Joe and all,
Oh thank you joe for this obviously politically motivated response to
Chucks comments. It strikes me that as both somewhat disingenuous
and ironic given the PR enhanced "ICANN Announcements" that
have been "Shared" (Sarcasm) with us all...
Joe Sims wrote:
> If the reason that NSI can only support a limited number of new competitive
> registrars is a resource problem, one possible solution that would help to
> increase competition (which I know you are on record as favoring) would be
> to redirect some of your resources that are currently allocated to
> marketing or political activity to this problem. Just a suggestion.
>
>
> (Embedded
> image moved [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> to file: 07/11/99 07:54 PM
> pic29080.pcx)
>
>
> Extension:
>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> cc: (bcc: Joe Sims/JonesDay)
> Subject: RE: [IDNO-DISCUSS] Re: [IFWP] RE: who tells the quill
> holder what
>
> Bill,
>
> Please clarify for me how NSI is a domain name speculator. That's a charge
> I haven't heard before.
>
> Also, please help me understand what the practice of invoicing for domain
> names has to do with limiting the number of registrars that can be
> implemented at one time. The first issue is a registrar issue. The second
> is a registry issue. It should come as no surprise that a considerable
> amount of support is provided to implement new registrars, so the more that
> are in the pipeline at the same time, the more resources are required.
> That
> does not seem like a very complicated concept.
>
> Chuck Gomes
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Bill Lovell [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Sunday, July 11, 1999 7:59 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [IDNO-DISCUSS] Re: [IFWP] RE: who tells the
> > quill holder what
> >
> > At 06:26 PM 7/11/99 -0400, domainiac wrote:
> > >>Almost every major ISP does exactly this becasue it
> > >>enhances high-availability architectures and eliminates the
> > >>root-servers.net machines as external points of failure (EPOF). When
> > >--
> > >>I've done work with 8 area ISPs, and not a single one does this
> > >>Roland. I seriously doubt very many ISPs at all do this.
> > >--
> > >Here are some articles that touch on this point:
> > >
> > > <http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/17973.html>
> > >
> > > <http://news.com/News/Item/0,4,32591,00.html>?
> >
> > Ironic, I would say. NSI, the ultimate domain name speculator, pretends
> > to
> > thwart the practice which it promulgated by permitting registrations
> while
> > not paying for them, thus causing a work overload (if they are to be
> > believed)
> > that precludes them from signing up more than 5 competitors a month. It
> > is
> > becoming increasingly apparent that NSI's attempts to hold on to its
> > monopoly
> > as long as possible, and to wring every $ out of the system while it can,
> > continue unabated. There is no obstacle to stable, efficient operation
> of
> > the
> > internet that NSI will not arbitrarily impose in its own interests. With
> > ever
> > increasing arrogance, it pushes the envelope as far as possible and
> > beyond,
> > in spite of warnings by NTIA that it has been acting outside of its
> > authority
> > (and when has it not?). 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
> > domain names and the whole schmear, and sent NSI packing back into a
> > well deserved oblivion? It is now quite beyond argument that NSI cannot
> > be trusted either as the registry or in any other capacity.
> >
> > Bill Lovell
> >
> > P. S. As to the steps noted below, good move!
> > >
> > >The news.com article the number of total zone file subscriptions was
> > about
> > >500 and that included users who used the zone files for other reasons.
> > >
> > >This brings up another issue about NSI's and the zone files. NSI is
> > >requiring companies to tell NSI why they are using the zone files before
> > NSI
> > >will even send a copy of the agreement to access the zone files. These
> > >companies are often competing with NSI for the same customers for
> > services
> > >outside the scope of the Internic function (domain hosting, e-mail
> > >forwarding, etc.). In addition, NSI put stipulations in the agreement
> > that
> > >they could cut off access in the future at their discretion.
> > >
> > >I therefore asked for zone file access through NTIA via FOIA. Kathy
> > Smith,
> > >chief counsel for NTIA wrote back and said they did search for zone
> files
> > >but they couldn't find them! I appealed this based on the fact the
> > records
> > >are under the control of NTIA under the cooperative agreement with NSI.
> > I
> > >am waiting for a response.
> > >
> > >Russ Smith
> > > <http://domainia.org/>
> > >
> >
>
>
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!)
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
