index.html http://www.AllLaw.com/California.html To search statutes: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/statute.html http://www.state.ca.us/s/search/servers.html#www The text of the California Incorporation Law is at: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/calawquery?codesection=corpcodebody=hits=All Michael Sondow = INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF INDEPENDENT INTERNET USERS http://www.iciiu.org(ICIIU)[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel(718)846-7482Fax(603)754-8927 =
[IFWP] Re: Namespace and i-DNS.net International Root Sync Report Mon Oct30 05:30:01 EST 2000
Good news - i-dns is almost fixed. Now all they have to do is recognize themselves for their own cctlds and their fixed. To be frank cctld .LA was only established this past week - so everyone was caught on that one. On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Joe Baptista wrote: i-DNS.net International Root Sync report for Mon Oct 30 05:30:01 EST 2000 http://www.i-DNS.net/ (c) The dot.GOD Registry @ http://www.dot-god.com/ EC - ERROR detected in zone .EC add ns A.I-DNS.NET. to root add ns B.I-DNS.NET. to root add ns C.I-DNS.NET. to root add ns D.I-DNS.NET. to root add ns ECNET.EC. to root add ns ECUA.NET.EC. to root add ns F.I-DNS.NET. to root delete ns NS1.I-EMAIL.NET. from root delete ns NS2.I-EMAIL.NET. from root LA - ERROR detected in zone .LA add ns A.I-DNS.NET. to root add ns C.I-DNS.NET. to root add ns E.I-DNS.NET. to root add ns F.I-DNS.NET. to root delete ns NS1.I-EMAIL.NET. from root delete ns NS2.I-EMAIL.NET. from root on another positive note - namespace has fixed all it's problems. There are no errors no longer in their root. Unfortunately their still forging the SOA header and pretending their the nsiregistry. In fact namespace did chenge their SOA from the old internic forgery to the new nsiregistry forgery. I wonder why they do that - most illogical. But at least they now have a clean root, even if it advertises itself as a forgery - at least it's a forgery that works. . 1D IN SOA A.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. hostmaster.nsiregistry.NET. regards joe -- Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster +1 (805) 753-8697
[IFWP] RE: Fw: i-DNS.net International Root Sync Report Sat Oct 28 22:24:10 EDT 2000
Hey Joe, You could try consolidating the reports into a single e-mail, like Tony Bates does with the CIDR report (call it the ROOT report) and include NANOG. -Original Message- From: Joe Baptista [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2000 6:12 PM To: James Seng Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; NCDNHC Subject: Re: Fw: i-DNS.net International Root Sync Report Sat Oct 28 22:24:10 EDT 2000 This is a public distribution and I'm not complaining. From now on everyone get's checked and everone has an opportunity to fix themselves. I'm sick and tired of root server operations outside the legacy being run like some candy consession. If ya can't stand the heat baby get out of the kitcken. Frankly I'm sick and tired of badly run root zones embarrasing me. So enough with the crocadile tears and get it fixed. Reports will be automatically published weekly each monday night. If you want to take advantage of it their published to domain policy, some comp news group on domains, and alt.fan.joe-baptista (need i say more). regards joe On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, James Seng wrote: Hi Joe, You know, posting this to a list where no i-DNS.net staff is lurking around is actually quite pointless because we would not know your complains. You should have easily cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ;-) Anyhow, I got my technical operations looking into this now. -James Seng - Original Message - From: Joe Baptista [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: NCDNHC [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2000 10:37 AM Subject: Re: i-DNS.net International Root Sync Report Sat Oct 28 22:24:10 EDT 2000 Our friends at i-dns should really fix their roots - soon. On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, Joe Baptista wrote: i-DNS.net International Root Sync report: Sat Oct 28 22:24:10 EDT 2000 http://www.i-DNS.net/ AL - ERROR detected in zone .AL ERROR root missing ns ITGBOX.IAT.CNR.IT. ERROR delete ns ITGBOX.CNUCE.CNR.IT. from root AN - ERROR detected in zone .AN ERROR root missing ns ENGINE1.UNA.NET. AT - ERROR detected in zone .AT ERROR root missing ns NS3.AUSTRIA.EU.NET. ERROR root missing ns NS7.UNIVIE.AC.AT. ERROR delete ns ALIJKU01.EDVZ.UNI-LINZ.AC.AT. from root ERROR delete ns NS.AUSTRIA.EU.NET. from root BE - ERROR detected in zone .BE ERROR root missing ns MASTER.DNS.BE. ERROR delete ns SPARKY.ARL.MIL. from root BO - ERROR detected in zone .BO ERROR root missing ns AUTH100.NS.UU.NET. ERROR delete ns WARA.BOLNET.BO. from root BY - ERROR detected in zone .BY ERROR root missing ns NS2.SCSI.GOV.BY. ERROR root missing ns SUN.SCSI.GOV.BY. CA - ERROR detected in zone .CA ERROR root missing ns MERLE.CIRA.CA. ERROR root missing ns RS0.NETSOL.COM. ERROR delete ns RS0.INTERNIC.NET. from root CC - ERROR detected in zone .CC ERROR root missing ns NS1.LONDON.UK.NETDNS.COM. ERROR delete ns NS2.GLOBALDNS.COM. from root CH - ERROR detected in zone .CH ERROR root missing ns RIP.PSG.COM. ERROR delete ns NS.UU.NET. from root CI - ERROR detected in zone .CI ERROR root missing ns MALAKULA.BONDY.IRD.FR. ERROR root missing ns NS.IRD.FR. ERROR delete ns MALAKULA.BONDY.ORSTOM.FR. from root ERROR delete ns NS.RIPE.NET. from root ERROR delete ns ORSTOM.RIO.NET. from root COM - ERROR detected in zone .COM ERROR root missing ns A.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns B.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns C.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns D.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns E.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns G.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns I.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns M.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR delete ns B.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns C.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns D.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns E.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns F.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns G.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns H.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns I.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root CZ - ERROR detected in zone .CZ ERROR root missing ns CZ.EUNET.CZ. ERROR root missing ns NS2.NIC.FR. ERROR delete ns NS.CESNET.CZ. from root ERROR delete ns NS.EUNET.CZ. from root DE - ERROR detected in zone .DE ERROR root missing ns SSS-AT.DENIC.DE. ERROR root missing ns SSS-NL.DENIC.DE. ERROR delete ns ADMII.ARL.MIL. from root ERROR delete ns AUTH61.NS.UU.NET. from root ERROR delete ns NS.RIPE.NET. from root EC - ERROR
[IFWP] RE: Fw: i-DNS.net International Root Sync Report Sat Oct 28 22:24:10 EDT 2000
good idea - i'll incorporate it into the facility next month. regards joe On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote: Hey Joe, You could try consolidating the reports into a single e-mail, like Tony Bates does with the CIDR report (call it the ROOT report) and include NANOG. -Original Message- From: Joe Baptista [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2000 6:12 PM To: James Seng Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; NCDNHC Subject: Re: Fw: i-DNS.net International Root Sync Report Sat Oct 28 22:24:10 EDT 2000 This is a public distribution and I'm not complaining. From now on everyone get's checked and everone has an opportunity to fix themselves. I'm sick and tired of root server operations outside the legacy being run like some candy consession. If ya can't stand the heat baby get out of the kitcken. Frankly I'm sick and tired of badly run root zones embarrasing me. So enough with the crocadile tears and get it fixed. Reports will be automatically published weekly each monday night. If you want to take advantage of it their published to domain policy, some comp news group on domains, and alt.fan.joe-baptista (need i say more). regards joe On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, James Seng wrote: Hi Joe, You know, posting this to a list where no i-DNS.net staff is lurking around is actually quite pointless because we would not know your complains. You should have easily cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ;-) Anyhow, I got my technical operations looking into this now. -James Seng - Original Message - From: Joe Baptista [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: NCDNHC [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2000 10:37 AM Subject: Re: i-DNS.net International Root Sync Report Sat Oct 28 22:24:10 EDT 2000 Our friends at i-dns should really fix their roots - soon. On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, Joe Baptista wrote: i-DNS.net International Root Sync report: Sat Oct 28 22:24:10 EDT 2000 http://www.i-DNS.net/ AL - ERROR detected in zone .AL ERROR root missing ns ITGBOX.IAT.CNR.IT. ERROR delete ns ITGBOX.CNUCE.CNR.IT. from root AN - ERROR detected in zone .AN ERROR root missing ns ENGINE1.UNA.NET. AT - ERROR detected in zone .AT ERROR root missing ns NS3.AUSTRIA.EU.NET. ERROR root missing ns NS7.UNIVIE.AC.AT. ERROR delete ns ALIJKU01.EDVZ.UNI-LINZ.AC.AT. from root ERROR delete ns NS.AUSTRIA.EU.NET. from root BE - ERROR detected in zone .BE ERROR root missing ns MASTER.DNS.BE. ERROR delete ns SPARKY.ARL.MIL. from root BO - ERROR detected in zone .BO ERROR root missing ns AUTH100.NS.UU.NET. ERROR delete ns WARA.BOLNET.BO. from root BY - ERROR detected in zone .BY ERROR root missing ns NS2.SCSI.GOV.BY. ERROR root missing ns SUN.SCSI.GOV.BY. CA - ERROR detected in zone .CA ERROR root missing ns MERLE.CIRA.CA. ERROR root missing ns RS0.NETSOL.COM. ERROR delete ns RS0.INTERNIC.NET. from root CC - ERROR detected in zone .CC ERROR root missing ns NS1.LONDON.UK.NETDNS.COM. ERROR delete ns NS2.GLOBALDNS.COM. from root CH - ERROR detected in zone .CH ERROR root missing ns RIP.PSG.COM. ERROR delete ns NS.UU.NET. from root CI - ERROR detected in zone .CI ERROR root missing ns MALAKULA.BONDY.IRD.FR. ERROR root missing ns NS.IRD.FR. ERROR delete ns MALAKULA.BONDY.ORSTOM.FR. from root ERROR delete ns NS.RIPE.NET. from root ERROR delete ns ORSTOM.RIO.NET. from root COM - ERROR detected in zone .COM ERROR root missing ns A.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns B.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns C.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns D.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns E.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns G.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns I.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns M.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR delete ns B.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns C.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns D.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns E.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns F.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns G.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns H.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns I.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root CZ - ERROR detected in zone .CZ ERROR root missing ns CZ.EUNET.CZ. ERROR root missing ns NS2.NIC.FR. ERROR delete ns NS.CESNET.CZ. from root ERROR delete ns NS.EUNET.CZ. from root DE - ERROR detected in zone
[IFWP] Re: Froomkin Wrong On No GCCA Violation
Hi Michael, I've recently come to realize that our legal system is either broken, or it just can't keep up with the changes in our society. In ICANN, we have the world's first, global governance body, established by a world-wide process conducted by the U.S. Department of Commerce. And virtually everything about it is embroiled in controversy. Why? Because virtually everything about it seems to be Gamed. Fixed. somehow Dishonest. Now, I don't says these things to get anyone in trouble. I say them to highlight a problem that *must* be fixed. (I feel so strongly about this, I even suggest amnesty for anyone involved in any of these activities.) The more important point is, we must fix our problems. And I'm not just talking about ICANN . . . ICANN has shown us how our Government can lie to its people. How its investigative arms and legal machinations can fail to serve their purpose. ICANN has shown us how our Government really works, in secret committees, and in collusion with the other governments, large corporations, and the press. ICANN has shown us how our most prestigious universities and non-profit foundations, can be a part of the problem, as easily as a part of the solution. Worst of all, ICANN has shown us that these excesses are commonplace and protected, so much so that only a handful seem to even care. One of the unique aspects of the U.S. Constitution, is its recognition of Divine Law, that which we all know as true in the heart of our souls. It's the law that all legitimate human laws try to emulate. What our founding fathers knew, we have forgotten. And it's time to remember. Jay. At 12:59 AM 10/28/00, Michael Sondow wrote: In his most recent article (Duke Law Journal 50:17, and available at http://personal.law.miami.edu/~froomkin), Mr. Froomkin writes that the creation of ICANN did not violate federal laws and specifically was not in violation of the Government Corporation Control Act (GCCA). Mr. Froomkin writes: "Any participation by the federal government in ICANNs formation beyond general cheerleading would probably have violated the Government Corporation Control Act (GCCA). However, most of the board members appear to have been recruited either by European Union officials or by Joe Sims, Postels lawyer and later ICANNs." and "...because the formation was kept at arms length, ICANNs creation did not violate the Government Corporation Control Act, the statute designed to prevent agencies from creating private corporations to do their will." and "By calling for NewCo to form spontaneously, government officials avoided directly "creating" the corporation." However, Mr. Froomkin is wrong. He is either unaware of the facts and the evidence which proves those facts, or has chosen to ignore them. Esther Dyson herself was called to the chairmanship of the ICANN board by none other than Ira Magaziner, in collusion with Roger Cochetti of IBM, as Esther Dyson's own statements prove (http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/scripts/rammaker.asp?s=REALdir=icannfile=icann1start=1-22-00end=2-14-50). Ms. Dyson furthermore stated that ICANN was about to be recognized by the Department of Commerce at the time of the recorded meeting, which was ICANN's first and which was held when there had not yet been any acceptance of ICANN by stakeholders and there were still competing proposals for the NewCo, thus proving the DOC's de facto creation of ICANN. The ICIIU hereby warns the Berkman Center and ICANN that any attempt at destruction of the evidence is a violation of U.S. Code Sec.18 § 1001(a)(1) (see below) and that they will be prosecuted for doing so. Michael Sondow = Whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both. --- 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(1) = International Congress of Independent Internet Users http://www.iciiu.org(ICIIU)[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel(718)846-7482Fax(603)754-8927 = +++ Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "Wake up, Neo... The Matrix has you..." -- Trinity
[IFWP] Re: CDR: [ga] An open letter to Louis Touton (was) www.ester.dyson(fwd)
Hey John - is this guy refering to you? It's a funny sort of compliment. -- Forwarded message -- Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 19:41:55 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: CDR: [ga] An open letter to Louis Touton (was) www.ester.dyson At 05:06 PM 10/29/00 -0500, Joe said: John Palmer is on the right track .. This is the same John Palmer that once tried to unmoderate all of alt.*. I guess age does bring wisdom.
[IFWP] Re: Paul Vixie
On Sun, 29 Oct 2000, William X. Walsh wrote: Sunday, October 29, 2000, 2:14:03 PM, you wrote: This is great - Vixie has immortalized me ;-) http://mail-abuse.org/lawsuit/baptista.htm I see your threat of a lawsuit was as empty as they claimed it would be. in law william nothing is ever empty - it's just pending. and i'm sure no more nor less pending then you lawsuit threat against this great institution. At least one things for sure - i have managed to get a bug up vixies ass, and that's worth a giggle or two. regards joe -- Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster +1 (805) 753-8697
[IFWP] Re: Re[2]: Paul Vixie
On Sun, 29 Oct 2000, William X. Walsh wrote: Hello Joe, Sunday, October 29, 2000, 4:40:15 PM, you wrote: institution. At least one things for sure - i have managed to get a bug up vixies ass, and that's worth a giggle or two. Not really. They post messages from anyone who sends in a lawsuit threat, regardless of the grounds or who it is. No - not paul. He get's alot of that - I know I keep getting people calling me about pursueing it, or who are pursueing thei own actions. We all know how I can get paul off his proverbial ass. -- Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster +1 (805) 753-8697
[IFWP] Re: Fw: i-DNS.net International Root Sync Report Sat Oct 28 22:24:10EDT 2000
This is a public distribution and I'm not complaining. From now on everyone get's checked and everone has an opportunity to fix themselves. I'm sick and tired of root server operations outside the legacy being run like some candy consession. If ya can't stand the heat baby get out of the kitcken. Frankly I'm sick and tired of badly run root zones embarrasing me. So enough with the crocadile tears and get it fixed. Reports will be automatically published weekly each monday night. If you want to take advantage of it their published to domain policy, some comp news group on domains, and alt.fan.joe-baptista (need i say more). regards joe On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, James Seng wrote: Hi Joe, You know, posting this to a list where no i-DNS.net staff is lurking around is actually quite pointless because we would not know your complains. You should have easily cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ;-) Anyhow, I got my technical operations looking into this now. -James Seng - Original Message - From: Joe Baptista [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: NCDNHC [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2000 10:37 AM Subject: Re: i-DNS.net International Root Sync Report Sat Oct 28 22:24:10 EDT 2000 Our friends at i-dns should really fix their roots - soon. On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, Joe Baptista wrote: i-DNS.net International Root Sync report: Sat Oct 28 22:24:10 EDT 2000 http://www.i-DNS.net/ AL - ERROR detected in zone .AL ERROR root missing ns ITGBOX.IAT.CNR.IT. ERROR delete ns ITGBOX.CNUCE.CNR.IT. from root AN - ERROR detected in zone .AN ERROR root missing ns ENGINE1.UNA.NET. AT - ERROR detected in zone .AT ERROR root missing ns NS3.AUSTRIA.EU.NET. ERROR root missing ns NS7.UNIVIE.AC.AT. ERROR delete ns ALIJKU01.EDVZ.UNI-LINZ.AC.AT. from root ERROR delete ns NS.AUSTRIA.EU.NET. from root BE - ERROR detected in zone .BE ERROR root missing ns MASTER.DNS.BE. ERROR delete ns SPARKY.ARL.MIL. from root BO - ERROR detected in zone .BO ERROR root missing ns AUTH100.NS.UU.NET. ERROR delete ns WARA.BOLNET.BO. from root BY - ERROR detected in zone .BY ERROR root missing ns NS2.SCSI.GOV.BY. ERROR root missing ns SUN.SCSI.GOV.BY. CA - ERROR detected in zone .CA ERROR root missing ns MERLE.CIRA.CA. ERROR root missing ns RS0.NETSOL.COM. ERROR delete ns RS0.INTERNIC.NET. from root CC - ERROR detected in zone .CC ERROR root missing ns NS1.LONDON.UK.NETDNS.COM. ERROR delete ns NS2.GLOBALDNS.COM. from root CH - ERROR detected in zone .CH ERROR root missing ns RIP.PSG.COM. ERROR delete ns NS.UU.NET. from root CI - ERROR detected in zone .CI ERROR root missing ns MALAKULA.BONDY.IRD.FR. ERROR root missing ns NS.IRD.FR. ERROR delete ns MALAKULA.BONDY.ORSTOM.FR. from root ERROR delete ns NS.RIPE.NET. from root ERROR delete ns ORSTOM.RIO.NET. from root COM - ERROR detected in zone .COM ERROR root missing ns A.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns B.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns C.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns D.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns E.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns G.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns I.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns M.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR delete ns B.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns C.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns D.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns E.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns F.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns G.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns H.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns I.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root CZ - ERROR detected in zone .CZ ERROR root missing ns CZ.EUNET.CZ. ERROR root missing ns NS2.NIC.FR. ERROR delete ns NS.CESNET.CZ. from root ERROR delete ns NS.EUNET.CZ. from root DE - ERROR detected in zone .DE ERROR root missing ns SSS-AT.DENIC.DE. ERROR root missing ns SSS-NL.DENIC.DE. ERROR delete ns ADMII.ARL.MIL. from root ERROR delete ns AUTH61.NS.UU.NET. from root ERROR delete ns NS.RIPE.NET. from root EC - ERROR detected in zone .EC ERROR root missing ns A.I-DNS.NET. ERROR root missing ns B.I-DNS.NET. ERROR root missing ns C.I-DNS.NET. ERROR root missing ns D.I-DNS.NET. ERROR root missing ns F.I-DNS.NET. FI - ERROR detected in zone .FI ERROR root missing ns T.NS.VERIO.NET. ERROR delete ns R2D2.JVNC.NET. from root FM - ERROR detected in zone .FM ERROR root missing ns FM01.FM. ERROR root missing ns FM03.FM. ERROR root missing ns NS1.GIP.NET. ERROR root missing ns NS2.GIP.NET. ERROR root missing
[IFWP] Re: i-DNS.net International Root Sync Report Sat Oct 28 22:24:10EDT 2000
Our friends at i-dns should really fix their roots - soon. On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, Joe Baptista wrote: i-DNS.net International Root Sync report: Sat Oct 28 22:24:10 EDT 2000 http://www.i-DNS.net/ AL - ERROR detected in zone .AL ERROR root missing ns ITGBOX.IAT.CNR.IT. ERROR delete ns ITGBOX.CNUCE.CNR.IT. from root AN - ERROR detected in zone .AN ERROR root missing ns ENGINE1.UNA.NET. AT - ERROR detected in zone .AT ERROR root missing ns NS3.AUSTRIA.EU.NET. ERROR root missing ns NS7.UNIVIE.AC.AT. ERROR delete ns ALIJKU01.EDVZ.UNI-LINZ.AC.AT. from root ERROR delete ns NS.AUSTRIA.EU.NET. from root BE - ERROR detected in zone .BE ERROR root missing ns MASTER.DNS.BE. ERROR delete ns SPARKY.ARL.MIL. from root BO - ERROR detected in zone .BO ERROR root missing ns AUTH100.NS.UU.NET. ERROR delete ns WARA.BOLNET.BO. from root BY - ERROR detected in zone .BY ERROR root missing ns NS2.SCSI.GOV.BY. ERROR root missing ns SUN.SCSI.GOV.BY. CA - ERROR detected in zone .CA ERROR root missing ns MERLE.CIRA.CA. ERROR root missing ns RS0.NETSOL.COM. ERROR delete ns RS0.INTERNIC.NET. from root CC - ERROR detected in zone .CC ERROR root missing ns NS1.LONDON.UK.NETDNS.COM. ERROR delete ns NS2.GLOBALDNS.COM. from root CH - ERROR detected in zone .CH ERROR root missing ns RIP.PSG.COM. ERROR delete ns NS.UU.NET. from root CI - ERROR detected in zone .CI ERROR root missing ns MALAKULA.BONDY.IRD.FR. ERROR root missing ns NS.IRD.FR. ERROR delete ns MALAKULA.BONDY.ORSTOM.FR. from root ERROR delete ns NS.RIPE.NET. from root ERROR delete ns ORSTOM.RIO.NET. from root COM - ERROR detected in zone .COM ERROR root missing ns A.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns B.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns C.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns D.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns E.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns G.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns I.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns M.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR delete ns B.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns C.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns D.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns E.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns F.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns G.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns H.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns I.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root CZ - ERROR detected in zone .CZ ERROR root missing ns CZ.EUNET.CZ. ERROR root missing ns NS2.NIC.FR. ERROR delete ns NS.CESNET.CZ. from root ERROR delete ns NS.EUNET.CZ. from root DE - ERROR detected in zone .DE ERROR root missing ns SSS-AT.DENIC.DE. ERROR root missing ns SSS-NL.DENIC.DE. ERROR delete ns ADMII.ARL.MIL. from root ERROR delete ns AUTH61.NS.UU.NET. from root ERROR delete ns NS.RIPE.NET. from root EC - ERROR detected in zone .EC ERROR root missing ns A.I-DNS.NET. ERROR root missing ns B.I-DNS.NET. ERROR root missing ns C.I-DNS.NET. ERROR root missing ns D.I-DNS.NET. ERROR root missing ns F.I-DNS.NET. FI - ERROR detected in zone .FI ERROR root missing ns T.NS.VERIO.NET. ERROR delete ns R2D2.JVNC.NET. from root FM - ERROR detected in zone .FM ERROR root missing ns FM01.FM. ERROR root missing ns FM03.FM. ERROR root missing ns NS1.GIP.NET. ERROR root missing ns NS2.GIP.NET. ERROR root missing ns NS3.GIP.NET. ERROR root missing ns SRVR3.RALDEN.COM. ERROR delete ns DNS.FM. from root ERROR delete ns DNS2.FM. from root GR - ERROR detected in zone .GR ERROR root missing ns NIC.AIX.GR. ERROR delete ns SPARKY.ARL.MIL. from root GT - ERROR detected in zone .GT ERROR root missing ns NS.RIPE.NET. ERROR root missing ns NS.UVG.EDU.GT. ERROR root missing ns OSI2.GUA.NET. ERROR delete ns ICM1.ICP.NET. from root ERROR delete ns NS.GT. from root ERROR delete ns NS.URL.EDU.GT. from root ERROR delete ns NS1-AUTH.SPRINTLINK.NET. from root ERROR delete ns NS2-AUTH.SPRINTLINK.NET. from root IE - ERROR detected in zone .IE ERROR root missing ns BANBA.DOMAINREGISTRY.IE. ERROR root missing ns ICE.VIA-NET-WORKS.IE. ERROR root missing ns NS3.NS.ESAT.NET. ERROR delete ns BANBA.UCD.IE. from root ERROR delete ns ICE.MEDIANET.IE. from root ERROR delete ns NS.ISI.IE. from root IN - ERROR detected in zone .IN ERROR root missing ns AUTH00.NS.UU.NET. ERROR root missing ns AUTH61.NS.UU.NET. ERROR root missing ns SS585.NCST.ERNET.IN. ERROR delete ns NAVEEN.NCST.ERNET.IN. from root ERROR delete ns SOOCHAK.NCST.ERNET.IN. from root IS - ERROR detected in zone .IS ERROR delete ns SPARKY.ARL.MIL. from root IT - ERROR detected in zone .IT ERROR root missing ns DNS2.IT.NET. ERROR root missing ns DNS2.IUNET.IT. ERROR delete ns ADMII.ARL.MIL. from root JO - ERROR detected in zone .JO ERROR root missing ns
[IFWP] Re: Name.Space Root Sync Report Sat Oct 28 22:28:41 EDT 2000
Our friends at namespace should really fix their root soon. Not only is the soa wrong - but alot of errors in the zones. On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, Joe Baptista wrote: Name.Space Root Sync report: Sat Oct 28 22:28:41 EDT 2000 http://www.namespace.org/ AT - ERROR detected in zone .AT ERROR root missing ns NS3.AUSTRIA.EU.NET. ERROR root missing ns NS7.UNIVIE.AC.AT. ERROR delete ns ALIJKU01.EDVZ.UNI-LINZ.AC.AT. from root ERROR delete ns NS.AUSTRIA.EU.NET. from root BE - ERROR detected in zone .BE ERROR root missing ns MASTER.DNS.BE. ERROR delete ns SPARKY.ARL.MIL. from root BO - ERROR detected in zone .BO ERROR root missing ns AUTH100.NS.UU.NET. ERROR delete ns WARA.BOLNET.BO. from root CA - ERROR detected in zone .CA ERROR root missing ns MERLE.CIRA.CA. ERROR root missing ns RS0.NETSOL.COM. ERROR delete ns RS0.INTERNIC.NET. from root CC - ERROR detected in zone .CC ERROR root missing ns NS1.LONDON.UK.NETDNS.COM. ERROR delete ns NS2.GLOBALDNS.COM. from root CH - ERROR detected in zone .CH ERROR root missing ns RIP.PSG.COM. ERROR delete ns NS.UU.NET. from root CI - ERROR detected in zone .CI ERROR root missing ns MALAKULA.BONDY.IRD.FR. ERROR root missing ns NS.IRD.FR. ERROR delete ns MALAKULA.BONDY.ORSTOM.FR. from root ERROR delete ns NS.RIPE.NET. from root ERROR delete ns ORSTOM.RIO.NET. from root COM - ERROR detected in zone .COM ERROR root missing ns A.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns B.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns C.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns D.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns E.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns G.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns I.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR root missing ns M.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. ERROR delete ns B.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns C.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns D.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns E.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns F.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns G.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns H.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root ERROR delete ns I.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. from root DE - ERROR detected in zone .DE ERROR root missing ns SSS-AT.DENIC.DE. ERROR root missing ns SSS-NL.DENIC.DE. ERROR delete ns ADMII.ARL.MIL. from root ERROR delete ns AUTH61.NS.UU.NET. from root ERROR delete ns NS.RIPE.NET. from root EC - ERROR detected in zone .EC ERROR root missing ns A.I-DNS.NET. ERROR root missing ns B.I-DNS.NET. ERROR root missing ns C.I-DNS.NET. ERROR root missing ns D.I-DNS.NET. ERROR root missing ns F.I-DNS.NET. FI - ERROR detected in zone .FI ERROR root missing ns T.NS.VERIO.NET. ERROR delete ns R2D2.JVNC.NET. from root FM - ERROR detected in zone .FM ERROR root missing ns FM01.FM. ERROR root missing ns FM03.FM. ERROR root missing ns NS1.GIP.NET. ERROR root missing ns NS2.GIP.NET. ERROR root missing ns NS3.GIP.NET. ERROR root missing ns SRVR3.RALDEN.COM. ERROR delete ns DNS.FM. from root ERROR delete ns DNS2.FM. from root GR - ERROR detected in zone .GR ERROR delete ns SPARKY.ARL.MIL. from root GT - ERROR detected in zone .GT ERROR root missing ns NS.RIPE.NET. ERROR root missing ns NS.UVG.EDU.GT. ERROR root missing ns OSI2.GUA.NET. ERROR delete ns ICM1.ICP.NET. from root ERROR delete ns NS.GT. from root ERROR delete ns NS.URL.EDU.GT. from root ERROR delete ns NS1-AUTH.SPRINTLINK.NET. from root ERROR delete ns NS2-AUTH.SPRINTLINK.NET. from root IE - ERROR detected in zone .IE ERROR root missing ns ICE.VIA-NET-WORKS.IE. ERROR delete ns ICE.MEDIANET.IE. from root IN - ERROR detected in zone .IN ERROR root missing ns AUTH00.NS.UU.NET. ERROR root missing ns AUTH61.NS.UU.NET. ERROR root missing ns SS585.NCST.ERNET.IN. ERROR delete ns NAVEEN.NCST.ERNET.IN. from root ERROR delete ns SOOCHAK.NCST.ERNET.IN. from root IS - ERROR detected in zone .IS ERROR delete ns SPARKY.ARL.MIL. from root IT - ERROR detected in zone .IT ERROR root missing ns DNS2.IT.NET. ERROR root missing ns DNS2.IUNET.IT. ERROR delete ns ADMII.ARL.MIL. from root JO - ERROR detected in zone .JO ERROR root missing ns ISDMNL.WR.USGS.GOV. ERROR root missing ns NS.ER.USGS.GOV. ERROR root missing ns NS.RIPE.NET. KR - ERROR detected in zone .KR ERROR root missing ns NS.KORNET.NET. ERROR delete ns NS.KORNET21.NET. from root LA - ERROR detected in zone .LA ERROR root missing ns A.I-DNS.NET. ERROR root missing ns C.I-DNS.NET. ERROR root missing ns E.I-DNS.NET. ERROR root missing ns F.I-DNS.NET. ERROR delete ns AUTH03.NS.UU.NET. from root ERROR delete ns DNSSEC1.SINGNET.COM.SG. from root ERROR delete ns DNSSEC2.SINGNET.COM.SG. from root ERROR delete ns DNSSEC3.SINGNET.COM.SG. from root ERROR delete ns NS.RIPE.NET. from root LI - ERROR detected in zone .LI
[IFWP] Re: Dealing with Spam from Esther Dyson
I missed this. Can you or anyone please forward to me the spam Ester sent you. I know the old crow and i'm sure there are some people on domain policy who would love to read her spam. regards joe On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, R. A. Hettinga wrote: At 6:47 PM -0700 on 10/27/00, Tim May wrote: So, Esther Dyson, whom I have never corresponded with, is spamming me with this crap. Me too. Maybe her people just learned about the majordomo "who" command... Cheers, RAH Clueless is as, etc... -- Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster
[IFWP] Re: ANNOUNCEMENT: Upcoming ICANN-LA Meetings
Yes Ben - it's ICANN fiesta time - one more time. But this meeting will not be boring. We at pccf will be doing very little this time round. But we are looking forward to watching the show. And I can gurantee that this will be a good show. It will be boring with moments of entertainment. I expect as always the irc channel will be restricted - i.e. no conversations about fruits or racy cocktail drinks ;-) regards joe baptista -- Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, Ben Edelman wrote: Greetings! Because you attended or participated remotely in one or more prior ICANN meetings, ICANN would like to remind you of its upcoming meetings to be held in Los Angeles, California on November 13 through 16. Major agenda items will include policies relating to the creation of new top-level domain registries and relating to ccTLD delegation and administration. More information about the meetings is available at http://www.icann.org/mdr2000. If you plan to attend in person, please preregister via http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/la2000/preregistration (if you have not already done so). While preregistration is not required, it helps local organizers anticipate attendance and allows you to be kept up to date with logistical updates as they become available. All plenary sessions will also be webcast with full remote participation. For more information about the webcast, including technical requirements to participate, see http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/la2000. If you plan to participate by webcast, please preregister using http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/la2000/preregistration. Finally, if you are not already subscribed to ICANN's announcements list, you may want to join it. Subscription instructions at http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcements.htm. Ben Edelman Berkman Center for Internet and Society Harvard Law School
Re: [IFWP] Re: ANNOUNCEMENT: Upcoming ICANN-LA Meetings
Oh no - Ben - you poor kid. I'm sorry about that. I have so many email aliases, I ended up cutting and pasting the wrong one in - yours. I'm sorry about that. It's a good thing I identified myself as always. see ya ther -- J. Baptista Planet Communications Computing Facility Voice/Fax (212) 894-3704 ext. 1033 http://www.pccf.net/ On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, Ben Edelman wrote: Yes Ben - it's ICANN fiesta time - one more time. But this meeting will not be boring. We at pccf will be doing very little this time round. But we are looking forward to watching the show. And I can gurantee that this will be a good show. It will be boring with moments of entertainment. I expect as always the irc channel will be restricted - i.e. no conversations about fruits or racy cocktail drinks ;-) regards joe baptista -- Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, Ben Edelman wrote: Greetings! Because you attended or participated remotely in one or more prior ICANN meetings, ICANN would like to remind you of its upcoming meetings to be held in Los Angeles, California on November 13 through 16. Major agenda items will include policies relating to the creation of new top-level domain registries and relating to ccTLD delegation and administration. More information about the meetings is available at http://www.icann.org/mdr2000. If you plan to attend in person, please preregister via http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/la2000/preregistration (if you have not already done so). While preregistration is not required, it helps local organizers anticipate attendance and allows you to be kept up to date with logistical updates as they become available. All plenary sessions will also be webcast with full remote participation. For more information about the webcast, including technical requirements to participate, see http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/la2000. If you plan to participate by webcast, please preregister using http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/la2000/preregistration. Finally, if you are not already subscribed to ICANN's announcements list, you may want to join it. Subscription instructions at http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcements.htm. Ben Edelman Berkman Center for Internet and Society Harvard Law School
[IFWP] Re: Auctioning .US ? (and The UDRP and .US)
Thanks to Jim Fleming for posting the URL and text. http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/usrfc2/comments.html "The proposed plan would auction new generic second-level domain names under .us (.e.g. business.us, loans.us), the proceeds from which would fund a "Digital Opportunity Trust" that connects, educates, and empowers people to participate in the networked society. Until now the .us space has been unattractive for commercial users and individuals because of its cumbersome registration system under geographic localities, e.g. ibm.armonk.ny.us. The new .us system we propose will auction generic names as an efficient way to allocate scarce resources and would be restructured to facilitate non-commercial uses in the public interest." This proposal has been made by The Benton Foundation and the Media Access Project, in response to the NTIA's call for comments on its Statement of Work (SOW), pursuant (supposedly) to another RFC on .US management (there have been previous ones). The proposal is interesting and worth a read. However, the above quote from it raises an obvious question: How does auctioning 2LDs facilitate non-commercial uses in the public interest? Commercial interests with more money will get them in an auction. Another question of interest, which perhaps the NTIA persons copied could respond to: On the ISI's new .US website (http://www.nic.us/), a "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy" is listed under "General Information" and linked to ICANN's website (no mention of the UDRP anywhere else on the .US website). Does this mean that .US has been placed under ICANN's UDRP by NTIA or ISI fiat? If so, does this mean that there are elements of the management of .US which have already been decided by the NTIA? If that is the case, could the NTIA tell us what these elements are, so that we won't waste time discussing them and submitting proposals regarding them? Michael Sondow = INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF INDEPENDENT INTERNET USERS http://www.iciiu.org(ICIIU)[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel(718)846-7482Fax(603)754-8927 =
[IFWP] Re: [bwg+] Pre-emptive Registrations
We have seen this too, and have been warned about it. Is this a violation of an ICANN registration rules? Jamie Jay Fenello wrote: Infoworld is researching multiple reports from people who have checked on domain names that were available, only to find later that they were registered shortly after their inquiry. Anyone having similar experiences, or having insight into why this might be happening, should contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 408-267-1721 Jay. +++ Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml -- David Korten -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.cptech.org
Re: [IFWP] Re: [bwg+] Pre-emptive Registrations
Hi Jamie, The reporter asked me the same thing. Even if it is not illegal, it certainly seems unethical. I suspect it is counter to the registrar agreement as well, but we have seen registrars "work" with other domain name warehousers in the past. In other words, it would be relatively easy to get around such rules, unless someone was aggressively monitoring the situation. Jay. At 10:02 PM 10/11/00, James Love wrote: We have seen this too, and have been warned about it. Is this a violation of an ICANN registration rules? Jamie Jay Fenello wrote: Infoworld is researching multiple reports from people who have checked on domain names that were available, only to find later that they were registered shortly after their inquiry. Anyone having similar experiences, or having insight into why this might be happening, should contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 408-267-1721 Jay. +++ Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml -- David Korten -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.cptech.org +++ Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml -- David Korten
[IFWP] Re: IFWP_LIST V1 #902
Kent Crispin ? In a message dated 10/9/2000 9:05:43 AM Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If at that point one candidate has an absolute majority (50% + 1) of the vote, he/she is selected. If not, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated. The eliminated candidate's votes are redistributed to the next ranked candidates (the "2"s).
[IFWP] Re: DOC ICANN buck passing
Joe, Thanks for keeping an ear to the political ground for us and alerting us to the sad state of affairs that have characterized this administration in the US, though the affairs are usually less political in nature. I encourage all US readers of Joe's post to ask their representatives (now running for re-election!!!) who is responsible for ICANN oversight and what they are doing to keep up with such a key issue to the future of American and global business, the internet! Post their responses here and for press people to be aware of. They are there to represent us and work for our interests, let your local papers know when they do not! Thanks again, Joe!!! Karl E. Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] "!Dr. Joe Baptista" wrote: Just in case someone is interested - there is no one at the DOC in charge of ICANN. It looks as if there's going to be a bit of buck passing at the NTIA since Burr's departure. Burr left the NTIA on Sept 8th and her responsibilities were trasnferred to Ken Schagrin. Ken called me from Montreal yesturday (he's enjoying the recent funeral we had there - great for internatinal contacts) and he confirmed that he will be transfered to another government department (trade) on Oct 10th. That's five days from now and he has no idea who is going to replace him - or at least won't say. Now this is conveniently happening in the middle of an icann election during a very contraversial TLD application. I commened the NTIA on avoiding it's responsibility. This is the classical example of the civil service suffle called "let's avoid responsibility". I'm not impressed. regards joe -- Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster +1 (805) 753-8697
[IFWP] Re: [Nc-tlds] RE: ICANN received 44 applications for new TLDs
Anupam Chander writes: First, Mr. Sondow's uneducated claim that I have "only recently become aware of ICANN's activities" is utterly false. I used the word "uneducated" in reference to the ICANN Board, not Mr. Chander. As to Mr. Chander being only recently involved in this affair, I don't recall seeing any posts from him on the related mailing lists (IFWP, Domain-policy, ICANN M.A.C., etc.) during the period 1998-99 (I have been an active subscriber to them), nor do I remember ever having heard him speak at an ICANN meeting during its formation. Where was Mr. Chander when the White Paper was issued? Where was he during the IFWP? Where was he during the debates surrounding the proposals for the NewCo? Where was he during the struggle between the Paris group and the CORE/Trademark group for acceptance by the ICANN Board of bylaws for the DNSO, or the war for control of the NCDNHC? Was he present, but silent? Did he use another name? If he had forwarded my original email in its entirety, others would have understood that the primary thrust of that email was criticism of ICANN's $50k entrance fee. Your so-called "criticism" is typical of the loyal opposition. You, like so many others who have found an unwarranted place in ICANN, operate so as to preserve your new-found and undeserved position by criticizing ICANN "from within", careful always to suggest, in every thing you say, that ICANN is not actually a bad organization, that it has simply made some minor errors, and that it is reformable. These are lies. ICANN was illegitimately created, has proceeded illegitimately in everything it has undertaken including its manipulation of its own bylaws to obviate the most fundamental rules which allowed it to be recognized by the DOC (membership, transparency, and accountability), and is in blatant violation of the U.S. Constitution and federal laws regarding the administration of government agencies and antitrust. Yet you pretend that ICANN need only modify its greed, by changing its TLD application process, to become acceptable. Like a host of other appeasers and collaborators, your criticisms are a cover-up for the irreconcilable breaches of justice, fairness, and legality committed by ICANN and which make it an unreformable and illicit organization. By forwarding my email to multiple lists, he denies me the opportunity to respond to his ridicule because I am not a subscriber to those lists, and my response is thereby automatically rejected by those lists that prohibit non-member postings. The fact that you are not a subscriber to the IFWP and Domain-Policy lists proves my original contention that you are a jonny-come-lately who has only recently become aware of ICANN's activities. Michael Sondow = INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF INDEPENDENT INTERNET USERS http://www.iciiu.org(ICIIU)[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel(718)846-7482Fax(603)754-8927 =
Re: [IFWP] Re: [Nc-tlds] RE: ICANN received 44 applications for new TLDs
Kent Crispin wrote: On Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 11:13:25AM -0700, Anupam Chander wrote: [...] Mr. Sondow's future postings will go unanswered by me. That is because he has no answer to them. Generally, that is the best policy. Same for Crispin, whose credibility (never very great, since he is a government employee) reached zero when he went behind the back of the membership of the DNSO-in-formation, re-writing the proposal agreed to in Monterrey in order to incorporate the demands of the trademark lobby without anyone's approval. Michael Sondow = INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF INDEPENDENT INTERNET USERS http://www.iciiu.org(ICIIU)[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel(718)846-7482Fax(603)754-8927 =
[IFWP] Re: [Nc-tlds] RE: ICANN received 44 applications for new TLDs
Anupam Chander writes: While I appreciate Mr. Sondow's concern, this seems to me a premature assessment. It seems to premature to Mr. Chander because you he has only recently become aware of ICANN's activities. If he had been following its development for the past two years, as I have, he would admit that the assessment is accurate. At least, he would admit it if he were truthful. I am grateful that Mr. Sondow and others will work to make sure that this view of a greedy ICANN will not come to pass. This is absurd. It has come to pass, despite the efforts of myself and others (not including, however, Mr. Chander). Where has Mr. Chander been all this time, and how does he pretend to come into the fray now, out of nowhere, to give his pedantic and mistaken opinions on ICANN? As an aside, Mr. Sondow quoted one sentence from a long email and cross-posted that sentence to numerous other lists, out of context from both my original email and the long discussion that preceded it on the list to which it was posted (namely, ncdnhc). I am not a subscriber to the ncdnhc list; I received that post because Mr. Chander himself cross-posted it to other lists to which I do subscribe. It was therefore very far from being a personal or restricted message, and I have certainly not broken any rules of netiquet in replying to it and posting my response to other lists concerned with these matters. As to its being out of context, that is simply untrue. There was no context, other than what was contained in the sentence quoted. I think this practice should be discouraged. The practice that needs to be discouraged is that of outsiders like Chander injecting themselves into an ongoing history and attempting to convince list members that their opinion - that ICANN is a legitimate organization - is valid. Michael Sondow = INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF INDEPENDENT INTERNET USERS http://www.iciiu.org(ICIIU)[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel(718)846-7482Fax(603)754-8927 =
[IFWP] Re: [Nc-tlds] RE: ICANN received 44 applications for new TLDs
On Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 11:13:25AM -0700, Anupam Chander wrote: [...] Mr. Sondow's future postings will go unanswered by me. Generally, that is the best policy. -- Kent Crispin "Do good, and you'll be [EMAIL PROTECTED] lonesome." -- Mark Twain
[IFWP] Re: ICANN received 44 applications for new TLDs
Chance observations from a series of disinterested observers on ICANN's 44 applications. 1. Frightening the paucity of diversity, multilingualism or imagination. 2. Seems like gtld-mou replicants only make the list? 3. None of these people even played junior scrabble. 4. IATA's .air and WHO's .health have taken four years to appear from conception, an elephantine birth one hopes will be rewarded with real tuskers. ICANN's attempt to garner internationalism has an even longer way to go down the birth canal. 5. I feel sorry for Esther Dyson whose efforts to build some international consensus on the back of Dixon's IFWP ran into stony isolationism. 6. Still time for the substantial backers of ICANN to chart a path that not only includes the IP of the US but the rest of the world, too. if they're interested in more than the occasional senior pro-am. 7. Abril's nominalism (that the name of a thing constitutes the thing, most infamously met in Anselm's proof of God) disproven. MM Josmarian (UK) Ltd http://www.josmarian.ch [EMAIL PROTECTED] UK tel: 07770947420/ fax: 0044.1273.474894 France tel/fax: 0033.450.20.94.92 Part of the Josmarian Group If you have a technical problem with this e-mail, please mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] outlining the nature of the problem. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This e-mail transmission is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information which is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee responsible for delivering this communication to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please forward it to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ James Love wrote: http://www.icann.org/tlds/tld-applications-lodged-02oct00.htm And, many applications involve more than one string. Paul Garin's Name.Space asks for the most strings. There are several non-commercial TLD applications, and several applications that compete for the same strings. Popular TLD strings are .biz (5), .kids (4), .tel (4), .inc (3), and .nom (2). There are only 2 applications for .web, one of which asked for three strings. There is one .union application, and one .museum application. The co-op and .coop proposal is by the Cooperative League of the USA. Novell is seeking .dir. Nokia is seeking eight TLD strings, including mobile. The Association Monegasque des Banques is seeking .fin. The Société Internationale de Télécommunications Aéronautiques is seeking air. The International Air transport Association wants .travel. Core is seeking .nom, but has competition from a 7 member group that includes Lycos, .tv, Korean firms 7DC and SK Telecom, onlincenic from China and the dotNOM consortium. Jamie -- James Love mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 --- You are currently subscribed to ncdnhc-discuss as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --
[IFWP] Re: [Nc-tlds] RE: ICANN received 44 applications for new TLDs
Anupam Chander wrote: ICANN can still serve the interests of humankind by not privileging the entities that proposed the TLDs when it decides who will administer the TLDs it awards. If this is a joke, it isn't very funny. ICANN is selling TLDs. The $50K application fee makes that crystal clear. ICANN will now sell registry rights, no doubt for far more than $50K, and will approve those TLDs that are backed by corporations able to pay it huge registry fees. ICANN is a business, albeit one that expects not to pay taxes by pretending to be a "public benefit non-profit corporation" (and it may succeed in avoiding taxes thanks to the dupes who have registered to be "at-large members"). ICANN's board are business people; its DNSO are all business people; and its attorneys are corporate lawyers. ICANN is motivated by one thing and one thing only: greed, the lowest common denominator of the low class of people who created it. Uneducated, selfish, and craven, ICANN will use new TLDs to make as much money as it can. Michael Sondow "We need to be able to judge which is more important - the images on the screen, the mechanisms that produce them, or the world that they are striving to represent." --Oscar Kenshur, in 'The Allure of the Hybrid' INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF INDEPENDENT INTERNET USERS http://www.iciiu.org(ICIIU)[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel(718)846-7482Fax(603)754-8927
[IFWP] Re: [Nc-tlds] Steve Metalitz/IPC letter to new TLD applications
(Forwarded by James Love) From: Copyright Coalition for Domain Names Dear New TLD Applicant: On behalf of the Intellectual Property Constituency (IPC) of the ICANN Domain Name Supporting Organization, I write to request a copy of your application, and to initiate a dialogue with you on those aspects of new TLD applications that the IPC has identified as critical. The trademark gestapo moves in. Michael Sondow = INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF INDEPENDENT INTERNET USERS http://www.iciiu.org(ICIIU)[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel(718)846-7482Fax(603)754-8927 =
[IFWP] RE: ANNOUNCE: A Day with the North-American ICANN Candidates
With the event described below drawing near, and six of seven North-American At Large candidates confirmed to attend, I want to make especially certain to have sufficient RealServer capacity to accommodate everyone who wishes to join via webcast. Accordingly, it's extra important that everyone planning to participate in the webcast preregister via the form linked from http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/candidateforum. Doing so lets us know how many webcast viewers to expect, and thus how much RealServer capacity and bandwidth we must secure for a successful transmission. (I also want to note that remote participation in this event will use a newly-overhauled mechanism that I hope and expect will greatly improve the webcast experience by reducing the number of simultaneous windows and other objects to keep track of. I'm therefore especially interested in suggestions for improvements to the remote participation system itself.) More information about the event follows. Ben Edelman Berkman Center for Internet Society Harvard Law School The Berkman Center for Internet Society at Harvard Law School and the Internet Democracy Project are pleased to announce two events featuring the ICANN North American candidates, each of which take place on Monday, October 2, 2000 on the Harvard Law School campus in Cambridge, Massachusetts. ICANN (the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) is the nonprofit organization that was formed in 1998 to assume responsibility for the domain name system, protocol parameter assignment, and related functions. ICANN's upcoming online election, taking place from October 1-10, will give the ICANN At-Large membership a voice in the organization's decisions through its selection of five members for ICANN's Board of Directors. One Director will be chosen from each of five geographic regions: Africa, Asia/Australia/Pacific, Europe, Latin America/Caribbean, and North America. There are seven candidates competing for the North American seat. Free and open to the public, both events will be webcast live with remote participation, and feature the candidates engaging in informal dialogue as well as formal debate. * "A Dialogue with the Candidates," 4:20-6:00p.m. EDT, moderated by Jonathan Zittrain, Assistant Professor of Law, Harvard Law School. Professor Jonathan Zittrain's "Internet Society 2000" Harvard Law School class will host a moderated discussion with the candidates, exploring the role of ICANN as an organization, the role of the ICANN directors, and the scope and meaning of ICANN's At-Large membership. The discussion will be open to the public and webcast live with remote participation. Both the online and in-person audiences will have the opportunity to pose questions for the candidates. This event is presented by the Berkman Center for Internet Society. * "ICANN North American Candidate Forum," 7:30-9:30p.m. EDT, moderated by Jean-Claude Guedon, University of Montreal. Expanding the format of the Presidential Commission debates, Jean-Claude Guedon will moderate a question-and-answer session among the seven North American ICANN candidates about the issues facing ICANN and the role of ICANN itself. Candidates will respond to questions posed by a distinguished panel including Declan McCullagh of Wired Magazine. The forum will be open to the public in-person and online via webcast with a real-time discussion forum. After the forum, candidates will have the opportunity to submit brief written follow-up responses to the forum's questions, and these responses will be posted along with video and other archive materials in the archive. This event is presented by the Berkman Center for Internet Society and the Internet Democracy Project. For more information about these events, including how to register to attend or view the live webcast, please visit the "A Day with the ICANN North American Candidates" website at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/candidateforum. Please note that these events are not sponsored by, nor affiliated with, ICANN. The Berkman Center for Internet Society at Harvard Law School is a research program founded to explore cyberspace, share in its study, and identify and engage the challenges and opportunities it presents. The Internet Democracy Project is a non-partisan organization that seeks to enhance public participation in decisions concerning the future of the Internet. We look forward to seeing you in Cambridge or to your participation via the Internet. *** The Berkman Center for Internet Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu The Internet Democracy Project http://www.internetdemocracyproject.org
[IFWP] Re: You be the Jury (Polling the Lessig- Sondow exchange)
And open sourced, auditable solution is much preferable over Joop's version of "democracy." -- Best regards, Williammailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I certainly like an open source auditable election. Anyone notice yet that with election.com running the ICANN at large we will get no such thing!? -- The COOK Report on Internet Index to 8 years of the COOK Report 431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 USA at http://cookreport.com (609) 882-2572 (phone fax)Have you done your part to keep [EMAIL PROTECTED] the Internet free from ICANN's control? Replace your machine's DNS numbers from http://dnsroot.org/ today
[IFWP] Re: [ICANN-EU] Re: You be the Jury (Polling the Lessig- Sondow exchange)
At 18:33 24/09/00 -0400, Gordon Cook wrote: I certainly like an open source auditable election. Anyone notice yet that with election.com running the ICANN at large we will get no such thing!? Gordon, I actually agree that open source voting software may be the best of options. But Where is it?? I went ahead and designed and commissioned the Polling Booth. I make its use available for free. If it is going to be open source, I would like to be paid what it is worth. Fair? It is quite complex with a lot of functionality. Any benefactors out there? Auditing is a different matter. Auditing votes is opening a can of worms at the best of times. Voters want results. Any auditing process, unless it is needed to determine the outcome of a power struggle, is a holdup for the voters. It puts those who are demanding audits in control, especially if there are no detailed rules for an auditing process. It also endangers the anonymity of a vote. This is the reason why so often members of associations vote by acclamation for destruction of the Ballot papers. In the meantime, cheap unsubstantiated slander against independent Polling resources, without ever providing an alternative is not helping democracy. If WXW sees a vote going against him in real time, perhaps he should consider the feedback effect that real time result publishing has. Real Time results is a feature that can be turned on or off, in accordance with the will of the voters. --Joop Teernstra LL.M.-- the Cyberspace Association and the constituency for Individual Domain Name Owners http://www.idno.org
Re: [IFWP] Re: [ICANN-EU] Re: You be the Jury (Polling the Lessig-Sondow exchange)
On Mon, 25 Sep 2000, Joop Teernstra wrote: I went ahead and designed and commissioned the Polling Booth. I make its use available for free. If it is going to be open source, I would like to be paid what it is worth. Then it's not really open source
