Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #1088
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST           Monday, March 18 2002           Volume 01 : Number 1088

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

Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 23:13:40 -0800
From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Verisign removing expiration dates from WHOIS Data?

The original message was sent on the 15th.

Joanna Lane wrote:
> 
> Maybe because Verisign doesn't pay it's ICANN reps to work at 11.30pm on a
> Sunday night?
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Sotiris
> Sotiropoulos
> Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 1:56 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [ga] Verisign removing expiration dates from WHOIS Data?
> 
> Why hasn't the Verisign rep in the DNSO responded to this
> thread as yet?
> 
> Genie Livingstone wrote:
> >
> > Isn't  publishing domain expiration date =  direct violation of ICANN
> > Registrar Accreditation Agreement??  ((But since when did Verisign care
> > about some ICANN rules))
> >
> > (see Paragraph F-1-f )
> >
> > http://www.icann.org/nsi/icann-raa-04nov99.htm#IIF1a
> >
> > F. Public Access to Data on SLD Registrations. During the term of this
> > Agreement:
> >
> > 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 SLD
> > registrations sponsored by Registrar in the registry for the .com, .net,
> > and .org TLDs. The data accessible shall consist of elements that are
> > designated from time to time according to an ICANN-adopted policy. Until
> > ICANN otherwise specifies by means of an ICANN-adopted policy, this data
> > shall consist of the following elements as contained in Registrar's
> > database:
> >
> > a. The name of the SLD being registered and the TLD for which
> > registration is being requested;
> >
> > b. The IP addresses of the primary nameserver and secondary
> > nameserver(s) for the SLD;
> >
> > c. The corresponding names of those nameservers;
> >
> > d. The identity of Registrar (which may be provided through Registrar's
> > website);
> >
> > e. The original creation date of the registration;
> >
> > f. The expiration date of the registration;
> >
> > g. The name and postal address of the SLD holder;
> >
> > h. The name, postal address, e-mail address, voice telephone number, and
> > (where available) fax number of the technical contact for the SLD; and
> >
> > i. The name, postal address, e-mail address, voice telephone number, and
> > (where available) fax number of the administrative contact for the SLD.
> >
> > Genie Livingstone
> > eyeondomain.com
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Don Brown" <[email-masked]>
> > To: "George Kirikos" <[email-masked]>
> > Cc: <[email-masked]>
> > Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 5:18 PM
> > Subject: Re: [ga] Verisign removing expiration dates from WHOIS Data?
> >
> > > Moreover, if WLS becomes reality, it is a serious ICANN issue, since
> > > there is no bottoms-up consensus to support it.
> > >
> > > There are those in favor, of course, but how many of them are
> > > potential benefactors of new, found income from it? I'd guess that to
> > > be the majority.
> > >
> > > It is interesting that VeriSign presents WLS as a way for it to help
> > > grow business for the Registrars (per the press release/quote below),
> > > but the Registrars who represent the majority of registrations have
> > > taken a position in opposition to WLS. Could it be that those
> > > Registrar's have noses that know the difference between chicken salad
> > > and chicken S*&%? I'd guess it is so, as well.
> > >
> > > If WLS becomes reality, the expiration date is really a minor
> > > consideration in the total scope of things.  There will be much bigger
> > > fish to fry.
> > >
> > >
> > > 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 :-)
> > >
> > >
> > > Saturday, March 16, 2002, 5:11:52 PM, George Kirikos
> > <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > > GK> Hello,
> > >
> > > GK> Take a look at the WHOIS for the domain name "auction-barn.com"
> > >
> > > GK>
> > http://www.netsol.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois?STRING=auction-barn.com&Search
> > Type=do
> > >
> > > GK> In particular:
> > >
> > > GK>    Record last updated on 15-Mar-2002.
> > > GK>    Record created on 26-Jan-2000.
> > > GK>    Database last updated on 16-Mar-2002 04:35:00 EST.
> > >
> > > GK> The "Record Expires" date is missing.
> > >
> > > GK> If VGRS goes ahead with WLS, this is a potentially serious issue,
> > as
> > > GK> consumers might be misled into purchasing WLS slots on names that
> > > GK> expire years in the future, as they'd have no way of knowing when
> > the
> > > GK> name truly expires (let alone when it is released, even if it
> > should be
> > > GK> past expiry). Existing customers and domain owners would also not
> > be
> > > GK> able to check for sure when a name is due to expire, if they can't
> > > GK> check the WHOIS on their own names.
> > >
> > > GK> Furthermore, aren't registrars required to show certain data
> > elements
> > > GK> in their WHOIS, as part of their accreditation contracts??
> > >
> > > GK> Sincerely,
> > >
> > > GK> George Kirikos
> > > GK> http://www.kirikos.com/
> > >
> > >
> > > GK> __________________________________________________
> > > GK> Do You Yahoo!?
> > > GK> Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage
> > > GK> http://sports.yahoo.com/
> > > GK> --
> > > GK> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > > GK> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > > GK> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > > GK> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----
> > > 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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > 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
> 
> --
> Sincerely,
> 
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
>         Hermes Network Inc.
>         Toronto, Canada
> 
> ----
> direct: 416.422.1034
> 
> icq: 34564103
> --
> 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

- -- 
Sincerely,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
	Hermes Network Inc.
	Toronto, Canada

- ----
direct: 416.422.1034

icq: 34564103
- --
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: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 22:42:19 -0800
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] posting limits

Censorship is wrong and hurts the credibility of any open and
transparent methodology.

Five posts a day limit is just silly.  If any limit was imposed it
should be by character count.

If you are in emerging country dialling up at some remote Internet
location it is better to get 7 short messages
than two long ones, so I believe this rule is a direct discrimination
against poorer countries and poorer users.

I also think this suspension creates a block to Alexander being
considered for Ester's post in the AL.

I assume Jeff will have no problem routing around this inconvenience.

Sincerely,
Eric

(could the motivation here been JW's opposition to Ester's appointment
of AS?)

- --
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: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 22:52:03 -0800
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Loss of the User

Well the current events have certainly left one group out of the loop.

The individual user had completely lost all representativeness in ICANN.

We now have just dropped from even remotely considering the millions of
users.

Perhaps that is a good thing.  Being blatant about not caring about them
creates an environment where others may fill the void.  Those of us
watching and learning about self governance are being given wonderful
models on which to build a truly bottom up process.

Sincerely,
Eric

- --
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: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 23:10:15 -0800
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Verisign removing expiration dates from WHOIS Data?

- --------------7EBBEB53DF07BF44D0DF3B2D
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

The rules are simple;

Don't do it.  Unless someone changes the rules they should not do it.
There is nothing for a Rep to discuss.

Right now there is absolutely no business reason for Verisign to honor contracts
with ICANN.
What the hell are they going to do about a breach of contract?  They certainly
are in no position to enforce a contract through the courts.  If Verisign
stopped paying them today, there is not a thing ICANN could do about it except
whine.  As a matter of fact Verisign may well find liability in giving ICANN any
money.

I do not even think there are grounds for the DoC to enforce the third party
beneficiary contract with Verisign because they have not enforced their own
contracts dealing with ICANN.  Repeatedly not doing the right thing leads to a
course of conduct and business dealing scenario that is a quagmire.

By Lynn's statements and by ICANN's lack of conduct they are virtually dead
meat.  Vint has only added to that problem this weekend with weak and poorly
worded public comments, I can almost feel sorry for Louis.

Sincerely,
Eric

Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:

> The original message was sent on the 15th.
>
> Joanna Lane wrote:
> >
> > Maybe because Verisign doesn't pay it's ICANN reps to work at 11.30pm on a
> > Sunday night?
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Sotiris
> > Sotiropoulos
> > Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 1:56 AM
> > To: [email-masked]
> > Cc: [email-masked]
> > Subject: Re: [ga] Verisign removing expiration dates from WHOIS Data?
> >
> > Why hasn't the Verisign rep in the DNSO responded to this
> > thread as yet?
> >
> > Genie Livingstone wrote:
> > >
> > > Isn't  publishing domain expiration date =  direct violation of ICANN
> > > Registrar Accreditation Agreement??  ((But since when did Verisign care
> > > about some ICANN rules))
> > >
> > > (see Paragraph F-1-f )
> > >
> > > http://www.icann.org/nsi/icann-raa-04nov99.htm#IIF1a
> > >
> > > F. Public Access to Data on SLD Registrations. During the term of this
> > > Agreement:
> > >
> > > 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 SLD
> > > registrations sponsored by Registrar in the registry for the .com, .net,
> > > and .org TLDs. The data accessible shall consist of elements that are
> > > designated from time to time according to an ICANN-adopted policy. Until
> > > ICANN otherwise specifies by means of an ICANN-adopted policy, this data
> > > shall consist of the following elements as contained in Registrar's
> > > database:
> > >
> > > a. The name of the SLD being registered and the TLD for which
> > > registration is being requested;
> > >
> > > b. The IP addresses of the primary nameserver and secondary
> > > nameserver(s) for the SLD;
> > >
> > > c. The corresponding names of those nameservers;
> > >
> > > d. The identity of Registrar (which may be provided through Registrar's
> > > website);
> > >
> > > e. The original creation date of the registration;
> > >
> > > f. The expiration date of the registration;
> > >
> > > g. The name and postal address of the SLD holder;
> > >
> > > h. The name, postal address, e-mail address, voice telephone number, and
> > > (where available) fax number of the technical contact for the SLD; and
> > >
> > > i. The name, postal address, e-mail address, voice telephone number, and
> > > (where available) fax number of the administrative contact for the SLD.
> > >
> > > Genie Livingstone
> > > eyeondomain.com
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Don Brown" <[email-masked]>
> > > To: "George Kirikos" <[email-masked]>
> > > Cc: <[email-masked]>
> > > Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 5:18 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [ga] Verisign removing expiration dates from WHOIS Data?
> > >
> > > > Moreover, if WLS becomes reality, it is a serious ICANN issue, since
> > > > there is no bottoms-up consensus to support it.
> > > >
> > > > There are those in favor, of course, but how many of them are
> > > > potential benefactors of new, found income from it? I'd guess that to
> > > > be the majority.
> > > >
> > > > It is interesting that VeriSign presents WLS as a way for it to help
> > > > grow business for the Registrars (per the press release/quote below),
> > > > but the Registrars who represent the majority of registrations have
> > > > taken a position in opposition to WLS. Could it be that those
> > > > Registrar's have noses that know the difference between chicken salad
> > > > and chicken S*&%? I'd guess it is so, as well.
> > > >
> > > > If WLS becomes reality, the expiration date is really a minor
> > > > consideration in the total scope of things.  There will be much bigger
> > > > fish to fry.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 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 :-)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Saturday, March 16, 2002, 5:11:52 PM, George Kirikos
> > > <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > > > GK> Hello,
> > > >
> > > > GK> Take a look at the WHOIS for the domain name "auction-barn.com"
> > > >
> > > > GK>
> > > http://www.netsol.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois?STRING=auction-barn.com&Search
> > > Type=do
> > > >
> > > > GK> In particular:
> > > >
> > > > GK>    Record last updated on 15-Mar-2002.
> > > > GK>    Record created on 26-Jan-2000.
> > > > GK>    Database last updated on 16-Mar-2002 04:35:00 EST.
> > > >
> > > > GK> The "Record Expires" date is missing.
> > > >
> > > > GK> If VGRS goes ahead with WLS, this is a potentially serious issue,
> > > as
> > > > GK> consumers might be misled into purchasing WLS slots on names that
> > > > GK> expire years in the future, as they'd have no way of knowing when
> > > the
> > > > GK> name truly expires (let alone when it is released, even if it
> > > should be
> > > > GK> past expiry). Existing customers and domain owners would also not
> > > be
> > > > GK> able to check for sure when a name is due to expire, if they can't
> > > > GK> check the WHOIS on their own names.
> > > >
> > > > GK> Furthermore, aren't registrars required to show certain data
> > > elements
> > > > GK> in their WHOIS, as part of their accreditation contracts??
> > > >
> > > > GK> Sincerely,
> > > >
> > > > GK> George Kirikos
> > > > GK> http://www.kirikos.com/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > GK> __________________________________________________
> > > > GK> Do You Yahoo!?
> > > > GK> Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage
> > > > GK> http://sports.yahoo.com/
> > > > GK> --
> > > > GK> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > > > GK> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > > > GK> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > > > GK> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----
> > > > 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
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > 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
> >
> > --
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> >         Hermes Network Inc.
> >         Toronto, Canada
> >
> > ----
> > direct: 416.422.1034
> >
> > icq: 34564103
> > --
> > 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
>
> --
> Sincerely,
>
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
>         Hermes Network Inc.
>         Toronto, Canada
>
> ----
> direct: 416.422.1034
>
> icq: 34564103
> --
> 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

- --------------7EBBEB53DF07BF44D0DF3B2D
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
The rules are simple;
<p>Don't do it.&nbsp; Unless someone changes the rules they should not
do it.
<br>There is nothing for a Rep to discuss.
<p>Right now there is absolutely no business reason for Verisign to honor
contracts with ICANN.
<br>What the hell are they going to do about a breach of contract?&nbsp;
They certainly are in no position to enforce a contract through the courts.&nbsp;
If Verisign stopped paying them today, there is not a thing ICANN could
do about it except whine.&nbsp; As a matter of fact Verisign may well find
liability in giving ICANN any money.
<p>I do not even think there are grounds for the DoC to enforce the third
party beneficiary contract with Verisign because they have not enforced
their own contracts dealing with ICANN.&nbsp; Repeatedly not doing the
right thing leads to a course of conduct and business dealing scenario
that is a quagmire.
<p>By Lynn's statements and by ICANN's lack of conduct they are virtually
dead meat.&nbsp; Vint has only added to that problem this weekend with
weak and poorly worded public comments, I can almost feel sorry for Louis.
<p>Sincerely,
<br>Eric
<p>Sotiris Sotiropoulos wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>The original message was sent on the 15th.
<p>Joanna Lane wrote:
<br>>
<br>> Maybe because Verisign doesn't pay it's ICANN reps to work at 11.30pm
on a
<br>> Sunday night?
<br>>
<br>> -----Original Message-----
<br>> From: [email-masked] [<a href="mailto:[email-masked]">mailto:[email-masked]</a>]On
Behalf Of Sotiris
<br>> Sotiropoulos
<br>> Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 1:56 AM
<br>> To: [email-masked]
<br>> Cc: [email-masked]
<br>> Subject: Re: [ga] Verisign removing expiration dates from WHOIS Data?
<br>>
<br>> Why hasn't the Verisign rep in the DNSO responded to this
<br>> thread as yet?
<br>>
<br>> Genie Livingstone wrote:
<br>> >
<br>> > Isn't&nbsp; publishing domain expiration date =&nbsp; direct violation
of ICANN
<br>> > Registrar Accreditation Agreement??&nbsp; ((But since when did
Verisign care
<br>> > about some ICANN rules))
<br>> >
<br>> > (see Paragraph F-1-f )
<br>> >
<br>> > <a href="http://www.icann.org/nsi/icann-raa-04nov99.htm#IIF1a">http://www.icann.org/nsi/icann-raa-04nov99.htm#IIF1a</a>
<br>> >
<br>> > F. Public Access to Data on SLD Registrations. During the term
of this
<br>> > Agreement:
<br>> >
<br>> > 1. At its expense, Registrar shall provide an interactive web page
and a
<br>> > port 43 Whois service providing free public query-based access
to
<br>> > up-to-date (i.e. updated at least daily) data concerning all active
SLD
<br>> > registrations sponsored by Registrar in the registry for the .com,
.net,
<br>> > and .org TLDs. The data accessible shall consist of elements that
are
<br>> > designated from time to time according to an ICANN-adopted policy.
Until
<br>> > ICANN otherwise specifies by means of an ICANN-adopted policy,
this data
<br>> > shall consist of the following elements as contained in Registrar's
<br>> > database:
<br>> >
<br>> > a. The name of the SLD being registered and the TLD for which
<br>> > registration is being requested;
<br>> >
<br>> > b. The IP addresses of the primary nameserver and secondary
<br>> > nameserver(s) for the SLD;
<br>> >
<br>> > c. The corresponding names of those nameservers;
<br>> >
<br>> > d. The identity of Registrar (which may be provided through Registrar's
<br>> > website);
<br>> >
<br>> > e. The original creation date of the registration;
<br>> >
<br>> > f. The expiration date of the registration;
<br>> >
<br>> > g. The name and postal address of the SLD holder;
<br>> >
<br>> > h. The name, postal address, e-mail address, voice telephone number,
and
<br>> > (where available) fax number of the technical contact for the SLD;
and
<br>> >
<br>> > i. The name, postal address, e-mail address, voice telephone number,
and
<br>> > (where available) fax number of the administrative contact for
the SLD.
<br>> >
<br>> > Genie Livingstone
<br>> > eyeondomain.com
<br>> >
<br>> > ----- Original Message -----
<br>> > From: "Don Brown" &lt;[email-masked]>
<br>> > To: "George Kirikos" &lt;[email-masked]>
<br>> > Cc: &lt;[email-masked]>
<br>> > Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 5:18 PM
<br>> > Subject: Re: [ga] Verisign removing expiration dates from WHOIS
Data?
<br>> >
<br>> > > Moreover, if WLS becomes reality, it is a serious ICANN issue,
since
<br>> > > there is no bottoms-up consensus to support it.
<br>> > >
<br>> > > There are those in favor, of course, but how many of them are
<br>> > > potential benefactors of new, found income from it? I'd guess
that to
<br>> > > be the majority.
<br>> > >
<br>> > > It is interesting that VeriSign presents WLS as a way for it
to help
<br>> > > grow business for the Registrars (per the press release/quote
below),
<br>> > > but the Registrars who represent the majority of registrations
have
<br>> > > taken a position in opposition to WLS. Could it be that those
<br>> > > Registrar's have noses that know the difference between chicken
salad
<br>> > > and chicken S*&amp;%? I'd guess it is so, as well.
<br>> > >
<br>> > > If WLS becomes reality, the expiration date is really a minor
<br>> > > consideration in the total scope of things.&nbsp; There will
be much bigger
<br>> > > fish to fry.
<br>> > >
<br>> > >
<br>> > > A quote from NewsBytes - <a href="http://www.newsbytes.com/news/02/173564.html">http://www.newsbytes.com/news/02/173564.html</a>
<br>> > >
<br>> > >&nbsp;&nbsp; But VeriSign spokeswoman Cheryl Regan contends that
the demand for
<br>> > >&nbsp;&nbsp; "recycled" domains is high enough that the service
could provide a
<br>> > >&nbsp;&nbsp; real boon to registrars.
<br>> > >
<br>> > >&nbsp;&nbsp; "We're doing this as a way to help grow new business
for
<br>> > >&nbsp;&nbsp; registrars," Regan said.
<br>> > >
<br>> > > roflmao :-)
<br>> > >
<br>> > >
<br>> > > Saturday, March 16, 2002, 5:11:52 PM, George Kirikos
<br>> > &lt;[email-masked]> wrote:
<br>> > > GK> Hello,
<br>> > >
<br>> > > GK> Take a look at the WHOIS for the domain name "auction-barn.com"
<br>> > >
<br>> > > GK>
<br>> > <a href="http://www.netsol.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois?STRING=auction-barn.com&Search">http://www.netsol.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois?STRING=auction-barn.com&amp;Search</a>
<br>> > Type=do
<br>> > >
<br>> > > GK> In particular:
<br>> > >
<br>> > > GK>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Record last updated on 15-Mar-2002.
<br>> > > GK>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Record created on 26-Jan-2000.
<br>> > > GK>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Database last updated on 16-Mar-2002 04:35:00
EST.
<br>> > >
<br>> > > GK> The "Record Expires" date is missing.
<br>> > >
<br>> > > GK> If VGRS goes ahead with WLS, this is a potentially serious
issue,
<br>> > as
<br>> > > GK> consumers might be misled into purchasing WLS slots on names
that
<br>> > > GK> expire years in the future, as they'd have no way of knowing
when
<br>> > the
<br>> > > GK> name truly expires (let alone when it is released, even if
it
<br>> > should be
<br>> > > GK> past expiry). Existing customers and domain owners would
also not
<br>> > be
<br>> > > GK> able to check for sure when a name is due to expire, if they
can't
<br>> > > GK> check the WHOIS on their own names.
<br>> > >
<br>> > > GK> Furthermore, aren't registrars required to show certain data
<br>> > elements
<br>> > > GK> in their WHOIS, as part of their accreditation contracts??
<br>> > >
<br>> > > GK> Sincerely,
<br>> > >
<br>> > > GK> George Kirikos
<br>> > > GK> <a href="http://www.kirikos.com/">http://www.kirikos.com/</a>
<br>> > >
<br>> > >
<br>> > > GK> __________________________________________________
<br>> > > GK> Do You Yahoo!?
<br>> > > GK> Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage
<br>> > > GK> <a href="http://sports.yahoo.com/">http://sports.yahoo.com/</a>
<br>> > > GK> --
<br>> > > GK> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
<br>> > > GK> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
<br>> > > GK> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
<br>> > > GK> Archives at <a href="http://www.dnso.org/archives.html">http://www.dnso.org/archives.html</a>
<br>> > >
<br>> > >
<br>> > >
<br>> > >
<br>> > > ----
<br>> > > Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Internet
Concepts, Inc.
<br>> > > [email-masked]&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<a href="http://www.inetconcepts.net">http://www.inetconcepts.net</a>
<br>> > > PGP Key ID: 04C99A55&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
(972) 788-2364&nbsp; Fax: (972) 788-5049
<br>> > > Providing Internet Solutions Worldwide - An eDataWeb Affiliate
<br>> > > ----
<br>> > >
<br>> > > --
<br>> > > This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
<br>> > > Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
<br>> > > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
<br>> > > Archives at <a href="http://www.dnso.org/archives.html">http://www.dnso.org/archives.html</a>
<br>> > >
<br>> > >
<br>> > >
<br>> >
<br>> > --
<br>> > This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
<br>> > Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
<br>> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
<br>> > Archives at <a href="http://www.dnso.org/archives.html">http://www.dnso.org/archives.html</a>
<br>>
<br>> --
<br>> Sincerely,
<br>>
<br>> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
<br>>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Hermes Network Inc.
<br>>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Toronto, Canada
<br>>
<br>> ----
<br>> direct: 416.422.1034
<br>>
<br>> icq: 34564103
<br>> --
<br>> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
<br>> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
<br>> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
<br>> Archives at <a href="http://www.dnso.org/archives.html">http://www.dnso.org/archives.html</a>
<p>--
<br>Sincerely,
<p>Sotiris Sotiropoulos
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Hermes Network Inc.
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Toronto, Canada
<p>----
<br>direct: 416.422.1034
<p>icq: 34564103
<br>--
<br>This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
<br>Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
<br>("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
<br>Archives at <a href="http://www.dnso.org/archives.html">http://www.dnso.org/archives.html</a></blockquote>
</html>

- --------------7EBBEB53DF07BF44D0DF3B2D--

- --
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: 18 Mar 2002 07:16:45 +0000
From: Abel Wisman <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Verisign removing expiration dates from WHOIS Data?

Naw, let's get serious here, of course Chuck works, however, ICANN will
fail at it's attempting this "coup d'etat" and VGRS will be the (loudly
and all the way to the bank) laughing 3d party.

ccTLD's will NEVER allow this to happen, and forget the number 244,
there are no 244 ccTLD's, that is only a theoretical number, however,
lots of TLD's are notwaiting to be "taken over" by ICANN and since the
governments already installed these boards (ccTLD's) they are not very
likely to accept a 1 in 50 representation on a "self-appointing" board
filled to the brim with BIG business members buying their way in to
posterity.

It is clear for all to see that this is not a plan to improve ICANN, the
internet or anything at all except for long time seats of importance,
big travel-expenses and loads of add-ons.

We'd do better to support jeffsey and Danny and Thomas in writing a
proposal of our own, backed by the gazillions of users out there then to
bicker Vint, or any other partner in crime of this Junta.

They have made up their mind, it is time we made up ours, well in time
for Bucharest and with awakened local politicians in every country and
the ccTLD's on our side.

abel

On Mon, 2002-03-18 at 03:28, Joanna Lane wrote:
> Maybe because Verisign doesn't pay it's ICANN reps to work at 11.30pm on a
> Sunday night?
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Sotiris
> Sotiropoulos
> Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 1:56 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [ga] Verisign removing expiration dates from WHOIS Data?
> 
> 
> Why hasn't the Verisign rep in the DNSO responded to this
> thread as yet?
> 
> Genie Livingstone wrote:
> >
> > Isn't  publishing domain expiration date =  direct violation of ICANN
> > Registrar Accreditation Agreement??  ((But since when did Verisign care
> > about some ICANN rules))
> >
> > (see Paragraph F-1-f )
> >
> > http://www.icann.org/nsi/icann-raa-04nov99.htm#IIF1a
> >
> > F. Public Access to Data on SLD Registrations. During the term of this
> > Agreement:
> >
> > 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 SLD
> > registrations sponsored by Registrar in the registry for the .com, .net,
> > and .org TLDs. The data accessible shall consist of elements that are
> > designated from time to time according to an ICANN-adopted policy. Until
> > ICANN otherwise specifies by means of an ICANN-adopted policy, this data
> > shall consist of the following elements as contained in Registrar's
> > database:
> >
> > a. The name of the SLD being registered and the TLD for which
> > registration is being requested;
> >
> > b. The IP addresses of the primary nameserver and secondary
> > nameserver(s) for the SLD;
> >
> > c. The corresponding names of those nameservers;
> >
> > d. The identity of Registrar (which may be provided through Registrar's
> > website);
> >
> > e. The original creation date of the registration;
> >
> > f. The expiration date of the registration;
> >
> > g. The name and postal address of the SLD holder;
> >
> > h. The name, postal address, e-mail address, voice telephone number, and
> > (where available) fax number of the technical contact for the SLD; and
> >
> > i. The name, postal address, e-mail address, voice telephone number, and
> > (where available) fax number of the administrative contact for the SLD.
> >
> > Genie Livingstone
> > eyeondomain.com
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Don Brown" <[email-masked]>
> > To: "George Kirikos" <[email-masked]>
> > Cc: <[email-masked]>
> > Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 5:18 PM
> > Subject: Re: [ga] Verisign removing expiration dates from WHOIS Data?
> >
> > > Moreover, if WLS becomes reality, it is a serious ICANN issue, since
> > > there is no bottoms-up consensus to support it.
> > >
> > > There are those in favor, of course, but how many of them are
> > > potential benefactors of new, found income from it? I'd guess that to
> > > be the majority.
> > >
> > > It is interesting that VeriSign presents WLS as a way for it to help
> > > grow business for the Registrars (per the press release/quote below),
> > > but the Registrars who represent the majority of registrations have
> > > taken a position in opposition to WLS. Could it be that those
> > > Registrar's have noses that know the difference between chicken salad
> > > and chicken S*&%? I'd guess it is so, as well.
> > >
> > > If WLS becomes reality, the expiration date is really a minor
> > > consideration in the total scope of things.  There will be much bigger
> > > fish to fry.
> > >
> > >
> > > 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 :-)
> > >
> > >
> > > Saturday, March 16, 2002, 5:11:52 PM, George Kirikos
> > <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > > GK> Hello,
> > >
> > > GK> Take a look at the WHOIS for the domain name "auction-barn.com"
> > >
> > > GK>
> > http://www.netsol.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois?STRING=auction-barn.com&Search
> > Type=do
> > >
> > > GK> In particular:
> > >
> > > GK>    Record last updated on 15-Mar-2002.
> > > GK>    Record created on 26-Jan-2000.
> > > GK>    Database last updated on 16-Mar-2002 04:35:00 EST.
> > >
> > > GK> The "Record Expires" date is missing.
> > >
> > > GK> If VGRS goes ahead with WLS, this is a potentially serious issue,
> > as
> > > GK> consumers might be misled into purchasing WLS slots on names that
> > > GK> expire years in the future, as they'd have no way of knowing when
> > the
> > > GK> name truly expires (let alone when it is released, even if it
> > should be
> > > GK> past expiry). Existing customers and domain owners would also not
> > be
> > > GK> able to check for sure when a name is due to expire, if they can't
> > > GK> check the WHOIS on their own names.
> > >
> > > GK> Furthermore, aren't registrars required to show certain data
> > elements
> > > GK> in their WHOIS, as part of their accreditation contracts??
> > >
> > > GK> Sincerely,
> > >
> > > GK> George Kirikos
> > > GK> http://www.kirikos.com/
> > >
> > >
> > > GK> __________________________________________________
> > > GK> Do You Yahoo!?
> > > GK> Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage
> > > GK> http://sports.yahoo.com/
> > > GK> --
> > > GK> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > > GK> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > > GK> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > > GK> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----
> > > 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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > 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
> 
> --
> Sincerely,
> 
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> 	Hermes Network Inc.
> 	Toronto, Canada
> 
> ----
> direct: 416.422.1034
> 
> icq: 34564103
> --
> 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

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

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #1088
*************************