Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #1084
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST           Sunday, March 17 2002           Volume 01 : Number 1084

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 03:33:47 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Registrar Constituency WLS Response to Verisign - A DNSO GA Ballot please...

Rick and all assembly members,

  Rick, thank you for passing this on to everyone.

  It would seem to me that the DNSO GA should also have held
a vote on the WLS and the .ORG delegation statement.  I had requested
these two things before, and received not reply from either Thomas,
or Alexander.  I think Alex had mentioned that the DNSO GA
would be submitting a ballot on the WLS issue.  Alex?   If not,
than again I would like to request again such a ballot be
initiated.

  Given Thomas and Alex's high level of interest in getting the
DNSO GA to be a productive assembly, and of course the
glowing remarks that Esther Dyson recently made with
respect to Alexander, and I am sure none of the GA
members would want to tarnish those glowing remarks,
or Alex in any way.  See Esthers Remarks at:
http://www.atlargestudy.org/forum_archive/msg02672.shtml
it would seem having the proper opportunity for the
DNSO GA members to vote on these issues would seem
to be a very productive thing where the members can
and should participate in a meaningful and constructive
way by voting on these very important issues...  I know
as a domain name holder myself, as with many others
have voiced of late, that these issues effect them directly
and therefore a vote is much more than justified.

Rick Wesson wrote:

> Chuck,
>
> First let me apologize for the tardiness of this response. We needed to
> publish and verify the vote on the attached document in the Registrars
> Constituency (RC) before we could post it to you.
>
> The attached PDF file is the Registrars Constituency response to
> VeriSign's proposed Wait Listing Service (WLS)
>
> The Registrars voting in favor of the response have had their names
> appended as signatories. Also a copy of an associated resolution recently
> passed by the RC is appended to this, our formal response.
>
> The vote results concerning this response are public and may be reviewed
> at http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/registrars/Arc01/msg02193.html
>
> -rick
>
> Rick Wesson
> CTO, Registrars Constituency
>
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                                    Name: final-rc-wls-response.pdf
>    final-rc-wls-response.pdf       Type: Portable Document Format (APPLICATION/PDF)
>                                Encoding: BASE64

Regards,
- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

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

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 01:38:30 -0800
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] ICANN Pretends to Solve ccTLD Problem

Saturday, Saturday, March 16, 2002, 1:03:43 AM, Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:

> "U.S.-based Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
> Numbers (ICANN) announced Thursday afternoon it's the new
> operator of the .jp top-level domain (TLD), providing
> technical and coordination functions for the domain
> extension."

> more: 
> http://www.isp-planet.com/news/2002/icann_020304.html

I know Jim Wagner, the author of this article is on this list, so I'll
address this here.  There is a serious issue with the accuracy of what
is being reported on here.

ICANN is NOT the operator of the .jp top level domain.  Japan Registry
Service Corporation (JPRS) is the new operator, after a redelegation
from JPNIC, and this type of redelegation requires ICANN approval.

http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-28feb02.htm

All ICANN did is approve of the transition.  And that's all the press
release above says as well.   The article Sotiris provided the link to
above grossly misstates what happened and what the press release was
about.

I'd also recommend using quotes from someone more familiar with the
ccTLD community rather than Judith Oppenheimer.  Anyone with some
understanding of the process would have been able to point this out
and help avoid the problem with the accuracy of the article.

- -- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
- --

"There is no better way to exercise the imagination than the study of
the law. No artist ever interpreted nature as freely as a lawyer
interprets the truth."
- -- Jean Giradoux

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

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 04:38:34 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] ICANN Pretends to Solve ccTLD Problem

WXW and all assembly members,

William X Walsh wrote:

> Saturday, Saturday, March 16, 2002, 1:03:43 AM, Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
>
> > "U.S.-based Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
> > Numbers (ICANN) announced Thursday afternoon it's the new
> > operator of the .jp top-level domain (TLD), providing
> > technical and coordination functions for the domain
> > extension."
>
> > more:
> > http://www.isp-planet.com/news/2002/icann_020304.html
>
> I know Jim Wagner, the author of this article is on this list, so I'll
> address this here.  There is a serious issue with the accuracy of what
> is being reported on here.

  Please point out the specific statements that you feel are not
accurate in Jim's article.  I also know Jim a little, and I didn't
see anything in his article that was not consistent with the
well documented facts in various discussions of forums
regarding this change in operators for .JP...

>
>
> ICANN is NOT the operator of the .jp top level domain.  Japan Registry
> Service Corporation (JPRS) is the new operator, after a redelegation
> from JPNIC, and this type of redelegation requires ICANN approval.
>
> http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-28feb02.htm

  And this announcement clearly states that ICANN entered into
an agreement, of which the details are conveniently not specified
and there is no public document providing them, and therefore
is simply and ICANN "Press Release" nothing more...

>
>
> All ICANN did is approve of the transition.

  Yes but under what conditions?  We don't really know do we?

>  And that's all the press
> release above says as well.   The article Sotiris provided the link to
> above grossly misstates what happened and what the press release was
> about.

  Prove it.  I don't see anything in Jim's article that is misleading
or is not already pretty boradly known and has been discussed
on this very forum.

>
>
> I'd also recommend using quotes from someone more familiar with the
> ccTLD community rather than Judith Oppenheimer.  Anyone with some
> understanding of the process would have been able to point this out
> and help avoid the problem with the accuracy of the article.

  Judith's statement was essentially accurate.  To attempt to say otherwise
is inconsistent with honesty.

>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
> --
>
> "There is no better way to exercise the imagination than the study of
> the law. No artist ever interpreted nature as freely as a lawyer
> interprets the truth."
> -- Jean Giradoux
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,
- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

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

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 09:06:04 -0400 (CLT)
From: Patricio Poblete <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] ICANN Pretends to Solve ccTLD Problem

Also, ISP News misquotes itself when it says that last year ccTLDs
"unanimously voted to withdraw from ICANN". If you follow their link,
what it really says is that ccTLDs "voted unanimously last Friday to
withdraw from ICANN's Domain Name Supporting Organization (DNSO)".

As I understand the situation, the agreement with JPRS formalizes the
situation created when JPNIC, the former manager of .JP, decided to
create a for-profit corporation (JPRS) to handle this task.
All the details have been public for a while already. See the IANA
report in

	http://www.iana.org/reports/jp-report-08feb02.htm

See also the information on .JP at the bottom of page

	http://www.icann.org/cctlds/

Patricio Poblete
NIC Chile

[">" = William X Walsh]
> 
> Saturday, Saturday, March 16, 2002, 1:03:43 AM, Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
> 
> > "U.S.-based Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
> > Numbers (ICANN) announced Thursday afternoon it's the new
> > operator of the .jp top-level domain (TLD), providing
> > technical and coordination functions for the domain
> > extension."
> 
> > more: 
> > http://www.isp-planet.com/news/2002/icann_020304.html
> 
> I know Jim Wagner, the author of this article is on this list, so I'll
> address this here.  There is a serious issue with the accuracy of what
> is being reported on here.
> 
> ICANN is NOT the operator of the .jp top level domain.  Japan Registry
> Service Corporation (JPRS) is the new operator, after a redelegation
> from JPNIC, and this type of redelegation requires ICANN approval.
> 
> http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-28feb02.htm
> 
> All ICANN did is approve of the transition.  And that's all the press
> release above says as well.   The article Sotiris provided the link to
> above grossly misstates what happened and what the press release was
> about.
> 
> I'd also recommend using quotes from someone more familiar with the
> ccTLD community rather than Judith Oppenheimer.  Anyone with some
> understanding of the process would have been able to point this out
> and help avoid the problem with the accuracy of the article.
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
> William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
> --
> 
> "There is no better way to exercise the imagination than the study of
> the law. No artist ever interpreted nature as freely as a lawyer
> interprets the truth."
> -- Jean Giradoux
> 
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> 
> 
> 

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

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 18:48:39 +1300 (NZDT)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ga] Accra: Alexander is scribing.

My own grateful thanks posted from Jo'Burg don't seem to have made it
to the list - let me add my thanks also. It has been an excellent
effort.

Regards

Peter Dengate Thrush

> I must say that Alexander and Thomas are an oustanding team for the
GA.
> Bravo! I had some misunderstandings with Thomas so he will know that
> this apraisal  comes from the hart and from real respect. Well done
and
> thank you. Jefsey
>
> On 17:33 14/03/02, Abel Wisman said:
>>Instead of nagging non-english natives about their possible
>>misspellings at times, which at least is more rare then then average
>>native english speaker writing words in a foreign language, is it my
>>opinion that a big and i mean really BIG thank you is sent to those
>>doing all this work.
>>
>>In particular Alex, who could've reasoned it was ICANN's task, but
>>instead simply does the job and Thomas, who spends a lot of hours
on it
>>as well.
>>
>>I think they are a perfect example for the rest when it comes to
>>constructive work.
>>
>>abel

- ----------------------------------------
This email was sent using Actrix WebMail
        http://www.actrix.co.nz

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

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 09:40:00 EST
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] Discussion draft -- ICANN reorganization

I have prepared a preliminary discussion draft on ICANN reorganization, 
published at http://www.icannworld.org/proposal.htm

Perhaps this can pave the way for commentary on the topic by the GA.
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 09:40:17 -0800 (PST)
From: George Kirikos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Registrar Constituency WLS Response to Verisign - A DNSO GA Ballot please...

Hello,

- --- Jeff Williams <[email-masked]> wrote:
>   It would seem to me that the DNSO GA should also have held
> a vote on the WLS and the .ORG delegation statement.  I had requested
> these two things before, and received not reply from either Thomas,
> or Alexander.  I think Alex had mentioned that the DNSO GA
> would be submitting a ballot on the WLS issue.  Alex?   If not,
> than again I would like to request again such a ballot be
> initiated.

There were already multiple opportunities for folks to show their
approval or disapproval of WLS (I don't follow the .org issue much).
Each time, overwhelmingly the GA was against it. I'm not sure what
another vote would prove. It might be a step in the reverse direction,
too, in that a "200-20" vote is just numerical, whereas having folks
provide their name along with their position, as has happened in the
mailing list, is more forceful. Anonymous voting in the age of the
internet would be very difficult (one side could easily sign up a few
hundred or thousand "supporters" to manipulate a vote where the voters
are anonymous). The way the RC did it, with registrars voting in
public, is best, as it's less open to manipulation (similar to how
voice votes were held in ancient Greece).

WLS was mentioned on Slashdot, too, where it was derided.

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/01/14/0649205&mode=thread

It's unclear that Verisign respects democratic institutions, in any
event. At some point (maybe we're well past that already), we might
need a "Magna Carta" to limit the power of this monarchy.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage
http://sports.yahoo.com/
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 15:21:56 -0600
From: Don Brown <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] WLS Humor

A quote from NewsBytes - http://www.newsbytes.com/news/02/173564.html

  But VeriSign spokeswoman Cheryl Regan contends that the demand for
  "recycled" domains is high enough that the service could provide a
  real boon to registrars.

  "We're doing this as a way to help grow new business for
  registrars," Regan said.

roflmao :-)

- ----
Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA     Internet Concepts, Inc.
[email-masked]         http://www.inetconcepts.net
PGP Key ID: 04C99A55              (972) 788-2364  Fax: (972) 788-5049
Providing Internet Solutions Worldwide - An eDataWeb Affiliate
- ----

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

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 15:11:52 -0800 (PST)
From: George Kirikos <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Verisign removing expiration dates from WHOIS Data?

Hello,

Take a look at the WHOIS for the domain name "auction-barn.com"

http://www.netsol.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois?STRING=auction-barn.com&SearchType=do

In particular:

   Record last updated on 15-Mar-2002.
   Record created on 26-Jan-2000.
   Database last updated on 16-Mar-2002 04:35:00 EST.

The "Record Expires" date is missing. 

If VGRS goes ahead with WLS, this is a potentially serious issue, as
consumers might be misled into purchasing WLS slots on names that
expire years in the future, as they'd have no way of knowing when the
name truly expires (let alone when it is released, even if it should be
past expiry). Existing customers and domain owners would also not be
able to check for sure when a name is due to expire, if they can't
check the WHOIS on their own names.

Furthermore, aren't registrars required to show certain data elements
in their WHOIS, as part of their accreditation contracts??

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage
http://sports.yahoo.com/
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 17:41:34 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Discussion draft -- ICANN reorganization

Danny and all assembly members,

  Nice work here Danny.  I liked much of it quite well.  I am forwarding
this on to our members for their review and consideration.
I personally would like to see the DNSO web site provide a link
to your draft...  Again though, nice work.

[email-masked] wrote:

> I have prepared a preliminary discussion draft on ICANN reorganization,
> published at http://www.icannworld.org/proposal.htm
>
> Perhaps this can pave the way for commentary on the topic by the GA.
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,
- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

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

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 15:53:16 -0800 (PST)
From: Rick Wesson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Verisign removing expiration dates from WHOIS Data?

Registrars are required to include the expiration date in their whois.

- -rick

from http://www.icann.org/registrars/ra-agreement-17may01.htm

3.3 Public Access to Data on Registered Names. During the Term of this
Agreement:

3.3.1 At its expense, Registrar shall provide an interactive web page and
a port 43 Whois service providing free public query-based access to
up-to-date (i.e., updated at least daily) data concerning all active
Registered Names sponsored by Registrar for each TLD in which it is
accredited. The data accessible shall consist of elements that are
designated from time to time according to an ICANN adopted specification
or policy. Until ICANN otherwise specifies by means of an ICANN adopted
specification or policy, this data shall consist of the following elements
as contained in Registrar's database:

3.3.1.1 The name of the Registered Name;

3.3.1.2 The names of the primary nameserver and secondary nameserver(s)
for the Registered Name;

3.3.1.3 The identity of Registrar (which may be provided through
Registrar's website);

3.3.1.4 The original creation date of the registration;

3.3.1.5 The expiration date of the registration;

3.3.1.6 The name and postal address of the Registered Name Holder;

3.3.1.7 The name, postal address, e-mail address, voice telephone number,
and (where available) fax number of the technical contact for the
Registered Name; and

3.3.1.8 The name, postal address, e-mail address, voice telephone number,
and (where available) fax number of the administrative contact for the
Registered Name.

On Sat, 16 Mar 2002, George Kirikos wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> Take a look at the WHOIS for the domain name "auction-barn.com"
> 
> http://www.netsol.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois?STRING=auction-barn.com&SearchType=do
> 
> In particular:
> 
>    Record last updated on 15-Mar-2002.
>    Record created on 26-Jan-2000.
>    Database last updated on 16-Mar-2002 04:35:00 EST.
> 
> The "Record Expires" date is missing. 
> 
> If VGRS goes ahead with WLS, this is a potentially serious issue, as
> consumers might be misled into purchasing WLS slots on names that
> expire years in the future, as they'd have no way of knowing when the
> name truly expires (let alone when it is released, even if it should be
> past expiry). Existing customers and domain owners would also not be
> able to check for sure when a name is due to expire, if they can't
> check the WHOIS on their own names.
> 
> Furthermore, aren't registrars required to show certain data elements
> in their WHOIS, as part of their accreditation contracts??
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> George Kirikos
> http://www.kirikos.com/
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage
> http://sports.yahoo.com/
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> 

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

------------------------------

Date: 17 Mar 2002 00:02:51 +0000
From: Abel Wisman <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Verisign removing expiration dates from WHOIS Data?

i guess it is time for another official complaint then, though of curse
getting them in takes days :P

# whois auction-barn.com
[whois.crsnic.net]

Whois Server Version 1.3

Domain names in the .com, .net, and .org domains can now be registered
with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net
for detailed information.

   Domain Name: AUCTION-BARN.COM
   Registrar: NETWORK SOLUTIONS, INC.
   Whois Server: whois.networksolutions.com
   Referral URL: http://www.networksolutions.com
   Name Server: ONYX.NBNET.NB.CA
   Name Server: OPAL.NBNET.NB.CA
   Updated Date: 27-jan-2002

>>> Last update of whois database: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 17:04:58 EST <<<

The Registry database contains ONLY .COM, .NET, .ORG, .EDU domains and
Registrars.

[whois.networksolutions.com]
The Data in the VeriSign Registrar WHOIS database is provided by
VeriSign for
information purposes only, and to assist persons in obtaining
information about
or related to a domain name registration record.  VeriSign does not
guarantee 
its accuracy.  Additionally, the data may not reflect updates to billing
contact
information.  By submitting a WHOIS query, you agree to use this Data
only 
for lawful purposes and that under no circumstances will you use this
Data to:
(1) allow, enable, or otherwise support the transmission of mass
unsolicited,
commercial advertising or solicitations via e-mail, telephone, or
facsimile; or
(2) enable high volume, automated, electronic processes that apply to
VeriSign
(or its computer systems).  The compilation, repackaging, dissemination
or 
other use of this Data is expressly prohibited without the prior written
consent of VeriSign.  VeriSign reserves the right to terminate your
access to 
the VeriSign Registrar WHOIS database in its sole discretion, including 
without limitation, for excessive querying of the WHOIS database or for
failure
to otherwise abide by this policy.  VeriSign reserves the right to
modify these
terms at any time.  By submitting this query, you agree to abide by this
policy.

Registrant:
Donald Long (AUCTION-BARN2-DOM)
   222 Main St
   Doaktown, NB E9C 1B1
   CA

   Domain Name: AUCTION-BARN.COM

   Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Billing Contact:
      Long, Don  (DL16451)  [email-masked]
      Intertech Global Marketing Inc
      222 Main St.
      Doaktown
      NB
      E9C 1B1
      CA
      15063659000 (FAX) 15063658944

   Record last updated on 15-Mar-2002.
   Record created on 26-Jan-2000.
   Database last updated on 16-Mar-2002 04:35:00 EST.

   Domain servers in listed order:

   OPAL.NBNET.NB.CA		198.164.30.2
   ONYX.NBNET.NB.CA		198.164.4.2

On Sat, 2002-03-16 at 23:53, Rick Wesson wrote:
> 
> Registrars are required to include the expiration date in their whois.
> 
> -rick
> 
> from http://www.icann.org/registrars/ra-agreement-17may01.htm
> 
> 3.3 Public Access to Data on Registered Names. During the Term of this
> Agreement:
> 
> 3.3.1 At its expense, Registrar shall provide an interactive web page and
> a port 43 Whois service providing free public query-based access to
> up-to-date (i.e., updated at least daily) data concerning all active
> Registered Names sponsored by Registrar for each TLD in which it is
> accredited. The data accessible shall consist of elements that are
> designated from time to time according to an ICANN adopted specification
> or policy. Until ICANN otherwise specifies by means of an ICANN adopted
> specification or policy, this data shall consist of the following elements
> as contained in Registrar's database:
> 
> 3.3.1.1 The name of the Registered Name;
> 
> 3.3.1.2 The names of the primary nameserver and secondary nameserver(s)
> for the Registered Name;
> 
> 3.3.1.3 The identity of Registrar (which may be provided through
> Registrar's website);
> 
> 3.3.1.4 The original creation date of the registration;
> 
> 3.3.1.5 The expiration date of the registration;
> 
> 3.3.1.6 The name and postal address of the Registered Name Holder;
> 
> 3.3.1.7 The name, postal address, e-mail address, voice telephone number,
> and (where available) fax number of the technical contact for the
> Registered Name; and
> 
> 3.3.1.8 The name, postal address, e-mail address, voice telephone number,
> and (where available) fax number of the administrative contact for the
> Registered Name.
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, 16 Mar 2002, George Kirikos wrote:
> 
> > Hello,
> > 
> > Take a look at the WHOIS for the domain name "auction-barn.com"
> > 
> > http://www.netsol.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois?STRING=auction-barn.com&SearchType=do
> > 
> > In particular:
> > 
> >    Record last updated on 15-Mar-2002.
> >    Record created on 26-Jan-2000.
> >    Database last updated on 16-Mar-2002 04:35:00 EST.
> > 
> > The "Record Expires" date is missing. 
> > 
> > If VGRS goes ahead with WLS, this is a potentially serious issue, as
> > consumers might be misled into purchasing WLS slots on names that
> > expire years in the future, as they'd have no way of knowing when the
> > name truly expires (let alone when it is released, even if it should be
> > past expiry). Existing customers and domain owners would also not be
> > able to check for sure when a name is due to expire, if they can't
> > check the WHOIS on their own names.
> > 
> > Furthermore, aren't registrars required to show certain data elements
> > in their WHOIS, as part of their accreditation contracts??
> > 
> > Sincerely,
> > 
> > George Kirikos
> > http://www.kirikos.com/
> > 
> > 
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage
> > http://sports.yahoo.com/
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> > 
> 
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
- -- 
Abel S.H. Wisman

Scottish Provident House 
76-80 College Road
Harrow Middlesex
HA1 1BQ 
UK
+44 20 8424 2422
+44 78 1214 1916

www.able-towers.com
www.url.org
www.grid9.net
www.telesave.net

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

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 18:03:36 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Registrar Constituency WLS Response to Verisign - A DNSO GA Ballot please...

Geroge and all assembly members,

George Kirikos wrote:

> Hello,
>
> --- Jeff Williams <[email-masked]> wrote:
> >   It would seem to me that the DNSO GA should also have held
> > a vote on the WLS and the .ORG delegation statement.  I had requested
> > these two things before, and received not reply from either Thomas,
> > or Alexander.  I think Alex had mentioned that the DNSO GA
> > would be submitting a ballot on the WLS issue.  Alex?   If not,
> > than again I would like to request again such a ballot be
> > initiated.
>
> There were already multiple opportunities for folks to show their
> approval or disapproval of WLS (I don't follow the .org issue much).
> Each time, overwhelmingly the GA was against it. I'm not sure what
> another vote would prove.

  Well George it would PROVE that first the DNSO GA members
can show their interest and position in a official way to the WLS and
.ORG divestiture proposal.  Second, without an official vote on these
matters, the ICANN BoD can claim that the DNSO GA is a nearly
useless part of the DNSO which they are already trying to do now,
and anyone can latter claim that the DNSO GA members had no
official position on the WLS or the .ORG divestiture issues...

> It might be a step in the reverse direction,
> too, in that a "200-20" vote is just numerical, whereas having folks
> provide their name along with their position, as has happened in the
> mailing list, is more forceful. Anonymous voting in the age of the
> internet would be very difficult (one side could easily sign up a few
> hundred or thousand "supporters" to manipulate a vote where the voters
> are anonymous). The way the RC did it, with registrars voting in
> public, is best, as it's less open to manipulation (similar to how
> voice votes were held in ancient Greece).
>
> WLS was mentioned on Slashdot, too, where it was derided.
>
> http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/01/14/0649205&mode=thread
>
> It's unclear that Verisign respects democratic institutions, in any
> event. At some point (maybe we're well past that already), we might
> need a "Magna Carta" to limit the power of this monarchy.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> George Kirikos
> http://www.kirikos.com/
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage
> http://sports.yahoo.com/

Regards,
- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

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

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 19:07:52 -0500
From: "James Love" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Verisign removing expiration dates from WHOIS Data?

If ICANN is incapable of protecting domain name holders from abusive
practices by Verisign, who should or who has the legal authority to do so?

Jamie

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "George Kirikos" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 6:11 PM
Subject: [ga] Verisign removing expiration dates from WHOIS Data?

> Hello,
>
> Take a look at the WHOIS for the domain name "auction-barn.com"
>
>
http://www.netsol.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois?STRING=auction-barn.com&SearchType
=do
>
> In particular:
>
>    Record last updated on 15-Mar-2002.
>    Record created on 26-Jan-2000.
>    Database last updated on 16-Mar-2002 04:35:00 EST.
>
> The "Record Expires" date is missing.
>
> If VGRS goes ahead with WLS, this is a potentially serious issue, as
> consumers might be misled into purchasing WLS slots on names that
> expire years in the future, as they'd have no way of knowing when the
> name truly expires (let alone when it is released, even if it should be
> past expiry). Existing customers and domain owners would also not be
> able to check for sure when a name is due to expire, if they can't
> check the WHOIS on their own names.
>
> Furthermore, aren't registrars required to show certain data elements
> in their WHOIS, as part of their accreditation contracts??
>
> Sincerely,
>
> George Kirikos
> http://www.kirikos.com/
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage
> http://sports.yahoo.com/
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
>

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

------------------------------

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #1084
*************************