RE: [ga-roots] Jon Postel

[Simon Higgs <simon@higgs.com>]

At 05:37 PM 5/28/01 -0700, you wrote:

Just to clarify, the contract was "sole-sourced" to the IANA/ISI/USC staff. 
The issue is not with the IANA people, but with DoC/NTIA's handling of the 
contract and it's failure to open the bid for Newco/ICANN  to outside 
bidders (like ORSC).

>There were no funding issues.  ISI had the ability to absorb the project
>without further funding, plus there were other research contracts that could
>be used to fund it.
>
>I am not saying anything was fixed, nor was it anywhere implied.  ICANN was
>the eventual contractee, nothing more.  I am sure by the time I am old and
>grey, which is not too far off, there will be plenty of lawsuits to subpoena
>me for.  Fire away.
>
>AFAICT, your accusatory "maybe's" need to be further researched before
>hitting the send button.
>
>Let's stop beating the dead horse.
>
>Josh
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Roeland Meyer [mailto:rmeyer@mhsc.com]
>Sent: Monday, May 28, 2001 5:20 PM
>To: 'Josh Elliott'; Roeland Meyer
>Cc: [Ga-Roots]
>Subject: RE: [ga-roots] Jon Postel
>
>
>AFAICT = As far as I can tell ...
>
>That sounds like a very hedged "maybe" to me ...
>
>wrt 2) there were funding issues, absolutely.
>wrt 3) You're right, contracted services lapse and fail to be renewed. They
>aren't let go. There was a sizable hubbub about this at the time.
>wrt 5) See definition of AFAICT (above)
>wrt 6) You mean that the fix was in since Jun98?  Before the DOC even
>started their evaluation of the competing bids (NewCo, BWG, ORSC)? Before
>even the last meeting of the IFWP? Have you ANY clue about what you are
>saying here? Stand by, you might be subpoena'd, as a witness. If you guys
>weren't worried about funding, you should have been. Else, you just blew the
>covers off some very old stinky fish. I can count at least one FAR violation
>in there.
>
>--
>ROELAND M.J. MEYER
>Managing Director
>Morgan Hill Software Company, Inc.
>TEL: +001 925 373 3954
>FAX: +001 925 373 9781
>http://www.mhsc.com
>mailto: rmeyer@mhsc.com
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Josh Elliott [mailto:josh@basicfusion.com]
> > Sent: Monday, May 28, 2001 4:59 PM
> > To: Roeland Meyer
> > Cc: [Ga-Roots]
> > Subject: RE: [ga-roots] Jon Postel
> >
> >
> > To be more specific about your inaccuracies:
> >
> > 1) Bill Manning was never "outsted", in fact, he did not work
> > on IANA very
> > often.
> > 2) There were no budget cuts or funding cuts
> > 3) Bill was temporarily used to get particular technical
> > projects completed
> > on behalf of IANA, and Mike never let Manning go.
> > 4) You are correct, $600k does not go very far in LA.
> > 5) The statement that IANA did not do anything for 6 months
> > is completely
> > inaccurate, attackful, uninformed, and inappropriate.  A
> > number of people
> > worked their butts off for the IANA project all the time.  Period.
> > 6) Among its regular duties at that time, IANA was working
> > quickly torward
> > the transition to NewCo/ICANN, so all of us were doing more
> > than biting our
> > nails.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Josh
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ga-roots@dnso.org
> > [mailto:owner-ga-roots@dnso.org]On Behalf
> > Of Roeland Meyer
> > Sent: Monday, May 28, 2001 3:03 PM
> > To: 'Simon Higgs'; [ga-roots]
> > Subject: RE: [ga-roots] Jon Postel
> >
> >
> > ICANN took over IANA that Dec98, between 25Dec98 and 1Jan99, including
> > funding. That was when Bill Manning was ousted. It had to
> > happen because USG
> > was cutting their funding, remember? This is also why I said
> > ORSC needed to
> > be backed up by funding. A large chunk of ICANN's original
> > $600K went to
> > IANA operations. A lot of folks looked to Mike Roberts for
> > letting Manning
> > go, but the truth of the matter is that there wasn't enough
> > funds for the
> > head-count ($600K doesn't stretch very far in Los Angeles).
> >
> > AFAICT, IANA did absolutely nothing between Jul98 and Jan99
> > (except bite
> > their nails, maybe).
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Simon Higgs [mailto:simon@higgs.com]
> > > Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2001 2:51 AM
> > > To: [ga-roots]
> > > Subject: RE: [ga-roots] Jon Postel
> > >
> > >
> > > At 08:09 AM 5/25/01 -0700, Josh Elliott wrote:
> > >
> > > Who all worked for the IANA with Jon? As I understand it, it
> > > was a four
> > > person task with 0.25 person budget.
> > >
> > > Also, how did it change after Jon died?
> > >
> > > >Patrick,
> > > >
> > > >There are a few details I would dispute, but the only real
> > > important one is
> > > >that IANA only existed until late 1998, which is entirely
> > > incorrect.  The
> > > >IANA still exists today under ICANN management, and before
> > ICANN took
> > > >control contractually for IANA, it still operated without
> > > the direction of
> > > >Jon Postel in late 1998.
> > > >
> > > >Thanks,
> > > >
> > > >Josh (former IANA Administrator)
> > > >
> > > >Josh Elliott, President & CEO
> > > >Basic Fusion, Inc.
> > > >
> > > >josh@basicfusion.com
> > > >+1 661 254 8701 (Work)
> > > >+1 661 287 3523 (Fax)
> > > >+1 818 470 1040 (Mobile)
> > > >
> > > >-----Original Message-----
> > > >From: owner-ga-roots@dnso.org
> > > [mailto:owner-ga-roots@dnso.org]On Behalf
> > > >Of Patrick Corliss
> > > >Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 7:50 AM
> > > >To: NameCritic
> > > >Cc: [ga-roots]
> > > >Subject: [ga-roots] Jon Postel
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >On Fri, 25 May 2001 04:10:16 -0700, William X. Walsh wrote:
> > > >Subject: Re[4]: (Fwd) Re: [ga-roots] alternate roots
> > > considered harmful
> > > >
> > > > > Hello NameCritic,
> > > > >
> > > > > Friday, May 25, 2001, 3:41:28 AM, NameCritic wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >> You obviously do not know your domain history very well.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Or you do not William. Are you saying there was never a
> > > time when all
> > > > > > you had to do was ask Jon Postel for a domain name to get one?
> > > > >
> > > > > A top level domain?  Yes, I am.
> > > >
> > > >http://www.cctec.com/maillists/nanog/historical/9603/msg00108.html
> > > >Just a small quibble David:  when you say "the IANA"
> > > decided, it gives
> > > >the impression that an august group of people like the IESG
> > > took action.
> > > >In reality "the IANA" is but a SINGLE person - John
> > Postel.  If some
> > > >people are upset I suspect it might be because the power to
> > > make such a
> > > >decision is vested in the hands of ONE person rather than
> > in a group.
> > > >
> > > >http://www.tftb.com/ICANN.html
> > > >That the system has worked as well as it has is largely a
> > > tribute to the
> > > >work of one man, Dr. John Postel, the recently deceased
> > > director of the
> > > >Internet Assigned Numbers Authority.
> > > >
> > > >http://www.u.arizona.edu/~wfoster/whogoverns.html
> > > >InterNIC gets its authority to delegate both IP address and
> > > domain names
> > > >from the Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA). IANA,
> > > which is run by
> > > >John Postel, has historically been responsible for unique
> > > parameters that
> > > >are required by IETF protocols. Though IANA had given most
> > > countries the
> > > >right to operate their own TLD and assign secondary domain
> > > names within it,
> > > >the .com TLD has developed a cachet not only for United
> > > States businesses
> > > >but for businesses all over the world.
> > > >
> > > >http://www.murdoch.edu.au/elaw/issues/v6n1/blakeney61_text.html
> > > >The IANA also allocated the right to administer country code
> > > TLDs to local
> > > >Network Information Centres (NICs) or to local corporations.
> > > For example the
> > > ><.co.uk>, <.ltd.uk>, <.plc.uk>, <.net.uk> and <.org.uk>
> > > domain names are
> > > >administered by Nominet UK Limited (Nominet).
> > > >
> > > >http://www.isocnz.org.nz/international/cctld000728report-best
> > > -practice.html
> > > >CENTR's view is that complete authority was transferred by
> > > John Postel to
> > > >the local manager, and all issues, including re-delegation,
> > > are a matter for
> > > >the local courts in the country associated with the ccTLDs.
> > > >
> > > >http://www.isocnz.org.nz/international/cctld000728report-best
> > > -practice.html
> > > >Nominet (the manager of .uk) has taken US legal advice,
> > > which is to the
> > > >effect that the UK registry has a contract with either the
> > > estate of John
> > > >Postel, or his employer (effectively the University of
> > > Southern California).
> > > >Nominet has not consented to any transfer of the benefits or
> > > obligations
> > > >under that contract to ICANN, and does not recognise any
> > > ICANN authority
> > > >over the UK registry.
> > > >
> > > >http://www.zakon.org/robert/internet/timeline/
> > > >1988.  Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA)
> > > established in December
> > > >with Jon Postel as its Director. Postel was also the RFC
> > > Editor and US
> > > >Domain registrar for many years.
> > > >
> > > >http://www.zakon.org/robert/internet/timeline/
> > > >1989.  Countries connecting to NSFNET: Australia (AU),
> > > Germany (DE), Israel
> > > >(IL), Italy (IT), Japan (JP), Mexico (MX), Netherlands (NL),
> > > New Zealand
> > > >(NZ), Puerto Rico (PR), United Kingdom (UK)
> > > >
> > > >http://www.iiia.org/lists/newdom/1995q3/0239.html
> > > >Actually, while the InterNIC processes the requests for the
> > > two-letter
> > > >country code TLDs and does the interactions with the
> > applicants, the
> > > >IANA is in the loop on approving each one. So the ultimate
> > > approval of
> > > >each (ISO-3166) two-letter country code TLD has always and
> > > continues to
> > > >involve an approval step by the IANA.
> > > >
> > >
> > >http://www.itu.int/newsarchive/press/releases/1998/PostelLegacy.html
> > > >Few organizations have played as critical a role as the
> > > IANA. Unique numbers
> > > >and unique names must be assigned and managed. The IANA
> > has allocated
> > > >Internet protocol addresses and maintained a registry of the
> > > unique values
> > > >required for the Internet to work. This has been IANA's task
> > > from the very
> > > >beginning.
> > > >
> > > >http://www.net99.org/presentations/Bernard_Turcotte/tsld002.htm
> > > >The top level DNS system was under the administration of
> > the Internet
> > > >Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) and its director John
> > > Postel until late
> > > >1998.  IANA administered the TLD system and the IP address system
> > > >internationally without any formal authority.
> > > >
> > > >See http://www.auda.org.au/docs/letter-com.au.html
> > > >com.au Letter of Authority
> > > >15 November 1999
> > > >
> > > >.au Domain Administration
> > > >255 Elizabeth Street
> > > >Sydney NSW 2000
> > > >
> > > >Dear Sirs
> > > >
> > > >The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority ("IANA") has delegated to
> > > >me the authority to manage the .au namespace.
> > > >
> > > >I hereby now delegate to you full authority to manage the .com.au
> > > >namespace, which is a subset of the .au namespace (the "Domain").
> > > >
> > > ><snip>
> > > >
> > > >In the event that I am succeeded as the delegated authority for
> > > >the .au namespace, my successor shall assume all the rights and
> > > >obligations accruing to me under my arrangement with IANA and
> > > >this arrangement with you.
> > > >
> > > >I trust that you will administer the Domain in a fair and
> > > >responsible manner.
> > > >
> > > >Yours sincerely
> > > >Robert Elz
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Regards
> > > >Patrick Corliss
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >--
> > > >This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
> > > >Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > > >("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
> > > >Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> > > >
> > > >--
> > > >This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
> > > >Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > > >("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
> > > >Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> > >
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > >
> > > Simon Higgs
> > >
> > > --
> > > It's a feature not a bug...
> > >
> > > --
> > > This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
> > > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > > ("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
> > > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> > >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
> > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
> > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >
>
>--
>This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
>Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
>("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
>Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html


Best Regards,

Simon Higgs

--
It's a feature not a bug...

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html