My general opinion is that for an expert user, the net was only
slightly less useful or usable. (The challenge back then was to
figure out ways to get your email through quickly and consistently.)
If you were able to do that you were looked upon as an email guru.
Things were much more confusing
At 10:33 AM 7/5/99 -0700, you wrote:
On Mon, Jul 05, 1999 at 11:44:51AM -0400, Richard J. Sexton wrote:
If the names council was 80% ORSC people I'd scream saying it was unbalanced
and nobody would take it seriously. The bylaws, as implemented, fail to
prevent capture by a single organzation
That is not what I intended to convey. The basic idea is that domain
names are there to be *used*, not *sold*.
That way there be dragons. I'm no fan of domain speculation
but if somebody offered me a million dollars for vrx.net
I'd find a new domain pretty damn quick.
Once you saying what
At 05:06 PM 7/5/99 -0700, you wrote:
"Richard J. Sexton" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Greg Skinner wrote:
It should also be pointed out that a major reason for the development
of DNS was to eliminate some of the arcane email addressing systems,
for the purpose of making things simpler
Here's a good one. Zenith watches, in Switzerland, makes the most
accurate mechanical watches known. Rolex uses a de-tuned (God nows why)
Zenith movement in their high end chrongraph. ("Daytona").
Samsung bought American company Zenith, and although they havn't
made a watch, ever, the trademark
Why not one-domain-per-customer?
Why ?
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED]
"They were of a mind to govern us and we were of a mind to govern ourselves."
Why not one-domain-per-customer?
Why ?
A proposed solution to the "cybersquatting" problem Mr. Crispin raised (one
person registering tons of generic words and jacking up the price for the
"real" users). This is the solution that some ccTLDs have used.
There are laws to deal with this...
Here's a good one. Zenith watches, in Switzerland, makes the most
accurate mechanical watches known. Rolex uses a de-tuned (God nows why)
Zenith movement in their high end chrongraph. ("Daytona").
Samsung bought American company Zenith, and although they havn't
made a watch, ever, the
At 12:17 AM 7/6/99 -0400, you wrote:
A proposed solution to the "cybersquatting" problem Mr. Crispin raised
(one
person registering tons of generic words and jacking up the price for
the
"real" users). This is the solution that some ccTLDs have used.
There are laws to deal with this...
I could stand education on why it is so critical to have a separate
registration for taurus.com.
That can be argued either way, nut no matter that's a specific
instanc and is more or less irrelevant. In the general case
a single name ontology will always loose to a more free one.
--
[EMAIL
While TMs are the big money thing here, there are other rights to
names, as well. For example, I have a right to use the name
"Crispin", in certain contexts. There are many others with a similar
right to the name. It is not possible to prioritize among us, so
first come first serve is a
At 12:21 AM 7/6/99 -0700, you wrote:
On Mon, Jul 05, 1999 at 07:10:32PM -0400, Richard J. Sexton wrote:
That is not what I intended to convey. The basic idea is that domain
names are there to be *used*, not *sold*.
That way there be dragons. I'm no fan of domain speculation
At 08:26 AM 7/6/99 -0400, you wrote:
At 11:47 PM 7/5/99 -0400, Bill Lovell wrote:
Hey, you engineering wonks had first shot at the naming policy. It just
didn't take US law into account so now we overbearing know-it-alls have to
come in and clean up the mess.
Diane Cabell
At 09:06 AM 7/6/99 -0700, you wrote:
On Tue, Jul 06, 1999 at 09:03:13AM -0700, Christopher Ambler wrote:
Yes, especially since NSI is doing everything it can to torpedo
ICANN. Without ICANN there is no realistic way to get new TLDs in
the IANA root, not for years to come.
Wrong.
At 03:42 PM 7/6/99 -0400, you wrote:
At 06:07 PM 7/5/99 , Michael Sondow wrote:
Sydney Morning Herald, July 1999
Net dispute: Govt may step in
"Governments will end up taking control of the distribution of
Internet addresses if the Internet industry cannot resolve its
differences, according
At 04:32 PM 7/6/99 -0400, you wrote:
Isn't there a famous case in England that shot
down people who were camping on domain names with the intent to
Yes.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED]
"They were of a mind to govern us and we were of a mind to govern ourselves."
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from ["Sheffo, Joe"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 1999 18:07:18 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul 6
Any word on this ?
At 06:39 PM 7/3/99 -0400, Jonathan Zittrain wrote:
Esther, Mike, Joe,
Is there any particular ICANN view on efforts to set up alternative root
systems? I'd figured that ICANN would be neutral on it--it's got a mandate
to (eventually, if all proceeds a particular way)
http://www.dnso.org/wgroups/wg-a/Archives/msg6.html
My God. That's the scariest thing I've ever seen.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED]
"They were of a mind to govern us and we were of a mind to govern ourselves."
I hate to say I told you so, but:
http://www.open-rsc.org/inc/bylaws/
Last revised Oct 8/98 8:02 pm EST
Commented version
This is a separate proposal to the NTIA from ORSC. The
significant differences between propsals submitted so far
and ours are:
1.Membership
I'm really glad Brian has finally entered the fray and
hope to see more of this.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED]
"They were of a mind to govern us and we were of a mind to govern ourselves."
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 1999 21:52:24 -0400
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: "Martin B. Schwimmer" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [IFWP] BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Admin request of type
/\bcancel\b/i at line 2
You'd have to poll them. I don't think you could impose it here; barn door
and all that.
The down side is that they didn't allow personal domain registrations,
although I believe they are about to do so under a second level domain (?
bing.per.no or something like that). If strictly enforced, it
demands a central authority. There is a business here -- a big one.
Tell the poeple on IRC.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED]
"They were of a mind to govern us and we were of a mind to govern ourselves."
I was actually making reference to the Papers on electronic commerce that
were issued by the White House in June 1997 and updated in October 1999.
There is still an enormous amount of work to be done to fashion a framework
for electronic commerce which addresses the significance of digital
At 09:54 PM 7/8/99 -0400, you wrote:
At 09:45 PM 7/8/99 , Jon Zittrain wrote:
Gene,
I always figured that the IETF approach is what Jon IANA more or less
represented, for better or worse--with the IETF's degree of open
participation. Indeed, much of the structure of the DNS is expressed
At 06:14 PM 7/8/99 -0700, you wrote:
On Thu, Jul 08, 1999 at 09:07:26PM -0400, A.M. Rutkowski wrote:
These would seem to include:
1) funding someone part time at ISI or CNRI
to maintain the protocol registry files.
2) some coordination mechanism among the
regional IP registries that
I fail to see how an SLD is eminently more usable than a 3LD, etc.
So ?
If you were czar of the entire known internet that might mean something
but you're not and it doesn't.
Tell you what, you observe and respect other peoples ideas and then
you can expect the same from them.
I assert the
At 07:47 PM 7/8/99 -0700, you wrote:
On Thu, Jul 08, 1999 at 09:54:49PM -0400, Jay Fenello wrote:
"Shared registries" were not promoted by
the entrepreneurs that I knew, it was a
business model promoted by the IAHC!
Shared registries is also the business model promoted by the White
Paper;
The fact remains, the shared registry model is in the White Paper.
That's why NSI is going through these contortions -- perhaps you've
noticed?
This decision was made before the green and white papers came
out. Those of us in the room with Magaziner in New York
were told "the NSI monopoly
At 12:15 AM 7/9/99 -0400, Jon Zittrain wrote:
The best way to make the entrepreneurial squabbles dissipate would be
*tons* of new TLDs.
Could you say that again a little louder please? I'm
not sure I heard you.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED]
"They were of a mind to govern us and we
At 05:38 AM 7/9/99 GMT, William X. Walsh wrote:
On Fri, 9 Jul 1999 00:38:08 -0400 (EDT), "Richard J. Sexton"
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 12:04 AM 7/9/99 -0400, Jon Zittrain wrote:
shrug I just meant to list the sorts of pressures that have moved DNS
issues squarely out of
At 09:18 AM 7/9/99 +0200, Jean-Michel Becar wrote:
Very interesting messge of Roberto.
Jean-Michel Bécar
Really ? Which part did you like the best ?
--
Richard Sexton | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://dns.vrx.net/tech/rootzone
http://killifish.vrx.nethttp://www.mbz.org
TECTED]]On
Behalf Of William X. Walsh
Sent: Thursday, July 08, 1999 10:38 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [IDNO-DISCUSS] Re: [IFWP] RE: who tells the quill holder what
to write?
On Fri, 9 Jul 1999 00:38:08 -0400 (EDT), "Richard J. Sexton"
[
At 09:20 AM 7/9/99 -0700, you wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William X. Walsh) wrote:
Since you seem to think marketing is the answer, lets let the market
prove it. Lets count registrations.
Case closed.
I disagree. Supply me with some proof that all other factors equal,
SLD registrations do
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: UNSUBSCRIBE list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 02:41:40 -0400 (EDT)
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] has unsubscribed from
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: UNSUBSCRIBE list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 02:16:26 -0400 (EDT)
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] has unsubscribed from
At 01:33 PM 7/10/99 -0400, Jon Zittrain wrote:
If instead you see ICANN as having a public trust function...
No. We don't. The names of files I use on my computer are none
of the publics damn business. It's between me and other people
that write to this namespace.
Most of the general public
The Declaration is not a formal EFF position and I for one am not entirely
comfortable with its tone.
Esther
You'll probably hate this then:
http://vrx.net/declaration.html
--
Richard Sexton | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://dns.vrx.net/tech/rootzone
http://killifish.vrx.net
The depth of your thinking would put a jackrabbit to shame.
Is there consensus that this sort of langauge is unacceptible -
personal insults should warrent an apology ?
--
Richard Sexton | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://dns.vrx.net/tech/rootzone
http://killifish.vrx.nethttp://www.mbz.org
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from [d3nnis
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 18:26:00 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jul 10 18:25:59
At 02:14 AM 7/12/99 +0200, Onno Hovers wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bill Lovell wrote:
Would NTIA, ICANN and you and I not all be better off if ICANN immediately
took over the "A" server, stuck it at a neutral place such as NIST out of
the hands of ALL of the wheeler dealers, took over
I've had to remove Craig as his mail has been bouncing for a while.
Could somebody remind him to resubscribe when he asks
somebody what happened to the IFWP mail?
Return-Path:
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 21:44:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mail Delivery
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from ["Ken Stubbs"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 09:19:09 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jul 12
At 01:16 AM 7/14/99 +0200, you wrote:
ICANN has made it VERY clear they ARE restricting entry into the
IANA root
The default root, and you would be surprised how many people believe
that if they don't point to it, their dns/internet will be broken.
You might also be surprised by the
When we have competitive gTLD REGISTRIES, this indeed will be a
consideration for many, especially when it comes to past history.
People DO share experiences. I'm on a number of lists where people do
just that. They will share experiences and make decisions based on
their own experience, and
What if I said "use my root and I'll point you to versions of the TLDs
that filter out known porn sites."
More like "give you access to the porn sites you get get with
*your* ISP with the government controlled root".
--
Richard Sexton | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://dns.vrx.net/tech/rootzone
At 09:25 PM 7/13/99 -0400, Jon Zittrain wrote:
Richard,
To my knowledge the software allowed individual nntp server admins to
decide whether to take all newsgroups or only those they specifically
approved.
Yes but that was a decade later
--
Richard Sexton | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from [Peter Veeck
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 01:12:30 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Jul 14
http://www.dnso.org/wgroups/wg-c-1/Archives/msg00056.html
--
Richard Sexton | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://dns.vrx.net/tech/rootzone
http://killifish.vrx.nethttp://www.mbz.orghttp://lists.aquaria.net
Bannockburn, Ontario, Canada, 70 72 280SE, 83 300SD +1 (613) 473-1719
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from [John Charles Broomfield
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 09:57:55 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from ["Rob Raisch"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 10:17:01 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Jul 14
How do you deal with a clueless membership? Say they
voted unanimously to make anybody with a nameserver
pay $1 everytime sombody used it for a lookup and
if you didn't pay this you couldn't run a nameserver
period.
How do you deal with things like that ?
--
Richard Sexton | [EMAIL
PM 7/14/99 -0400, you wrote:
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 11:07:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard J. Sexton (At work))
Path:
ns3.vrx.net!news2.best.com!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!su-news-hub1.bb
At 06:57 PM 7/15/99 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree that there may be cultural differences, but I disagree this being
one of these. Maybe because that, among all people on the Earth, Italians
are among the most suspicious about Governments. Or maybe because our
Constitution (sorry to
At 10:51 AM 7/16/99 +0200, you wrote:
I have seen press coverage that is biased and ultra-biased, in one direction
and the other,
Can you give some examples ?
--
Richard Sexton | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://dns.vrx.net/tech/rootzone
http://killifish.vrx.nethttp://www.mbz.org
At 06:03 AM 7/16/99 -0400, Joe Sims wrote:
significant funds soon are not good. There is a serious catch-22 here
that for some ICANN critics is probably not coincidental: complain about
the lack of an elected Board, and simultaneously make it impossible to
generate the funds to elect a truly
At 09:38 AM 7/16/99 -0400, Jay Fenello wrote:
-- The law firm of Jones Day, your employer,
has billed ICANN for $585,000, substantially more
than required to simply incorporating a non-profit
entity, and/or to hold elections.
ORSC spent $175 to incorporate, including bylaws that if ICANN
At 12:40 PM 7/16/99 -0700, you wrote:
Patrick Greenwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If ICANN were a community-based organization as was envisioned, instead of
the monstrosity it has become, it would be reasonable to ask the community
for assistance in gather resources to hold elections.
But
An explosion and fire at a Bell Canada CO in downtown Toronto cut off my net
access for the whole day today, which was mildly traumatic ;-}.
This is alsi why the IFWP list was uncommunacative for a few hours
today.
--
Richard Sexton | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://dns.vrx.net/tech/rootzone
At 09:42 AM 7/17/99 -0400, you wrote:
Joop's site is terrific. It's very clever and easy to navigate. It is a very
nice polling site. I estimate his cost for the three trips at around $4500.
David Johnson has an excellent one also.
Add the fact that it isn't just the votes that have to be
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from [Andy Gardner
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 14:13:24 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jul 17
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from ["Roeland M.J. Meyer"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 15:59:08 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jul
Joop's statement about passwords was naive, because a fraudulent
voter *with* a password is no better than a fraudulent voter
*without* a password. The primary problem remains, as Diane pointed
out, authenticating the voters in the first place.
--
Kent Crispin
At 03:01 PM 7/17/99 -0700, you wrote:
On Sat, Jul 17, 1999 at 04:32:37PM -0400, Gene Marsh wrote:
There are clearly other, higher, priorities. The White Paper, the
Green Paper, the MoU with NTIA all quite clearly state that the
stability of the Internet is the highest priority of all, etc.
What's a bigger problem, fraud ot apathy:
http://www.arin.net/archives/arin-members.9811
"So far we have only received 17 ballots. That's right, of the many, many
members we have in ARIN, only 17 have cast votes. Now c'mon folks, we
have more than 17 nominees!"
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from ["Roeland M.J. Meyer"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 19:24:51 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jul
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from [Dave Crocker
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 19:49:12 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jul 17
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from [Dave Crocker
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 19:49:13 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jul 17
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from [Andy Gardner
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 20:28:27 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jul 17
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from [Dave Crocker
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 22:52:05 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jul 17
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from [Dave Crocker
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 22:52:05 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jul 17
At 02:42 PM 7/18/99 -0400, Joe Sims wrote:
Jay, it was a hard lesson, but I've learned that nothing useful comes from
engaging with you, so I don't plan to.
Can you *do* that ?
--
Richard Sexton | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://dns.vrx.net/tech/rootzone
http://killifish.vrx.net
At 03:27 PM 7/18/99 -0700, you wrote:
Sunday, July 18, 1999, 8:54:33 AM, Dave Crocker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In any event my position, now, is that IDNO does not represent the stated
constituency and has much too flawed a history to justify its being selected.
In other words, since the
At 03:53 PM 7/18/99 -0700, you wrote:
I hear that ICANN has run out of money.
Have they published a statement showing the expenses to date.
(I, for one, wouldn't want to to pay the $1 domain name tax [not to
mention the probable eventual $$ for IP address space tax] when there is
no published
Which certainly has its appealing aspects. But 'splain something: I'm
sitting here on, say, a xxx.com or a xxx.net ISP, and I want to search a
.per or a .biz, or more exactly I want to search on whatever, some of
which may happen to be on .per or .biz. Alternatively, I want all the people
on
I guess I don't understand your question then, My apologies.
At 11:36 PM 7/18/99 -0700, you wrote:
At 12:29 AM 7/19/99 -0400, you wrote:
Which certainly has its appealing aspects. But 'splain something: I'm
sitting here on, say, a xxx.com or a xxx.net ISP, and I want to search a
.per or a
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from [Dave Crocker
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 11:21:44 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jul 19
There is a form at http://lists.ifwp.org that you can use to
quickly unsubscribe yourself.
Posting "unsubscribe" to the IFWP list will not work.
--
Richard Sexton | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://dns.vrx.net/tech/rootzone
http://killifish.vrx.nethttp://www.mbz.org
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 12:43:50 +0100
From: Jeff Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Organization: INEG. Inc. (Spokesman INEGroup)
To: ICANN [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: "Esther (The
What level would be fair? I don't know. But as domains currently
cost an individual $35 a year, one would hope the cost would be lower
than this.
$5 - $10. There was some consenss on this in Geneva.
--
Richard Sexton | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://dns.vrx.net/tech/rootzone
Somebody tell Paul he'll need to resubscribe (http://lists.ifwp.org)
his mail has been bouncing for almost 24 hours and I'veunsubbed him
Return-Path:
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Undeliverable mail for [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 19 Jul
At 11:35 PM 7/19/99 -0400, you wrote:
Richard,
All of the TLDA postings, all of the Tom Bliley messages, all of the Esther
Dyson messages, all the messages to James Love, all the messages to Rep.
Tom Sawyer (my representative), and more. None of them are there.
Somboy noticed recently that
At 07:05 PM 7/19/99 -0700, you wrote:
On Mon, Jul 19, 1999 at 10:02:01PM -0400, Gene Marsh wrote:
It is interesting, is it not, that the messages I forwarded to the list
never appeared there.
It rejects cross-postings.
Since when ?
At 08:00 AM 7/20/99 -0700, you wrote:
I actually meant to include the poised list as an example of a place
where I have seen a good amount of support for ICANN as well.
--gregbo
How many people is that ?
--
Richard Sexton | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://dns.vrx.net/tech/rootzone
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from ["Roeland M.J. Meyer"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 12:17:16 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from [Diane Cabell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 17:36:12 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul 20
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from [Dave Crocker
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 18:14:57 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul 20
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from ["Roeland M.J. Meyer"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 18:18:48 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from ["Roeland M.J. Meyer"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 18:49:40 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from [Dave Crocker
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 21:15:45 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul 20
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from ["Roeland M.J. Meyer"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 22:43:13 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul
17 days and counting...
Esther, Mike, Joe,
Is there any particular ICANN view on efforts to set up alternative root
systems? I'd figured that ICANN would be neutral on it--it's got a mandate
to (eventually, if all proceeds a particular way) maintain and manage the
contents of the legacy
..
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Only a dead fish floats downstream.
Richard J. Sexton [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.killi.net
+1 (613) 473 1719 Maitland House, Bannockburn, Ontario, CANADA, K0K 1Y0
--
Richard Sexton | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://dns.vrx.net/tech/roo
At 12:01 AM 7/22/99 +, Kerry Miller wrote:
In this connection, the 'resolution' in introduced
(http://www.icann.org/dnso/dnso-nc-amendments.htm ) "The
following proposed Amendments to the ICANN Bylaws are intended
to implement an evident consensus among participants in the
ICANN process
This was the IFWP - The International Federation for the White Paper.
Thats "Forum" not "Federation".
Nice missive, Karl. Very nice.
--
Richard Sexton | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://dns.vrx.net/tech/rootzone
http://killifish.vrx.nethttp://www.mbz.orghttp://lists.aquaria.net
I think Jay's concern - and mine also, is this. There
are currently 248 companies selling domains under
top level domanis they manage that are currently in
the legacy root servers.
Then, on the other hand, we have maybe a few dozen
companies that also want to manage a top level domain
domain
Why is the congressinal committee so hung up on NSI saynig
"consensus" and implying it means NSI consensus, yet
whenever Mike Roberts or Esther say "it was consensus of the
Inetrnet community" this is not questioned?
--
Richard Sexton | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://dns.vrx.net/tech/rootzone
At 11:33 AM 7/22/99 -0800, you wrote:
My nomination for the best soundbyte of today's Congressional Hearing on
"Domain Name System Privatization: Is ICANN Out of Control?"
"Consensus is a lot like pornography. You know it when you see it."
(Sorry, I don't have
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:Non-member submission from ["Meeks, Brock"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 10:43:55 -0400 (EDT)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Jul 23
301 - 400 of 1006 matches
Mail list logo
