Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #1145
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST           Monday, April 29 2002           Volume 01 : Number 1145

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

Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 10:59:51 +0200
From: Jefsey Morfin <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Re: [icann-europe] ICANN, VRSN, ORG: please, let get real. 

Dear Joe,
thank you for your comment. [Also thanks for a positive private support by 
a certain person wanting not to be disclosed - unexpected and impresive!].

At 19:54 27/04/02, Joe Baptista wrote:
>I shall refer to these people as twits - which in internet parlance means
>a user who is not an internet newbie (first timer) - so they know their
>way around the internet - but the problem is they have no idea what it is
>they are doing - however they don't know any better and have a false sense
>of security - etc. etc.

The real problem is that they know how to run the network for themselves, 
their community (some refer to it as the ICANN community, ie the JonPostel 
legacy network community). They had no experience about operating it for 
other. And they are foreign to international network system business 
development.

>An example of a twit is ester dyson, and the press who claim she is a
>guru.  as well as people like chris wilkinson who is willing to play cards
>with simms - icanns man in charge of putting out fires.

I think Sims will be recorded as a legal-collar e-terrorist. But why to 
blame him? he is certainly a reasonable pragmatic brillant guy. He learned 
networks from Jon Postel, discovered the opportunity and keeps it going. 
The problem is that Jon Postel is not here anymore to tell him what has 
changed and what cannot be done in the old ways anymore. He is a lawyer not 
a worldwide network manager.

Esther is trying her best the same with what she knows and experienced. I 
never met Wilkinson yet. But I have no doubt he tries to to his best. We 
all have different experiences. There are three kinds of us: the religious 
(like Stuart), those who listen (as most of us) and those who dont listen. 
Unfortunately religious and deafs are the governing minority.

>This claim is nonsense.  The CIA as usual has no clue.  All it takes is an
>attack on the root servers to call it lights out.

Joe, what would be of real interest would be for you to list all what the 
CIA can do or know about a given country in using the root server system. 
Kill access to it. Reroute calls to sites. Intercept mails etc. is obvious. 
I am more interested in the day to day log analysis: did you ever tried to 
link your log files to some event (economic growth, vacations, tension 
etc...). I am sure that one good analyst can learn a lot about a country 
this way.

>On Sat, 27 Apr 2002, Jefsey Morfin wrote:
>Well Jefsey it feels like the Titanic to me too.  But look at the comedy -
>when it blows up it won't affect us.  But it will affect the europeans.

everyone alike. Except open systems, China and friends. Except my French 
nationwide access as it may instantly rely on our roots. We also can offer 
a service in a matter of hours. But... we currently lack the ressources to 
support the whole thing.

> > Point 2. The only solution we have IMHO is :
> > 1. to accept that we are in a general critical situation, so we stop
> > babbling and we think very clearly.
>
>no let it crash.  ICANN is irrelevant to the big picture.  Just sit back
>and watch the worlds bureacrats scramble when the irrelevant non existent
>icann monopoly blows up.  and the result is a very broken and vulnerable
>intranet called icann/doc/ntia.  i won't be affected.  most of europe
>will.

Joe, we are talking about world's economy. Job, people, etc... Gulf War and 
Sept 11 shown us the impact on our lifes. What you propose would be a 
nightmare. Again consensuses are based on Trust. Kill the trust in the USG 
system and you kill the world.

>the dns as you know is a collection of objects which reference resources -
>a master index which can be used by many authors to archive and reference
>information resources independently and in associated communities.

I am sorry, here I part from you. Please reread it as it is today. The 
system is the "whereis". Initially it was understood as a database. But it 
is really a non optimized search protocol. The system is not hierachical 
(top down) it is bootom up (progressive filters).

>the commercialization of the usg internet has been it's death.

Let say Jon Postel ran his network. They did not catch up yet with most of 
the implications of operating for others. And they have no idea about how 
to develop it commericaly.

BTW this is not a simple thing, IMHO.

> > a) the ITU/T, as an international structure, is nation oriented, while the
> > TCP/IP distributed networks are multinational by essence.
> > b) the ITU/T is operators oriented: the TCP/IP distributed architecture
> > makes every participant to be technically an operator. We would overwhelm
> > the ITU/T with thousands of small members.
>
>exactly.  and the culture at the ITU is all wrong.  the itu like most
>bureacratic organizations works on the principles of paranoia.  if they
>can't control the process they would rather have nothing to do with it.

This is the bargain. Either concertation or nothing. Not out any other 
paranoia, but because it will not work. Now, if ITU/T wants to take it the 
way you say, the universal network system will meet real problems as 
telephone under IP adn Wi-Fi will develop. You cannot stop the tide of the 
market.

> > A DN is NOT anything else than a mnemonic pointer to the IP address of a
> > network privately owned resource (a "cyber domain": site, equipment,
> > etc..). The only duty of a DN is to correctly and stably point to that IP.
>
>It's just a bit more then that.  It represents a means of indexing uRL's -
>information - across the internet.  In the old days domain names were not
>up for grabs (commercialized) and the links between resources were much
>more stable then they are today.

This is what I say: URLs are alphanumeric pointers. The whole problem 
results from ACPA. Let kill that  possiblity of transfering DNs and you 
clean the situation. BTW cybersquatters are doing it: they dont renew

> > This is why we have to stop these chit chat about .org and new TLDs, and
> > WLS. We have to openly discuss with Stratton Sclavos and the DoC  ...
>No no - Jefsey - much better to just let it die and collapse.  Less energy
>involved.

I am not sure about this. At least until we have not set-up a contingency 
plan. My contingency plan is a "parallel network" (Intlnet), ie a parallel 
type of application with popular support. So Intlnet can develop in 
parallel, based on different commecial/usage concepts and standard, and 
addressing a different market, so there is no conflict (unless the ICANN 
wants it in colliding). I just propose to resume what we initially did, 
before we left ARPANET by its own. If the ICANN's Internet meet real 
difficulties, or if the USG has to become serious about protecting the US 
interests in taking the root over, the backup would be ready.

jfc

- --
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, 28 Apr 2002 04:30:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: [icann-europe] ICANN, VRSN, ORG: please, let get real.

Dear Friends and Arch enemies,

This is the most real and important thread that you will ever read.

I have little to add except that for those of you who think this is 
bullshit think real hard.

ICANN is the bullshit.  

All countries and/or large groups should have parallel and enthusiastic 
systems that are more secure and more hearty than this toy feeble system.

If you are the kind of gal that likes not to wear underwear, that is cool 
but if you get in an accident (and the DoC is surely headed for one) it is 
really embarassing!

I suggest everyone start wearing their BVDs now.

We are doing real work in real time with a few ccTLDs and any contribution 
along these lines will help millions.

Eric

> Dear Joe,
> thank you for your comment. [Also thanks for a positive private support
> by  a certain person wanting not to be disclosed - unexpected and
> impresive!].
> 
> At 19:54 27/04/02, Joe Baptista wrote:
>>I shall refer to these people as twits - which in internet parlance
>>means a user who is not an internet newbie (first timer) - so they know
>>their way around the internet - but the problem is they have no idea
>>what it is they are doing - however they don't know any better and have
>>a false sense of security - etc. etc.
> 
> The real problem is that they know how to run the network for
> themselves,  their community (some refer to it as the ICANN community,
> ie the JonPostel  legacy network community). They had no experience
> about operating it for  other. And they are foreign to international
> network system business  development.
> 
>>An example of a twit is ester dyson, and the press who claim she is a
>>guru.  as well as people like chris wilkinson who is willing to play
>>cards with simms - icanns man in charge of putting out fires.
> 
> I think Sims will be recorded as a legal-collar e-terrorist. But why to
>  blame him? he is certainly a reasonable pragmatic brillant guy. He
> learned  networks from Jon Postel, discovered the opportunity and keeps
> it going.  The problem is that Jon Postel is not here anymore to tell
> him what has  changed and what cannot be done in the old ways anymore.
> He is a lawyer not  a worldwide network manager.
> 
> Esther is trying her best the same with what she knows and experienced.
> I  never met Wilkinson yet. But I have no doubt he tries to to his
> best. We  all have different experiences. There are three kinds of us:
> the religious  (like Stuart), those who listen (as most of us) and
> those who dont listen.  Unfortunately religious and deafs are the
> governing minority.
> 
>>This claim is nonsense.  The CIA as usual has no clue.  All it takes is
>>an attack on the root servers to call it lights out.
> 
> Joe, what would be of real interest would be for you to list all what
> the  CIA can do or know about a given country in using the root server
> system.  Kill access to it. Reroute calls to sites. Intercept mails
> etc. is obvious.  I am more interested in the day to day log analysis:
> did you ever tried to  link your log files to some event (economic
> growth, vacations, tension  etc...). I am sure that one good analyst
> can learn a lot about a country  this way.
> 
>>On Sat, 27 Apr 2002, Jefsey Morfin wrote:
>>Well Jefsey it feels like the Titanic to me too.  But look at the
>>comedy - when it blows up it won't affect us.  But it will affect the
>>europeans.
> 
> everyone alike. Except open systems, China and friends. Except my
> French  nationwide access as it may instantly rely on our roots. We
> also can offer  a service in a matter of hours. But... we currently
> lack the ressources to  support the whole thing.
> 
>> > Point 2. The only solution we have IMHO is :
>> > 1. to accept that we are in a general critical situation, so we stop
>> > babbling and we think very clearly.
>>
>>no let it crash.  ICANN is irrelevant to the big picture.  Just sit
>>back and watch the worlds bureacrats scramble when the irrelevant non
>>existent icann monopoly blows up.  and the result is a very broken and
>>vulnerable intranet called icann/doc/ntia.  i won't be affected.  most
>>of europe will.
> 
> Joe, we are talking about world's economy. Job, people, etc... Gulf War
> and  Sept 11 shown us the impact on our lifes. What you propose would
> be a  nightmare. Again consensuses are based on Trust. Kill the trust
> in the USG  system and you kill the world.
> 
>>the dns as you know is a collection of objects which reference
>>resources - a master index which can be used by many authors to archive
>>and reference information resources independently and in associated
>>communities.
> 
> I am sorry, here I part from you. Please reread it as it is today. The 
> system is the "whereis". Initially it was understood as a database. But
> it  is really a non optimized search protocol. The system is not
> hierachical  (top down) it is bootom up (progressive filters).
> 
>>the commercialization of the usg internet has been it's death.
> 
> Let say Jon Postel ran his network. They did not catch up yet with most
> of  the implications of operating for others. And they have no idea
> about how  to develop it commericaly.
> 
> BTW this is not a simple thing, IMHO.
> 
>> > a) the ITU/T, as an international structure, is nation oriented,
>> > while the TCP/IP distributed networks are multinational by essence.
>> > b) the ITU/T is operators oriented: the TCP/IP distributed
>> > architecture makes every participant to be technically an operator.
>> > We would overwhelm the ITU/T with thousands of small members.
>>
>>exactly.  and the culture at the ITU is all wrong.  the itu like most
>>bureacratic organizations works on the principles of paranoia.  if they
>>can't control the process they would rather have nothing to do with it.
> 
> This is the bargain. Either concertation or nothing. Not out any other 
> paranoia, but because it will not work. Now, if ITU/T wants to take it
> the  way you say, the universal network system will meet real problems
> as  telephone under IP adn Wi-Fi will develop. You cannot stop the tide
> of the  market.
> 
>> > A DN is NOT anything else than a mnemonic pointer to the IP address
>> > of a network privately owned resource (a "cyber domain": site,
>> > equipment, etc..). The only duty of a DN is to correctly and stably
>> > point to that IP.
>>
>>It's just a bit more then that.  It represents a means of indexing
>>uRL's - information - across the internet.  In the old days domain
>>names were not up for grabs (commercialized) and the links between
>>resources were much more stable then they are today.
> 
> This is what I say: URLs are alphanumeric pointers. The whole problem 
> results from ACPA. Let kill that  possiblity of transfering DNs and you
>  clean the situation. BTW cybersquatters are doing it: they dont renew
> 
>> > This is why we have to stop these chit chat about .org and new TLDs,
>> > and WLS. We have to openly discuss with Stratton Sclavos and the DoC
>> >  ...
>>No no - Jefsey - much better to just let it die and collapse.  Less
>>energy involved.
> 
> I am not sure about this. At least until we have not set-up a
> contingency  plan. My contingency plan is a "parallel network"
> (Intlnet), ie a parallel  type of application with popular support. So
> Intlnet can develop in  parallel, based on different commecial/usage
> concepts and standard, and  addressing a different market, so there is
> no conflict (unless the ICANN  wants it in colliding). I just propose
> to resume what we initially did,  before we left ARPANET by its own. If
> the ICANN's Internet meet real  difficulties, or if the USG has to
> become serious about protecting the US  interests in taking the root
> over, the backup would be ready.
> 
> jfc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 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

http://www.Hi-Tek.com
Reality in a Digital World

The information transmitted in this e-mail is intended for the person or
entity to which it is addressed, and may contain confidential and/or
privileged material.  Any review, retransmission or other use of, or
taking any action in reliance upon this information by persons or
entities other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited.  If
you receive this e-mail in error, please contact the sender and delete
this material from any system.  Thank you!

- --
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, 28 Apr 2002 04:30:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: [icann-europe] ICANN, VRSN, ORG: please, let get real.

Dear Friends and Arch enemies,

This is the most real and important thread that you will ever read.

I have little to add except that for those of you who think this is 
bullshit think real hard.

ICANN is the bullshit.  

All countries and/or large groups should have parallel and enthusiastic 
systems that are more secure and more hearty than this toy feeble system.

If you are the kind of gal that likes not to wear underwear, that is cool 
but if you get in an accident (and the DoC is surely headed for one) it is 
really embarassing!

I suggest everyone start wearing their BVDs now.

We are doing real work in real time with a few ccTLDs and any contribution 
along these lines will help millions.

Eric

> Dear Joe,
> thank you for your comment. [Also thanks for a positive private support
> by  a certain person wanting not to be disclosed - unexpected and
> impresive!].
> 
> At 19:54 27/04/02, Joe Baptista wrote:
>>I shall refer to these people as twits - which in internet parlance
>>means a user who is not an internet newbie (first timer) - so they know
>>their way around the internet - but the problem is they have no idea
>>what it is they are doing - however they don't know any better and have
>>a false sense of security - etc. etc.
> 
> The real problem is that they know how to run the network for
> themselves,  their community (some refer to it as the ICANN community,
> ie the JonPostel  legacy network community). They had no experience
> about operating it for  other. And they are foreign to international
> network system business  development.
> 
>>An example of a twit is ester dyson, and the press who claim she is a
>>guru.  as well as people like chris wilkinson who is willing to play
>>cards with simms - icanns man in charge of putting out fires.
> 
> I think Sims will be recorded as a legal-collar e-terrorist. But why to
>  blame him? he is certainly a reasonable pragmatic brillant guy. He
> learned  networks from Jon Postel, discovered the opportunity and keeps
> it going.  The problem is that Jon Postel is not here anymore to tell
> him what has  changed and what cannot be done in the old ways anymore.
> He is a lawyer not  a worldwide network manager.
> 
> Esther is trying her best the same with what she knows and experienced.
> I  never met Wilkinson yet. But I have no doubt he tries to to his
> best. We  all have different experiences. There are three kinds of us:
> the religious  (like Stuart), those who listen (as most of us) and
> those who dont listen.  Unfortunately religious and deafs are the
> governing minority.
> 
>>This claim is nonsense.  The CIA as usual has no clue.  All it takes is
>>an attack on the root servers to call it lights out.
> 
> Joe, what would be of real interest would be for you to list all what
> the  CIA can do or know about a given country in using the root server
> system.  Kill access to it. Reroute calls to sites. Intercept mails
> etc. is obvious.  I am more interested in the day to day log analysis:
> did you ever tried to  link your log files to some event (economic
> growth, vacations, tension  etc...). I am sure that one good analyst
> can learn a lot about a country  this way.
> 
>>On Sat, 27 Apr 2002, Jefsey Morfin wrote:
>>Well Jefsey it feels like the Titanic to me too.  But look at the
>>comedy - when it blows up it won't affect us.  But it will affect the
>>europeans.
> 
> everyone alike. Except open systems, China and friends. Except my
> French  nationwide access as it may instantly rely on our roots. We
> also can offer  a service in a matter of hours. But... we currently
> lack the ressources to  support the whole thing.
> 
>> > Point 2. The only solution we have IMHO is :
>> > 1. to accept that we are in a general critical situation, so we stop
>> > babbling and we think very clearly.
>>
>>no let it crash.  ICANN is irrelevant to the big picture.  Just sit
>>back and watch the worlds bureacrats scramble when the irrelevant non
>>existent icann monopoly blows up.  and the result is a very broken and
>>vulnerable intranet called icann/doc/ntia.  i won't be affected.  most
>>of europe will.
> 
> Joe, we are talking about world's economy. Job, people, etc... Gulf War
> and  Sept 11 shown us the impact on our lifes. What you propose would
> be a  nightmare. Again consensuses are based on Trust. Kill the trust
> in the USG  system and you kill the world.
> 
>>the dns as you know is a collection of objects which reference
>>resources - a master index which can be used by many authors to archive
>>and reference information resources independently and in associated
>>communities.
> 
> I am sorry, here I part from you. Please reread it as it is today. The 
> system is the "whereis". Initially it was understood as a database. But
> it  is really a non optimized search protocol. The system is not
> hierachical  (top down) it is bootom up (progressive filters).
> 
>>the commercialization of the usg internet has been it's death.
> 
> Let say Jon Postel ran his network. They did not catch up yet with most
> of  the implications of operating for others. And they have no idea
> about how  to develop it commericaly.
> 
> BTW this is not a simple thing, IMHO.
> 
>> > a) the ITU/T, as an international structure, is nation oriented,
>> > while the TCP/IP distributed networks are multinational by essence.
>> > b) the ITU/T is operators oriented: the TCP/IP distributed
>> > architecture makes every participant to be technically an operator.
>> > We would overwhelm the ITU/T with thousands of small members.
>>
>>exactly.  and the culture at the ITU is all wrong.  the itu like most
>>bureacratic organizations works on the principles of paranoia.  if they
>>can't control the process they would rather have nothing to do with it.
> 
> This is the bargain. Either concertation or nothing. Not out any other 
> paranoia, but because it will not work. Now, if ITU/T wants to take it
> the  way you say, the universal network system will meet real problems
> as  telephone under IP adn Wi-Fi will develop. You cannot stop the tide
> of the  market.
> 
>> > A DN is NOT anything else than a mnemonic pointer to the IP address
>> > of a network privately owned resource (a "cyber domain": site,
>> > equipment, etc..). The only duty of a DN is to correctly and stably
>> > point to that IP.
>>
>>It's just a bit more then that.  It represents a means of indexing
>>uRL's - information - across the internet.  In the old days domain
>>names were not up for grabs (commercialized) and the links between
>>resources were much more stable then they are today.
> 
> This is what I say: URLs are alphanumeric pointers. The whole problem 
> results from ACPA. Let kill that  possiblity of transfering DNs and you
>  clean the situation. BTW cybersquatters are doing it: they dont renew
> 
>> > This is why we have to stop these chit chat about .org and new TLDs,
>> > and WLS. We have to openly discuss with Stratton Sclavos and the DoC
>> >  ...
>>No no - Jefsey - much better to just let it die and collapse.  Less
>>energy involved.
> 
> I am not sure about this. At least until we have not set-up a
> contingency  plan. My contingency plan is a "parallel network"
> (Intlnet), ie a parallel  type of application with popular support. So
> Intlnet can develop in  parallel, based on different commecial/usage
> concepts and standard, and  addressing a different market, so there is
> no conflict (unless the ICANN  wants it in colliding). I just propose
> to resume what we initially did,  before we left ARPANET by its own. If
> the ICANN's Internet meet real  difficulties, or if the USG has to
> become serious about protecting the US  interests in taking the root
> over, the backup would be ready.
> 
> jfc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 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

http://www.Hi-Tek.com
Reality in a Digital World

The information transmitted in this e-mail is intended for the person or
entity to which it is addressed, and may contain confidential and/or
privileged material.  Any review, retransmission or other use of, or
taking any action in reliance upon this information by persons or
entities other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited.  If
you receive this e-mail in error, please contact the sender and delete
this material from any system.  Thank you!

- --
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, 28 Apr 2002 05:16:46 -0700 (PDT)
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Really bad dotUS

dotUS,

The whole system and the whole concept and all the players suck.

Horror story after horror story are starting to pour through.

What are the lawsuits already pending against dotUS affiliates?

ISO, WTO, WIPO, BTA, and all the rest take a back seat to this debacle.

How am I supposed to sit across the table from some lady in a developing 
country and dictate that they follow International Standards when dotUS 
sets such a horrific standard.  Excuse me but this bites royal nuts.

Does anyone have a good excuse and exception line for me to use.

Eric

http://www.Hi-Tek.com
Reality in a Digital World

The information transmitted in this e-mail is intended for the person or
entity to which it is addressed, and may contain confidential and/or
privileged material.  Any review, retransmission or other use of, or
taking any action in reliance upon this information by persons or
entities other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited.  If
you receive this e-mail in error, please contact the sender and delete
this material from any system.  Thank you!

- --
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: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 01:44:34 -0700
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ga] Verisign stock price falls off a cliff

I publicly apologize for any error indicating wrongful authorship.
It certainly was not my intent to indicate Mr. Steinberg as an author of that
which I complained.
Thank you for the opportunity to set the record straight.

Sincerely,
Eric

Dan Steinberg wrote:

> I would appreciate it if you got your quoting right. you e-mail makes it
> look like I wrote the stuff you are complaining about.
>
> Eric Dierker wrote:
> >
> > What you guys don't get about stock, any freshman business student could
> > write two books about.
> >
> > > At 09:13 27/04/02 -0400, Dan Steinberg wrote:
> > >>  And their core business is not DNS.
> > >>They do other *stuff* mostly.  Listmemebers who have cycles to spare
> > >>can check out what businesses Verisign is in, what other companies they
> > >>acquired, and what business these acquisitions are in. Here's a
> > >>statememnt from their website:
> > >
> > > That other *stuff* is indeed a bigger contributor to revenue, but it is
> > >  business based on trust and reputation.
> > > Any hint of a stuff-up with the .com registry business and that other
> > > *stuff* will get hurt too.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>"VeriSign, Inc. (Nasdaq:VRSN) is the leading provider of digital trust
> > >>                       services that enable businesses and consumers to
> > >>engage in
> > >>                       commerce and communications with confidence."
> > >
> > > See the point? Verisign cannot afford a debacle with its 20 Bln.
> > > Network  Solutions division.
> > >
> > >
> > >>What does this have to do with the GA? As someone pointed out a few
> > >>years ago, less than a thousand people in the world (or on mars) know
> > >>how to spell DNS *and* care enough about it to sign up for the various
> > >>lists (like the GA).
> > >>
> > >>Face it, we may be as a group be able to effect change within (or
> > >>without) ICANN.  But to suggest that we are at all significant at the
> > >>level of Verisign stock price, or that it is somehow linked to
> > >>ICANN....is ludicrous!
> > >
> > > A strong word.  Why?
> > > The suggestion was that a large organized group of Domain Name
> > > registrants  benefit from Wall Streets' momentary disgust with their
> > > registry and take a  very small, but politically significant stake that
> > > they will use for public  input at Verisign's General Meeting and
> > > private conversations with  Verisign's management to achieve a
> > > Registrant-friendly image based on  actual improved Policy for the
> > > largest Registry of Domain Names.
> > >
> > > What is so ludicrous about that? It's in the best traditions of free
> > > enterprise. Surely someone at Verisign will see merit in it. :)
> > > And surely some organized Domain Name holders will.   It will have a
> > > bigger  overall effect  on Net presence security than talking to to
> > > Tucows or  Register.com
> > >
> > > ICANN has been functioning as a "consensus manufacturing" middleman. A
> > > supposed "governance buffer". Its own CEO admits that it has failed in
> > > this role.
> > > The GA of the DNSO is not changing anything.
> > >
> > > We have now reached the hour of truth.
> > > Time for thinking outside the box.
> > >
> > > --Joop
> > >
> > > --
> > > 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
> >
> > http://www.Hi-Tek.com
> > Reality in a Digital World
> >
> > The information transmitted in this e-mail is intended for the person or
> > entity to which it is addressed, and may contain confidential and/or
> > privileged material.  Any review, retransmission or other use of, or
> > taking any action in reliance upon this information by persons or
> > entities other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited.  If
> > you receive this e-mail in error, please contact the sender and delete
> > this material from any system.  Thank you!
> >
> > --
> > 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: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 01:58:07 -0700
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] Re: [Fwd: URGENT: .us Application Information Needed]

Of course I tried to snip all of the personal data.

But I just found this very interesting and full of it.
These guys just can't run a legitimate deal.

Eric

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: URGENT: .us Application Information Needed
> From: <[email-masked]>
>
> Dear VeriSign(r) Customer,
>
> Earlier this week we notified you that we were unable to complete your
> .us domain name application. We have not heard from you and need your
> response by midnight, SUNDAY, APRIL 28. Otherwise we will be unable to
> submit your application.
>
> To finish your application process, simply:
>
> 1. Reply to this e-mail
> 2. Indicate from questions below which answer is appropriate (ie: 1D and
> 2D) 3. Cut and paste your account number into the reply
>
>
> Please confirm your Citizenship Information by answering the following
> questions:
>
> 1. How do you plan to use this .us domain name? Choose one.
>    A. Personal Use
>    B. Educational Purposes
>    C. Government Purposes
>    D. Business (for profit) Use
>    E. Non-profit Business or Organization Use
>
> 2. Under which category do you qualify? Choose one.
>
>    Individual
>    A. Citizen or National of the United States
>    B. A permanent resident of the United States or any U.S.
>    territory/possession.
>
>    U.S. Organization
>    C. Incorporated within one of the U.S. states or U.S. territory
>
>    Organization
>    D. An entity that has an office or facility in the U.S.
>    E. An entity that regularly engages in lawful activities (sales of
>    goods or
>       services or other businesses, commercial or non-commercial,
>       including  not-for-profit relations in the United States)
>
> You must provide this information prior to APRIL 28 at MIDNIGHT ET to
> ensure your request is submitted to the .us registry. If you do not
> respond to this message, you will need to submit your .us domain name
> request again.
>
> (C) 2002 VeriSign Inc.  All Rights Reserved
>

- --
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: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 10:33:06 +0100
From: "Jon Lawrence" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Re: [Fwd: URGENT: .us Application Information Needed]

What exactly is the problem you have with this email?

I'm no fan of Verisigns but this seems like they are simply ensuring that
they are complying with the nexus requirements of .us.

Unless I'm missing something?

>-- Original Message --
>From: [email-masked]
>Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 01:58:07 -0700
>To: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
>Subject: [ga] Re: [Fwd: URGENT: .us Application Information Needed]
>
>
>Of course I tried to snip all of the personal data.
>
>But I just found this very interesting and full of it.
>These guys just can't run a legitimate deal.
>
>Eric
>
>
>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: URGENT: .us Application Information Needed
>> From: <[email-masked]>
>>
>> Dear VeriSign(r) Customer,
>>
>> Earlier this week we notified you that we were unable to complete your
>> .us domain name application. We have not heard from you and need your
>> response by midnight, SUNDAY, APRIL 28. Otherwise we will be unable to
>> submit your application.
>>
>> To finish your application process, simply:
>>
>> 1. Reply to this e-mail
>> 2. Indicate from questions below which answer is appropriate (ie: 1D
and
>> 2D) 3. Cut and paste your account number into the reply
>>
>>
>> Please confirm your Citizenship Information by answering the following
>> questions:
>>
>> 1. How do you plan to use this .us domain name? Choose one.
>>    A. Personal Use
>>    B. Educational Purposes
>>    C. Government Purposes
>>    D. Business (for profit) Use
>>    E. Non-profit Business or Organization Use
>>
>> 2. Under which category do you qualify? Choose one.
>>
>>    Individual
>>    A. Citizen or National of the United States
>>    B. A permanent resident of the United States or any U.S.
>>    territory/possession.
>>
>>    U.S. Organization
>>    C. Incorporated within one of the U.S. states or U.S. territory
>>
>>    Organization
>>    D. An entity that has an office or facility in the U.S.
>>    E. An entity that regularly engages in lawful activities (sales of
>>    goods or
>>       services or other businesses, commercial or non-commercial,
>>       including  not-for-profit relations in the United States)
>>
>> You must provide this information prior to APRIL 28 at MIDNIGHT ET to
>> ensure your request is submitted to the .us registry. If you do not
>> respond to this message, you will need to submit your .us domain name
>> request again.
>>
>> (C) 2002 VeriSign Inc.  All Rights Reserved
>>
>
>--
>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 #1145
*************************