For the historians:
>>From: Her Holiness the Dalai Lauren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Subject: Re: .COM history
>>Message-ID: <gX2C1.74$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 23:22:52 GMT
>>
>>NOTE: The rant that follows is not directed at Greg.
>>I forget who started the 'carpet-baggers' notion...
>>
>>When I worked at the InterNIC (1995-1997) we discovered the
>>first registered .NET belonged to NORDU.NET of Norway.
>>
>>And contrary to the beliefs of some in this thread, we did
>>reject .NET requests... 6 staffers were tasked to read the
>>lame comments section (it became fewer after the parsers in
>>the template were enhanced). The problem was the RFC was
>>too broad and an agreed upon definition of 'ISP' couldn't
>>really be had for rejection purposes.
>>
>>Besides, the folks who were mass submitting were clever.
>>Why is that fact always left out? With every block we
>>put in place they came up with additional spoofs... and
>>look what we have now? Hundreds of bogus entries and
>>parties fighting over unjustly registered names... I feel
>>for companies that were rejected when registering their
>>trademarked names. Many of us were happy to throw the one
>>domain name per person rule out the window... it only hurt
>>the honest. The Internet evolved... too bad the namespace
>>didn't keep up. Generic domains outlived their day. I
>>know Duane Stone pushed for 'authoritative decision-making'
>>outside the InterNIC walls. It would have been inappropriate
>>for the Registrar to junk the broken system but a void in
>>leadership was faced and Duane's pleas went unanswered as
>>the problems became more complex.
>>
>>In growth from 400 requests per day total - including
>>new, modify & delete for domains, contact updates, host
>>updates - to 25,000 and up per day much of the focus became
>>turn-around time and protection of data being updated via
>>authentication. Policing was not given much priority under
>>the technology & funding constraints. Who wanted to move
>>to the paper-trail update process now in place? Not a
>>single DNS/hostmaster in 1995 that I knew of. We did the
>>best we could with e-mail.
>>
>>It is funny how so many people point fingers now about
>>the evils of SRI or NSI but if you could have seen the
>>chaos... We had to answer the phone with questions ranging
>>from 'what is the Internet' to 'my mouse isn't working with
>>this software package and you're the Network Information
>>Center you'd know why'. So many who worked for bogus pay,
>>usually long hours, because they were trying to help out
>>the ISP community remain silent. And bitter. With reason.
>>
>>Do people realize that it wasn't even in the budget to
>>have the 14 of us handling in-addrs, ip allocation/assignment,
>>SWIP, all of the domain name issues and answer the phones in
>>early 1995? The whole registration process/budget was not
>>designed for vanity-tagging the Internet. NSF did not
>>intend to fund that purpose. NSI pulled the funds from
>>other network integration projects to cover the cost of
>>the staff, office space, phone systems that blew out the
>>building due to volume of callers, computers for us to
>>type on. Then the IS.InterNIC.Net role got smushed into
>>the RS.InterNIC.Net role... hmm, that is rarely mentioned.
>>
>>Not pleading poverty... pleading for adjustments to an
>>unforseen force majure of sorts. Logical request that
>>fell on deaf ears. The 5 yr. budgets were worked out far
>>in advance of the flood that hit in 1995.
>>
>>Okay, now that I'm on a rant that seems to be stuffed under
>>the carpet... where were the DS.InterNIC.Net folks? What
>>happened to their efforts at Directory Services? Why did
>>the world start to default to the Registry Services as the
>>end all? Hmm.
>>
>>Evolve folks. Quit hunting down history to point fingers
>>at a system never designed to handle the task at hand.
>>
>>Off to hunt down another cup of coffee.
>>-Ren, formerly [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED]/
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED], etc.
>>
>>Greg Skinner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>: In article <6qg8jk$1h6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>: Richard J. Sexton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>:>I can't say with certainty when .net and .org came about, but they are
>>:>documented in RFC1591.
>>
>>: CSNET was one of the first users of .net, I believe. UUNET also.
>>: If Laura Breeden or Rick Adams (respectively) are around, they may be
>>: able to give exact dates for their registration into those domains.
>>
>>: --gregbo
>>: gds at best.com
>>
>>--
>>-As Ever, Her Holiness the Dalai Lauren - [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ph-1.613.473.1719
It's about travel on expense accounts to places with good beer. - BKR
