William and all,
William X. Walsh wrote:
> On 22-Mar-99 A.M. Rutkowski wrote:
> > Over the coming months, there will be more NSI-like
> > registrars, as well as new TLD registries. Their sites will look
> > like search engine and other effective provider sites everywhere -
> > using every available means to attract and retain customers.
> >
> > A year from now, this will be a fuzzy initial edge of a much
> > broader transition we will only vaguely recollect.
>
> I'd like to know why you believe there were be new TLD registries in "the
> coming months."
"were be"? Don't you mean "Will be" here William? I hope so anyway. >;)
If it is "Will be" that you mean, it is likely that NSI will be obligated to add
new TLD's to the current legacy root structure as is inferred in the cooperative
agreement as well as the White paper. or potentially they will be adding some
of their own.
>
>
> Everything I have seen indicates that is months if not years away.
Possibly, but not necessarily. In fact it is, and can be done now. Use
you imagination and determine a method to make them globally seen.
Just a hint...
>
>
> I think you are trying to paint this as something inconsequential that will be
> resolved shortly, when there really is nothing to support that.
An very interesting and definitive comment, that also has no relevant
means of support...
>
>
> First of all, NSI should NOT have the right to point the internic.net domain
> name to their new registrar site.
Why WIlliam? They are REQUIRED to meet the terms of the extension of
the co-operative agreement. They have done so. The fact that you don't
like the method in which NSI did this is unfortunate, and to a degree I agree
with you. But this does not mean that they do not have a RIGHT to do so.
> No other registrar gets to benefit from the
> traffic of what was the former "registry" no matter what Chuck and NSI's
> management calls it. Further, ISPs are deeply affected by this change.
And those ISP's should have known that it was coming.
> NSI may
> not feel they have any obligation to them, but they are deeply affected by such
> changes. I know of one who is so angry at NSI he is pointing their domain
> names to a local site in his dns in protest, and tell his customers they can
> register names through his interfaces at no charge.
Good! This is a good start in a small way as to provide alternative's to
using NSI for his customers. The real question here is why this fellow
you mention didn't provide an alternative originally.....
> ISPs that formerly linked
> to the internic site did so because it was a "neutral" and safe thing to do.
THings change. The business needs of NSI and their direction can change
as is directed from the NTIA towards NSI. This has been known sense
september of last year.
>
> Without notice, NSI took advantage of that and forwarded that domain to a site
> that advertises services that directly compete with them, including web
> hosting (the .com business card is nothing more than a single page webhosting
> service, no matter what you call it).
No it was not totally without Notice William, and you know it isn't.
>
>
> NSI claimed to stand for an open and fair transition to a competitive market,
> but its actions speak to a totally different attitude.
Not completely true WIlliam. You insistence, though falsely stated will not
and cannot make it so. NSI made an announcement to completely comply
with the DOC/NTIA's requirements under the extension of the co-operative
agreement in February. It may indeed have been a rather bland and somewhat
cryptic, but it was announced and posted on this list and others as well.
>
>
> Your coloring of this situation differently is disingenious Tony, and nothing
> more than trying to paint a rosey picture for your client.
This is a false claim WIlliam, and you are well aware that it is. Your
continuing
to spread false aspersions on others is paramount to your creditability. This
comment is a blatant example of your attitude and actions stands as yet
another glaring example...
>
>
> ----------------------------------
> William X. Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> General Manager, DSo Internet Services
> Date: 22-Mar-99
> Time: 14:24:55
> ----------------------------------
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
