Just to keep the record straight, it was Amendment 4 (September 13, 1995),
not Amendment 11, that changed the Cooperative Agreement from cost + fixed
fee to a structure that allowed the collection of fees from registrants.
Amendment 11 (October 7, 1998) extended the Cooperative Agreement through
September 30, 2000.
It has always been surprising to me that General Atomics and ATT, who were
part of the initial InterNIC, received no flack for notholding up their
portion of the Cooperative Agreement. Maybe ATT did some work but their
Annual Report of, I believe 1996 didn't even mention that role.
>> For the historians:
>
>> >>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.
>
>
>NSF and NSI had a legally enforceable agreement. Before amendment #11
>(the one that created the fee-for-registration structure) that agreement,
>obligated NSF to cover NSI's costs and pay an additional fee (i.e. a
>guaranteed profit.) One can't offer much sympathy if NSI's management
>didn't demand that NSF live up to its legal obligations and instead simply
>loaded more work on its employees.
>
>And today, as a result of NSF's largess and grant of a protected monopoly
>to NSI isn't the current market value in the hands of NSI's shareholders
>now several billion dollars?
>
>One can't say that, from the point of view of NSI's stockholders, that NSI
>was undercompensated for work done.
>
> --karl--
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
Ellen Rony // http://www.domainhandbook.com
Co-author *=" ____ / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Domain Name Handbook \ ) +1 415.435.5010
// \\ "Carpe canine"
The more people I meet, the more I like my dog.
