Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #200
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST          Tuesday, November 28 2000          Volume 01 : Number 200

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

Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 18:01:15 +0900 (JST)
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] Yokohama photos

Dear friends,

I'm sorry for this being so late, but we put some photos of the ICANN
Yokohama meeting at the following URL.  Please enjoy.

http://www.nic.ad.jp/jp/intl/organization/icann/meeting/yokohama2000/photo1120.html

- ----
NaoMASA Maruyama (Vice President of JPNIC)
[email-masked]

- --
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, 27 Nov 2000 14:04:21 -0800
From: Darrell Greenwood <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] ICANN TO LOSE COUNTRY CODES?

ICANN TO LOSE COUNTRY CODES?
Country code chiefs have formed a working group that is
considering alternatives to letting ICANN manage their
ccTLDs on its root server.  The move follows resentment
from country code leaders that feel excluded from ICANN's
decision-making on policies affecting the Internet.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/14999.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, 27 Nov 2000 15:04:06 -0800
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] ICANN TO LOSE COUNTRY CODES?

Hello Darrell,

If the article didn't make comments like this one:
+++++++++++++++
Suppose the .uk names were ultimately registered in a single text file
- - as they all are right now - not in Herndon Virginia, home of the NSI
(actually, it's owned by NSI's parent company Verisign) but on a
server in the Anyplace Islands. British users, or anyone else wanting
to click to a .uk domain would need to access Anyplace or one of its
downstream name servers. How would they do that? Through their ISP.
+++++++++++++++

which clearly shows they have no understanding of how the system works
and what is really being discussed, it might have been interesting.

But with such obvious errors in their understanding, I do not believe
their understanding of the issues at hand are very solid either, and
are instead based on the sounding offs of certain alt.roots advocates
who are taking things more than a little out of context when talking
to uninformed reporters such as this one.  TheRegister is known for
writing stories from time to time that are later shown to be totally
offbase, and I think this is probably one of them.

Monday, November 27, 2000, 2:04:21 PM, you wrote:

> ICANN TO LOSE COUNTRY CODES?
> Country code chiefs have formed a working group that is
> considering alternatives to letting ICANN manage their
> ccTLDs on its root server.  The move follows resentment
> from country code leaders that feel excluded from ICANN's
> decision-making on policies affecting the Internet.
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/14999.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

- -- 
Best regards,
 William                            mailto:[email-masked]

- --
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: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 01:21:17 +0100 (CET)
From: Marc Schneiders <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] ICANN TO LOSE COUNTRY CODES?

On Mon, 27 Nov 2000, at 15:04 [=GMT-0800], William X. Walsh wrote:

> If the article didn't make comments like this one:
> +++++++++++++++
> Suppose the .uk names were ultimately registered in a single text file
> - as they all are right now - not in Herndon Virginia, home of the NSI
> (actually, it's owned by NSI's parent company Verisign) but on a
> server in the Anyplace Islands. British users, or anyone else wanting
> to click to a .uk domain would need to access Anyplace or one of its
> downstream name servers. How would they do that? Through their ISP.
> +++++++++++++++
> 
> which clearly shows they have no understanding of how the system works
> and what is really being discussed, it might have been interesting.

Journalists do not always get all the facts straight. It is remarkable
that the one who wrote this at least found the issue. It didn't get
through that much.

Of course ccTLDs won't change to another root. They don't need to. But
the existence of altroots makes that they can say to ICANN that they
won't pay the tax levied. And ICANN cannot really threaten to
throw them out. Good for them. 

- -- 
Marc Schneiders (rest in header)

- --
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: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 13:38:29 +0100 (MET)
From: DNSO Secretariat <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Technical problem on GA ga archives

Many thanks to Rogerto Gaetano for spotting a technical problem 
- -- lock on GA ga list archiving since Nov 9th (probably majordomo's 
queues handling bug ?).
It has been fixed.

All archives at glance in http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

DNSO Secretariat
- --
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: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 13:30:02 -0800
From: Darrell Greenwood <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Judge Orders Sex.Com Returned To Original Owner

JUDGE ORDERS SEX.COM RETURNED TO ORIGINAL OWNER
The sex.com case took another turn yesterday as a judge
ordered the domain returned to the original owner concluding
that the name was likely stolen.  The judge also ordered
that $25 million be placed with the federal court until the
litigation is concluded and damages are awarded.
http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,40380,00.html
http://www0.mercurycenter.com/svtech/news/front/docs/sex112800.htm
- --
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 #200
************************