Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #1277
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST            Sunday, June 16 2002            Volume 01 : Number 1277

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

Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 23:43:41 -0700
From: Loren Stocker <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] SnapNames is now whining to total strangers!

Hi All,

Now SnapNames has wrapped themselves in the flag of equal opportunity for the
helpless public. Duh?

How is John Q Netizen going to feel about equal access when the same
speculators put their "substantial cash payments" towards buying all the best
WLS options? How naive does Mr. Holmberg think we are?

All that's really needed is for Verisign to take uncertainty out of the domain
drops -- shorten the window, publish the times, and let everyone know when to
quit. That's transparent, fair, first-come-first-serve, and it's free, free,
free!

Best Regards,

Loren Stocker
www.evil.biz!

PS: We love Snapnames! But they should stay at the Registrar level 
and compete like everyone else -- and quit sucking up to Verisign!

Petition follows>>>

- --- kjel holmberg <[email-masked]> wrote:
> From: kjel holmberg <[email-masked]>
> To: kjel holmberg <[email-masked]>
> CC: "[email-masked]'"
> <[email-masked]>
> Subject: Your voice counts right now - sign brief
> petition for equal acces
> s to Internet domain names.
> Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 14:03:58 -0700
>
>
> June 12, 2002
>
> Dear Domain Name System Users (and Friends of
> SnapNames),
>
> The purpose of this letter is to ask your support
> for a critical improvement
> to the domain name system that solves the following
> problem: Typical domain
> name users have almost no access to the over 800,000
> valuable domain names
> that expire and should be available for
> re-registration every month.
>
> Please take a moment to review the attached
> petition. If you agree, please
> reply with comments to:
>
> [email-masked]
> <mailto:[email-masked]>
>
> Please reply as soon as possible. The Internet
> Corporation for Assigned
> Names and Numbers (ICANN), the domain name
> industry's oversight
> organization, will consider this issue at its next
> meeting, June 24-28.
> Those opposing your access to previously-owned
> domain names have made their
> case strenuously, so it's critical that ICANN hear
> from supporters of equal
> access, who have yet to be heard.
>
> Thank you for your time and input.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> SnapNames.com, Inc.
> Portland, Oregon
>
>
>
> Please circulate this petition to anyone else who
> may be concerned about
> this important issue.
>
>
> P E T I T I O N
>
> To the Board of Directors of the Internet
> Corporation for Assigned Names and
> Numbers (ICANN):
>
> We, the undersigned domain name and Internet users,
> intellectual property
> owners, members of the general public, and
> representatives of the same, are
> writing to urge the Board of Directors of the
> Internet Corporation for
> Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) to endorse the
> proposed Wait Listing
> Service (WLS) at the ICANN meeting in Bucharest,
> Romania, June 24-28, 2002.
>
> The WLS is a fair and sensible system that lets
> legitimate mainstream users
> acquire expiring domain names. The WLS represents a
> tremendous improvement
> over the status quo in which a handful of
> professional domain name buyers
> purchase preferential access to expiring names from
> registrars and exclude
> the general public. The WLS represents the first
> significant innovation in
> the domain name system since the establishment of
> formal Internet
> governance. The WLS is necessary to ensure the
> general public equal access
> to all domain names.
>
> There is currently no orderly, transparent, and fair
> system for allocating
> the approximately 800,000 domain names that expire
> every month. Instead,
> here is how most domain name consumers are locked
> out today:
>
> 1. The registry for .com, .net, and .org deletes
> expired domain names
> from its system every day, and places those names
> into a special pool. All
> ICANN-accredited domain name registrars have an
> identical level of access to
> this pool, regardless of the size of their customer
> bases.
> 2. Instead of making access to the deleted name pool
> available to the
> general public, some registrars serve only a handful
> of customers, often in
> return for substantial cash payments.
> 3. These privileged customers, using advanced
> hardware and software to
> query the deleted name pool thousands of times per
> second, are constantly
> ready and waiting to intercept expired domain names
> the millisecond they are
> deleted from the registry. The registry has
> reported that there can be up
> to 500,000 registration requests per name.
> 4. There is virtually no way for the typical user to
> compete
> effectively for deleting names in this environment.
> 5. Some domain name buyers operate as speculators
> who attempt to
> "ransom" acquired names to legitimate domain name
> users. Because the
> minimum cost of pursuing a domain name dispute is
> $1,500 (the typical
> minimum dispute resolution filing fee), this figure
> is often an unaffordable
> starting point for negotiations.
> 6. Because this status quo is so beneficial to a few
> individuals and
> companies, it is in their interest that the Internet
> community not be aware
> of their operations. That's why it's virtually
> impossible to find their
> services advertised. To this point: A recent study
> of nearly 1300 valuable
> deleted domain names determined that fully 97.9% had
> been re-registered by
> only a small handful of professionals using means
> not available to
> mainstream users, while a mere 2.1% had been
> registered on registrars'
> public websites. (See article entitled "Of, By, and
> For a Mere Handful of
> People." State of the Domain, April 2002, pp. 19,
> 22. Available online at
> www.sotd.info).
> 7. The WLS solves the problem of unequal access by
> creating a
> transparent, fair, first-come-first-served system.
> ICANN should not be
> distracted from the real problem-providing equal
> public access to expiring
> names-by red herring issues, such as:
> a. "Inadvertent deletion": the accidental failure
> of a
> registrant to renew a registration, despite multiple
> warnings from its
> registrar. (An emotional issue, to be sure, but one
> affecting just a
> miniscule fraction of the 800,000 names that expire
> monthly-and one that is
> easily solved by registrars themselves);
> b. "Competition": the imaginary claim that the
> WLS
> would eliminate something that does not actually
> exist today, except to the
> extent that professionals compete with each other in
> a closed environment
> that excludes over 99% of the public;
> c. "Price": the self-contradictory argument that
> the
> WLS's proposed $35 wholesale price would be too low
> to deter speculators,
> but too high for mainstream users.
>
> Without the support of Internet users, we believe
> the current situation will
> further deteriorate as more domain name registrars
> unfairly devote their
> registry connections solely to just a few privileged
> customers. Without the
> WLS, mainstream consumers such as trademark holders,
> businesses,
> individuals, and charitable organizations will
> continue to be denied the
> possibility of acquiring valuable expired names.
>
> ICANN should therefore endorse the WLS immediately.
>
> To make your voice heard in favor of equal access,
> please reply with
> comments to:
>
> [email-masked]
> <mailto:[email-masked]>
>
>
> Please circulate this petition to anyone else who
> may be concerned about
> this important issue.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Kjel P. Holmberg
> Business Development Manager
> SnapNames
> 115 NW 1st Ave, 3rd Floor
> Portland, Oregon 97209
> [email-masked]
> 503.219.9990 ext. 236
>

- --
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, 15 Jun 2002 23:59:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: Rick Wesson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] SnapNames is now whining to total strangers!

Loren,

If you haev a problem I suggest you contact your congress critter (look
them up at http://www.congress.org ) and write letters.

- -rick

On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Loren Stocker wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> Now SnapNames has wrapped themselves in the flag of equal opportunity for the
> helpless public. Duh?
>
> How is John Q Netizen going to feel about equal access when the same
> speculators put their "substantial cash payments" towards buying all the best
> WLS options? How naive does Mr. Holmberg think we are?
>
> All that's really needed is for Verisign to take uncertainty out of the domain
> drops -- shorten the window, publish the times, and let everyone know when to
> quit. That's transparent, fair, first-come-first-serve, and it's free, free,
> free!
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Loren Stocker
> www.evil.biz!
>
> PS: We love Snapnames! But they should stay at the Registrar level
> and compete like everyone else -- and quit sucking up to Verisign!
>
> Petition follows>>>
>
> --- kjel holmberg <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > From: kjel holmberg <[email-masked]>
> > To: kjel holmberg <[email-masked]>
> > CC: "[email-masked]'"
> > <[email-masked]>
> > Subject: Your voice counts right now - sign brief
> > petition for equal acces
> > s to Internet domain names.
> > Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 14:03:58 -0700
> >
> >
> > June 12, 2002
> >
> > Dear Domain Name System Users (and Friends of
> > SnapNames),
> >
> > The purpose of this letter is to ask your support
> > for a critical improvement
> > to the domain name system that solves the following
> > problem: Typical domain
> > name users have almost no access to the over 800,000
> > valuable domain names
> > that expire and should be available for
> > re-registration every month.
> >
> > Please take a moment to review the attached
> > petition. If you agree, please
> > reply with comments to:
> >
> > [email-masked]
> > <mailto:[email-masked]>
> >
> > Please reply as soon as possible. The Internet
> > Corporation for Assigned
> > Names and Numbers (ICANN), the domain name
> > industry's oversight
> > organization, will consider this issue at its next
> > meeting, June 24-28.
> > Those opposing your access to previously-owned
> > domain names have made their
> > case strenuously, so it's critical that ICANN hear
> > from supporters of equal
> > access, who have yet to be heard.
> >
> > Thank you for your time and input.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > SnapNames.com, Inc.
> > Portland, Oregon
> >
> >
> >
> > Please circulate this petition to anyone else who
> > may be concerned about
> > this important issue.
> >
> >
> > P E T I T I O N
> >
> > To the Board of Directors of the Internet
> > Corporation for Assigned Names and
> > Numbers (ICANN):
> >
> > We, the undersigned domain name and Internet users,
> > intellectual property
> > owners, members of the general public, and
> > representatives of the same, are
> > writing to urge the Board of Directors of the
> > Internet Corporation for
> > Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) to endorse the
> > proposed Wait Listing
> > Service (WLS) at the ICANN meeting in Bucharest,
> > Romania, June 24-28, 2002.
> >
> > The WLS is a fair and sensible system that lets
> > legitimate mainstream users
> > acquire expiring domain names. The WLS represents a
> > tremendous improvement
> > over the status quo in which a handful of
> > professional domain name buyers
> > purchase preferential access to expiring names from
> > registrars and exclude
> > the general public. The WLS represents the first
> > significant innovation in
> > the domain name system since the establishment of
> > formal Internet
> > governance. The WLS is necessary to ensure the
> > general public equal access
> > to all domain names.
> >
> > There is currently no orderly, transparent, and fair
> > system for allocating
> > the approximately 800,000 domain names that expire
> > every month. Instead,
> > here is how most domain name consumers are locked
> > out today:
> >
> > 1. The registry for .com, .net, and .org deletes
> > expired domain names
> > from its system every day, and places those names
> > into a special pool. All
> > ICANN-accredited domain name registrars have an
> > identical level of access to
> > this pool, regardless of the size of their customer
> > bases.
> > 2. Instead of making access to the deleted name pool
> > available to the
> > general public, some registrars serve only a handful
> > of customers, often in
> > return for substantial cash payments.
> > 3. These privileged customers, using advanced
> > hardware and software to
> > query the deleted name pool thousands of times per
> > second, are constantly
> > ready and waiting to intercept expired domain names
> > the millisecond they are
> > deleted from the registry. The registry has
> > reported that there can be up
> > to 500,000 registration requests per name.
> > 4. There is virtually no way for the typical user to
> > compete
> > effectively for deleting names in this environment.
> > 5. Some domain name buyers operate as speculators
> > who attempt to
> > "ransom" acquired names to legitimate domain name
> > users. Because the
> > minimum cost of pursuing a domain name dispute is
> > $1,500 (the typical
> > minimum dispute resolution filing fee), this figure
> > is often an unaffordable
> > starting point for negotiations.
> > 6. Because this status quo is so beneficial to a few
> > individuals and
> > companies, it is in their interest that the Internet
> > community not be aware
> > of their operations. That's why it's virtually
> > impossible to find their
> > services advertised. To this point: A recent study
> > of nearly 1300 valuable
> > deleted domain names determined that fully 97.9% had
> > been re-registered by
> > only a small handful of professionals using means
> > not available to
> > mainstream users, while a mere 2.1% had been
> > registered on registrars'
> > public websites. (See article entitled "Of, By, and
> > For a Mere Handful of
> > People." State of the Domain, April 2002, pp. 19,
> > 22. Available online at
> > www.sotd.info).
> > 7. The WLS solves the problem of unequal access by
> > creating a
> > transparent, fair, first-come-first-served system.
> > ICANN should not be
> > distracted from the real problem-providing equal
> > public access to expiring
> > names-by red herring issues, such as:
> > a. "Inadvertent deletion": the accidental failure
> > of a
> > registrant to renew a registration, despite multiple
> > warnings from its
> > registrar. (An emotional issue, to be sure, but one
> > affecting just a
> > miniscule fraction of the 800,000 names that expire
> > monthly-and one that is
> > easily solved by registrars themselves);
> > b. "Competition": the imaginary claim that the
> > WLS
> > would eliminate something that does not actually
> > exist today, except to the
> > extent that professionals compete with each other in
> > a closed environment
> > that excludes over 99% of the public;
> > c. "Price": the self-contradictory argument that
> > the
> > WLS's proposed $35 wholesale price would be too low
> > to deter speculators,
> > but too high for mainstream users.
> >
> > Without the support of Internet users, we believe
> > the current situation will
> > further deteriorate as more domain name registrars
> > unfairly devote their
> > registry connections solely to just a few privileged
> > customers. Without the
> > WLS, mainstream consumers such as trademark holders,
> > businesses,
> > individuals, and charitable organizations will
> > continue to be denied the
> > possibility of acquiring valuable expired names.
> >
> > ICANN should therefore endorse the WLS immediately.
> >
> > To make your voice heard in favor of equal access,
> > please reply with
> > comments to:
> >
> > [email-masked]
> > <mailto:[email-masked]>
> >
> >
> > Please circulate this petition to anyone else who
> > may be concerned about
> > this important issue.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Kjel P. Holmberg
> > Business Development Manager
> > SnapNames
> > 115 NW 1st Ave, 3rd Floor
> > Portland, Oregon 97209
> > [email-masked]
> > 503.219.9990 ext. 236
> >
>
>
> --
> 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: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 00:13:04 -0700
From: Loren Stocker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Re: [ga] SnapNames is now whining to total strangers!]

Rick,

WLS is everybody's problem -- everyone on these relevant lists and everyone
with a domain.

Are you writing your critter?.. Or just suggesting I discuss this elsewhere?

Best, Loren

If you haev a problem I suggest you contact your congress critter (look
them up at http://www.congress.org ) and write letters.

- -rick

On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Loren Stocker wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> Now SnapNames has wrapped themselves in the flag of equal opportunity for
the
> helpless public. Duh?
>
> How is John Q Netizen going to feel about equal access when the same
> speculators put their "substantial cash payments" towards buying all the
best
> WLS options? How naive does Mr. Holmberg think we are?
>
> All that's really needed is for Verisign to take uncertainty out of the
domain
> drops -- shorten the window, publish the times, and let everyone know when
to
> quit. That's transparent, fair, first-come-first-serve, and it's free,
free,
> free!
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Loren Stocker
> www.evil.biz!
>
> PS: We love Snapnames! But they should stay at the Registrar level
> and compete like everyone else -- and quit sucking up to Verisign!
>
> Petition follows>>>
>
> --- kjel holmberg <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > From: kjel holmberg <[email-masked]>
> > To: kjel holmberg <[email-masked]>
> > CC: "[email-masked]'"
> > <[email-masked]>
> > Subject: Your voice counts right now - sign brief
> > petition for equal acces
> > s to Internet domain names.
> > Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 14:03:58 -0700
> >
> >
> > June 12, 2002
> >
> > Dear Domain Name System Users (and Friends of
> > SnapNames),
> >
> > The purpose of this letter is to ask your support
> > for a critical improvement
> > to the domain name system that solves the following
> > problem: Typical domain
> > name users have almost no access to the over 800,000
> > valuable domain names
> > that expire and should be available for
> > re-registration every month.
> >
> > Please take a moment to review the attached
> > petition. If you agree, please
> > reply with comments to:
> >
> > [email-masked]
> > <mailto:[email-masked]>
> >
> > Please reply as soon as possible. The Internet
> > Corporation for Assigned
> > Names and Numbers (ICANN), the domain name
> > industry's oversight
> > organization, will consider this issue at its next
> > meeting, June 24-28.
> > Those opposing your access to previously-owned
> > domain names have made their
> > case strenuously, so it's critical that ICANN hear
> > from supporters of equal
> > access, who have yet to be heard.
> >
> > Thank you for your time and input.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > SnapNames.com, Inc.
> > Portland, Oregon
> >
> >
> >
> > Please circulate this petition to anyone else who
> > may be concerned about
> > this important issue.
> >
> >
> > P E T I T I O N
> >
> > To the Board of Directors of the Internet
> > Corporation for Assigned Names and
> > Numbers (ICANN):
> >
> > We, the undersigned domain name and Internet users,
> > intellectual property
> > owners, members of the general public, and
> > representatives of the same, are
> > writing to urge the Board of Directors of the
> > Internet Corporation for
> > Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) to endorse the
> > proposed Wait Listing
> > Service (WLS) at the ICANN meeting in Bucharest,
> > Romania, June 24-28, 2002.
> >
> > The WLS is a fair and sensible system that lets
> > legitimate mainstream users
> > acquire expiring domain names. The WLS represents a
> > tremendous improvement
> > over the status quo in which a handful of
> > professional domain name buyers
> > purchase preferential access to expiring names from
> > registrars and exclude
> > the general public. The WLS represents the first
> > significant innovation in
> > the domain name system since the establishment of
> > formal Internet
> > governance. The WLS is necessary to ensure the
> > general public equal access
> > to all domain names.
> >
> > There is currently no orderly, transparent, and fair
> > system for allocating
> > the approximately 800,000 domain names that expire
> > every month. Instead,
> > here is how most domain name consumers are locked
> > out today:
> >
> > 1. The registry for .com, .net, and .org deletes
> > expired domain names
> > from its system every day, and places those names
> > into a special pool. All
> > ICANN-accredited domain name registrars have an
> > identical level of access to
> > this pool, regardless of the size of their customer
> > bases.
> > 2. Instead of making access to the deleted name pool
> > available to the
> > general public, some registrars serve only a handful
> > of customers, often in
> > return for substantial cash payments.
> > 3. These privileged customers, using advanced
> > hardware and software to
> > query the deleted name pool thousands of times per
> > second, are constantly
> > ready and waiting to intercept expired domain names
> > the millisecond they are
> > deleted from the registry. The registry has
> > reported that there can be up
> > to 500,000 registration requests per name.
> > 4. There is virtually no way for the typical user to
> > compete
> > effectively for deleting names in this environment.
> > 5. Some domain name buyers operate as speculators
> > who attempt to
> > "ransom" acquired names to legitimate domain name
> > users. Because the
> > minimum cost of pursuing a domain name dispute is
> > $1,500 (the typical
> > minimum dispute resolution filing fee), this figure
> > is often an unaffordable
> > starting point for negotiations.
> > 6. Because this status quo is so beneficial to a few
> > individuals and
> > companies, it is in their interest that the Internet
> > community not be aware
> > of their operations. That's why it's virtually
> > impossible to find their
> > services advertised. To this point: A recent study
> > of nearly 1300 valuable
> > deleted domain names determined that fully 97.9% had
> > been re-registered by
> > only a small handful of professionals using means
> > not available to
> > mainstream users, while a mere 2.1% had been
> > registered on registrars'
> > public websites. (See article entitled "Of, By, and
> > For a Mere Handful of
> > People." State of the Domain, April 2002, pp. 19,
> > 22. Available online at
> > www.sotd.info).
> > 7. The WLS solves the problem of unequal access by
> > creating a
> > transparent, fair, first-come-first-served system.
> > ICANN should not be
> > distracted from the real problem-providing equal
> > public access to expiring
> > names-by red herring issues, such as:
> > a. "Inadvertent deletion": the accidental failure
> > of a
> > registrant to renew a registration, despite multiple
> > warnings from its
> > registrar. (An emotional issue, to be sure, but one
> > affecting just a
> > miniscule fraction of the 800,000 names that expire
> > monthly-and one that is
> > easily solved by registrars themselves);
> > b. "Competition": the imaginary claim that the
> > WLS
> > would eliminate something that does not actually
> > exist today, except to the
> > extent that professionals compete with each other in
> > a closed environment
> > that excludes over 99% of the public;
> > c. "Price": the self-contradictory argument that
> > the
> > WLS's proposed $35 wholesale price would be too low
> > to deter speculators,
> > but too high for mainstream users.
> >
> > Without the support of Internet users, we believe
> > the current situation will
> > further deteriorate as more domain name registrars
> > unfairly devote their
> > registry connections solely to just a few privileged
> > customers. Without the
> > WLS, mainstream consumers such as trademark holders,
> > businesses,
> > individuals, and charitable organizations will
> > continue to be denied the
> > possibility of acquiring valuable expired names.
> >
> > ICANN should therefore endorse the WLS immediately.
> >
> > To make your voice heard in favor of equal access,
> > please reply with
> > comments to:
> >
> > [email-masked]
> > <mailto:[email-masked]>
> >
> >
> > Please circulate this petition to anyone else who
> > may be concerned about
> > this important issue.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Kjel P. Holmberg
> > Business Development Manager
> > SnapNames
> > 115 NW 1st Ave, 3rd Floor
> > Portland, Oregon 97209
> > [email-masked]
> > 503.219.9990 ext. 236
> >
>
>
> --
> 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: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 16:13:27 +0100
From: "Jon Lawrence" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] South African .za ccTLD administrator takes drastic  action to prevent government takeover

Frankly as an Australian, and someone who has been involved in administration
of the .au ccTLD I welcomed the intervention of the Australian government
in assisting auDA to take control of the .au space from its previous delegate.

Robert Elz (the previous delegate) did an excellent unpaid job in maintaining
the .au space for many years however he was neither elected to that position
nor was he responsive to the needs of the internet community in Australia
in recent years.

We now have a domain space in Australia that is managed by a body that is
accountable to the internet community.  Whether they manage the space well
or not remains to be seen but at least there has now been a number of major
steps forward - namely the easing of the over-restrictive allocation policies
in place and the creation of a potentially world-class registry operation.

I don't see anything there that makes this a bad move at all.  Australia
has a vigorous democratic process and is capable of managing its domain
space in any way it sees fit.

regards

Jon Lawrence

>-- Original Message --
>Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 08:00:27 -0700
>From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
>Reply-To: [email-masked]
>To: Jim Ayson <[email-masked]>
>CC: [email-masked]
>Subject: Re: [ga] South African .za ccTLD administrator takes drastic 
action
>to prevent government takeover
>
>
>Friday, June 14, 2002, 7:43:37 AM, Jim Ayson wrote:
>
>> At 10:45 PM 6/13/2002 -0700, William X Walsh wrote:
>>>Lawrie, a South African Internet pioneer who is not paid for
>>>administrating the ZA domain, told Reuters he had taken pre-emptive
>>>action to stop the government from seizing control.
>>>
>>>"The storage of the primary zone file that defines and controls the ZA
>>>namespace is now offshore," he said.
>
>> This is a problem when one individual controls a ccTLD. What if Lawrie
>gets 
>> hit by a truck tommorow? Will .ZA just go into limbo?
>
>Not at all.  Just like the Internet didn't collapse when Jon Postel
>died.
>
>There is no problem with one person being the delegate for a Top Level
>Domain.
>
>The problem is that the government thinks it has the sole ability to
>determine who runs that TLD, or that it has some rights to make that
>decision unilaterally.  It doesn't.
>
>The management of that TLD is a matter of the delegation between IANA
>and the delegate.  The government has no role in that.
>
>Unfortunately, however, in exchange for support for ICANN, ICANN sold
>out to powerful governmental interests such as the European
>governments and Australian government who demanded that they have a
>say in the management of ccTLDs.  This was a bad move in my opinion, a
>very bad one.  It was a step backwards for the effort to maintain and
>further private management of the DNS.  But in exchange for
>recognition, ICANN sold out and created the GAC and then adopted a
>change to RFC1591 that gave governments a stronger role in the ccTLD
>arena.
>
>However, that doesn't give any government the right to decide on its
>own that it is assuming management of a ccTLD.  It merely makes the
>government a party to any discussions about redelegation issues.
>
>South Africa is making a move based out of complete ignorance over how
>the DNS works, and what is involved, simply because a few ignorant
>legislators realized that they could create a new bureaucracy and
>possible revenue source for the government.
>
>The delegate should be applauded for taking the necessary steps to
>prevent the nationalization of the ccTLD zone file without a proper
>and informed process in place.
>
>-- 
>Best regards,
>William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
>--
>Save Internet Radio!  
>CARP will kill Webcasting!
>http://www.saveinternetradio.org/
>
>
>--
>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: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 15:15:29 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] SnapNames is now whining to total strangers!

Rick and all assembly members,

  I agree that writing your congress person is one place wy which
such concerns can be potentially addressed.  However Rick, as you
know and has been again reiterated by Nancy VIctory on June 12
in her testimony to the Senate committee, the ICANN Board and
staff should also be paying much closer attention to such concerns
from stakeholder/users, as should the GAC according the Ms Victory.
In addition Rick, as you also know the MoU and the White Paper
specifies that the ICANN Board and staff are the first line of
oversight in such matters.  Hence, Loren making yet again his
concerns, as have been voiced/stated by many others regarding
WLS, known here is the proper place for them to yet again be
expressed.

Rick Wesson wrote:

> Loren,
>
> If you haev a problem I suggest you contact your congress critter (look
> them up at http://www.congress.org ) and write letters.
>
> -rick
>
> On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Loren Stocker wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Now SnapNames has wrapped themselves in the flag of equal opportunity for the
> > helpless public. Duh?
> >
> > How is John Q Netizen going to feel about equal access when the same
> > speculators put their "substantial cash payments" towards buying all the best
> > WLS options? How naive does Mr. Holmberg think we are?
> >
> > All that's really needed is for Verisign to take uncertainty out of the domain
> > drops -- shorten the window, publish the times, and let everyone know when to
> > quit. That's transparent, fair, first-come-first-serve, and it's free, free,
> > free!
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Loren Stocker
> > www.evil.biz!
> >
> > PS: We love Snapnames! But they should stay at the Registrar level
> > and compete like everyone else -- and quit sucking up to Verisign!
> >
> > Petition follows>>>
> >
> > --- kjel holmberg <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > > From: kjel holmberg <[email-masked]>
> > > To: kjel holmberg <[email-masked]>
> > > CC: "[email-masked]'"
> > > <[email-masked]>
> > > Subject: Your voice counts right now - sign brief
> > > petition for equal acces
> > > s to Internet domain names.
> > > Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 14:03:58 -0700
> > >
> > >
> > > June 12, 2002
> > >
> > > Dear Domain Name System Users (and Friends of
> > > SnapNames),
> > >
> > > The purpose of this letter is to ask your support
> > > for a critical improvement
> > > to the domain name system that solves the following
> > > problem: Typical domain
> > > name users have almost no access to the over 800,000
> > > valuable domain names
> > > that expire and should be available for
> > > re-registration every month.
> > >
> > > Please take a moment to review the attached
> > > petition. If you agree, please
> > > reply with comments to:
> > >
> > > [email-masked]
> > > <mailto:[email-masked]>
> > >
> > > Please reply as soon as possible. The Internet
> > > Corporation for Assigned
> > > Names and Numbers (ICANN), the domain name
> > > industry's oversight
> > > organization, will consider this issue at its next
> > > meeting, June 24-28.
> > > Those opposing your access to previously-owned
> > > domain names have made their
> > > case strenuously, so it's critical that ICANN hear
> > > from supporters of equal
> > > access, who have yet to be heard.
> > >
> > > Thank you for your time and input.
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > >
> > > SnapNames.com, Inc.
> > > Portland, Oregon
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Please circulate this petition to anyone else who
> > > may be concerned about
> > > this important issue.
> > >
> > >
> > > P E T I T I O N
> > >
> > > To the Board of Directors of the Internet
> > > Corporation for Assigned Names and
> > > Numbers (ICANN):
> > >
> > > We, the undersigned domain name and Internet users,
> > > intellectual property
> > > owners, members of the general public, and
> > > representatives of the same, are
> > > writing to urge the Board of Directors of the
> > > Internet Corporation for
> > > Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) to endorse the
> > > proposed Wait Listing
> > > Service (WLS) at the ICANN meeting in Bucharest,
> > > Romania, June 24-28, 2002.
> > >
> > > The WLS is a fair and sensible system that lets
> > > legitimate mainstream users
> > > acquire expiring domain names. The WLS represents a
> > > tremendous improvement
> > > over the status quo in which a handful of
> > > professional domain name buyers
> > > purchase preferential access to expiring names from
> > > registrars and exclude
> > > the general public. The WLS represents the first
> > > significant innovation in
> > > the domain name system since the establishment of
> > > formal Internet
> > > governance. The WLS is necessary to ensure the
> > > general public equal access
> > > to all domain names.
> > >
> > > There is currently no orderly, transparent, and fair
> > > system for allocating
> > > the approximately 800,000 domain names that expire
> > > every month. Instead,
> > > here is how most domain name consumers are locked
> > > out today:
> > >
> > > 1. The registry for .com, .net, and .org deletes
> > > expired domain names
> > > from its system every day, and places those names
> > > into a special pool. All
> > > ICANN-accredited domain name registrars have an
> > > identical level of access to
> > > this pool, regardless of the size of their customer
> > > bases.
> > > 2. Instead of making access to the deleted name pool
> > > available to the
> > > general public, some registrars serve only a handful
> > > of customers, often in
> > > return for substantial cash payments.
> > > 3. These privileged customers, using advanced
> > > hardware and software to
> > > query the deleted name pool thousands of times per
> > > second, are constantly
> > > ready and waiting to intercept expired domain names
> > > the millisecond they are
> > > deleted from the registry. The registry has
> > > reported that there can be up
> > > to 500,000 registration requests per name.
> > > 4. There is virtually no way for the typical user to
> > > compete
> > > effectively for deleting names in this environment.
> > > 5. Some domain name buyers operate as speculators
> > > who attempt to
> > > "ransom" acquired names to legitimate domain name
> > > users. Because the
> > > minimum cost of pursuing a domain name dispute is
> > > $1,500 (the typical
> > > minimum dispute resolution filing fee), this figure
> > > is often an unaffordable
> > > starting point for negotiations.
> > > 6. Because this status quo is so beneficial to a few
> > > individuals and
> > > companies, it is in their interest that the Internet
> > > community not be aware
> > > of their operations. That's why it's virtually
> > > impossible to find their
> > > services advertised. To this point: A recent study
> > > of nearly 1300 valuable
> > > deleted domain names determined that fully 97.9% had
> > > been re-registered by
> > > only a small handful of professionals using means
> > > not available to
> > > mainstream users, while a mere 2.1% had been
> > > registered on registrars'
> > > public websites. (See article entitled "Of, By, and
> > > For a Mere Handful of
> > > People." State of the Domain, April 2002, pp. 19,
> > > 22. Available online at
> > > www.sotd.info).
> > > 7. The WLS solves the problem of unequal access by
> > > creating a
> > > transparent, fair, first-come-first-served system.
> > > ICANN should not be
> > > distracted from the real problem-providing equal
> > > public access to expiring
> > > names-by red herring issues, such as:
> > > a. "Inadvertent deletion": the accidental failure
> > > of a
> > > registrant to renew a registration, despite multiple
> > > warnings from its
> > > registrar. (An emotional issue, to be sure, but one
> > > affecting just a
> > > miniscule fraction of the 800,000 names that expire
> > > monthly-and one that is
> > > easily solved by registrars themselves);
> > > b. "Competition": the imaginary claim that the
> > > WLS
> > > would eliminate something that does not actually
> > > exist today, except to the
> > > extent that professionals compete with each other in
> > > a closed environment
> > > that excludes over 99% of the public;
> > > c. "Price": the self-contradictory argument that
> > > the
> > > WLS's proposed $35 wholesale price would be too low
> > > to deter speculators,
> > > but too high for mainstream users.
> > >
> > > Without the support of Internet users, we believe
> > > the current situation will
> > > further deteriorate as more domain name registrars
> > > unfairly devote their
> > > registry connections solely to just a few privileged
> > > customers. Without the
> > > WLS, mainstream consumers such as trademark holders,
> > > businesses,
> > > individuals, and charitable organizations will
> > > continue to be denied the
> > > possibility of acquiring valuable expired names.
> > >
> > > ICANN should therefore endorse the WLS immediately.
> > >
> > > To make your voice heard in favor of equal access,
> > > please reply with
> > > comments to:
> > >
> > > [email-masked]
> > > <mailto:[email-masked]>
> > >
> > >
> > > Please circulate this petition to anyone else who
> > > may be concerned about
> > > this important issue.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Kjel P. Holmberg
> > > Business Development Manager
> > > SnapNames
> > > 115 NW 1st Ave, 3rd Floor
> > > Portland, Oregon 97209
> > > [email-masked]
> > > 503.219.9990 ext. 236
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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

Regards,
- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 124k members/stakeholders 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

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

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #1277
*************************