Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #570
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST           Wednesday, June 27 2001           Volume 01 : Number 570

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

Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 12:45:41 -0000
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Nomination for representative to the NC Review TF - Eric Dierker (fwd)

Stefan,

You wrote:
>
>I am not sure, whether this is the right venue to discuss .vn issues.
>

Well, the subject has been brought up in support for a nomination by the GA, 
and I don't see how the continuation of the debate could be ruled out of 
order.

Also, there have been some interesting developments, like the question from 
WXW to you about cryptography below:

[WXW wrote, quoting you:]
> > On-line credit-card payments need https protocol, which includes
> > encryption. Encryption is by the letter of the rules usually illegal 
>(all
> > the customers would need a permission). Will Hi-Tek get the rules 
>changed
> > first, or just produce again another factum which defies the rules?
>
>Where do you get this from?
>
>Encryption is not illegal.  It think you have a misunderstanding here.
>High grade encryption was illegal to export from the US, but
>SSL/https protocols were still available, and are still available.
>And in any event, the US has relaxed the export controls extensively.
>With the exception of a few countries now, the browser makers can
>distribute high level encryption with their products to anyone (And
>do).
>

I just assume that you mean that encripted transmission is currently illegal 
in VietNam, but I am curious to hear your authoritative answer, and I am 
sure that the issue about different local laws influencing the Internet is 
of interest to most of the people in the GA.

Best regards
Roberto

PS: How are things in the ISTF?

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

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

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

Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 08:30:47 +0200
From: Stefan Probst <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Nomination for representative to the NC Review TF - Eric Dierker (fwd)

At 22:29 26.6.2001 -0700, Jeff Williams wrote:
>Stefan and all assembly members,
>
>Stefan Probst wrote:
>
> > Dear Jeff,
> >
> > I am not sure, whether this is the right venue to discuss .vn issues.
>
>I am quite sure it is not.  My original response on this thread was made
>to you, Eric, Thomas, Lee ect..  privately.  You choose to post it
>to this forum.

I did answer to your posts privately. However, before I received them, I 
made a short statement to the list, saying, that the .vn ccTLD is not to be 
launched within a few days, but in fact up and running since years.
You responded to that post and thus it was continuing here on this list. I 
did not drag this thread to the list, but merely continuing it.

>If any forum is a good one for this sort of exchange
>it would be the [email-masked] Forum.  However sense you choose
>to again respond on this forum I am obliged to respond as well here.

OK, let's stop this "escalation" here on the list. Everybody interested, 
pls. announce it, and we'll do a c/c list.

> > I forwarded the URLs and the mails to some other people who are working on
> > the Net in Vietnam, and their comments were much more harsh than mine. An
> > absolutely misleading domain like "vnnic.com" for somebody who maybe
> > provides some SW for the registry, or will be a future registrar or
> > whatever, is IMHO everything else than honest business behaviour.
>
>Whom exactly did you send the URL's you mention to?  E-Mail addresses please.

It is meanwhile posted (forwarded by somebody else) to the "[VN IT 
discussion group]" <[email-masked]>.
This list contains people who are in development and/or IT in Vietnam. It 
is not yet put on "[VN IT I discussion group]" <[email-masked]>, 
a list for internet techies in Vietnam (techies of several ISPs and 
others). On the latter list we helped e.g. the VDC people to sort out their 
messy DSN setup last year. Both lists run on a server of Rob Hurle.

>I also do not see any business behavior on the part of vnnic.com or 
>hi-tek.com thus far.  If you could be a bit more specific please?

What does the domain "vnnic.com" imply? Since when does a contracted 
marketing company assume the name of the marketed product?
You judge.

> > I still don't know what hi-tek is really doing.
>
>   Yes this seems obvious to me...  Thank you for admitting it...

If their website would be more about detailled facts, not so much about 
wishful dreaming (at least as of this time), I would know better....
For now I have to live on the bits and pieces, which I get from your/their 
mails and from their websites.

Rgds.
Stefan

- --
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: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 07:05:45 -0700
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] cryptography etc. & Policy etc.

Roberto et al,

You are very right here. This one of those areas where us policy wogs need to
interface more with the techies. Again misunderstanding and disinformation are
at the crux of this issue.

U.S. policy in general allows for e-commerce cryptography to freely flow, that
is a generality.  U.S. policy is more concerned with capacity than encryption,
again a generality and my use of capacity is intentionally vague.

We have to keep in mind just as IP interests are by far the strongest
"lobbyists" for UDRP matters so they are for commerce.  e-commerce encryption
helps the flow of goods and money and therefor is good for overall commerce. Of
course the U.S. is all for this precept. Now national secret type cryptology is
another story but that involves capacity(again vague).

I mentioned cookies in my earlier post which I am sure some found quite out of
context.  But it is not.  Transnational cookiedom is a possible problem.
Electronic Identification of international citizens on a non transparent basis
is a policy nightmare when it comes to privacy.

I am sure I have bored you all to tears.  If this thread continues I will be
happy to provide some URLS to further the marketing.  Remember marketing is
education and education is marketing and it should be accomplished inside-out
and outside-in across all borders political and physical.

Sincerely,
Eric

Roberto Gaetano wrote:

> Stefan,
>
> You wrote:
> >
> >I am not sure, whether this is the right venue to discuss .vn issues.
> >
>
> Well, the subject has been brought up in support for a nomination by the GA,
> and I don't see how the continuation of the debate could be ruled out of
> order.
>
> Also, there have been some interesting developments, like the question from
> WXW to you about cryptography below:
>
> [WXW wrote, quoting you:]
> > > On-line credit-card payments need https protocol, which includes
> > > encryption. Encryption is by the letter of the rules usually illegal
> >(all
> > > the customers would need a permission). Will Hi-Tek get the rules
> >changed
> > > first, or just produce again another factum which defies the rules?
> >
> >Where do you get this from?
> >
> >Encryption is not illegal.  It think you have a misunderstanding here.
> >High grade encryption was illegal to export from the US, but
> >SSL/https protocols were still available, and are still available.
> >And in any event, the US has relaxed the export controls extensively.
> >With the exception of a few countries now, the browser makers can
> >distribute high level encryption with their products to anyone (And
> >do).
> >
>
> I just assume that you mean that encripted transmission is currently illegal
> in VietNam, but I am curious to hear your authoritative answer, and I am
> sure that the issue about different local laws influencing the Internet is
> of interest to most of the people in the GA.
>
> Best regards
> Roberto
>
> PS: How are things in the ISTF?
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

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

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

Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 09:16:20 -0700
From: [email-masked] (Kristy McKee)
Subject: Re: [ga] Admin note: I have resigned as list monitor

At 12:28 PM 6/27/2001 +0000, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
>Eric Dierker wrote:
>
>>
>>Tierra Firma - on solid ground.  The winds are shifting and it is time 
>>for men
>>like Harald to step aside.  They do not fit in with the new genre of
>>hardworking people with open and transparent agendas who do not care about
>>control as much as their ideals.
>
>
>I concur that Harald, as a person that over the years has built something 
>for the Internet (and that is still doing so as IETF Chair), is 
>unfortunately out of place in the GA.
>
>Regards
>Roberto

Okay,

Yeah, sure, get rid of all the mechanics and engineers and see how it goes.

I do not think milliseconds would pass before we had all been sought out 
for rehire.

But I do agree that netizens really do not have proper support in the 
DNSO's GA.  One reason is most of the participants refuse to read enough to 
understand the tool they are using much less discuss it which may be (I 
imagine) why so many choose to create personal arguments.  Now there are 
some folks in this group who are fabulous and I think we all know who they are.

Also, I have noted when taking my own vehicle to the mechanic how cruel 
people are to their mechanics - as if the mechanic herself was the cause of 
the customer's ignorance or poor driving habits.  (This reminds me of when 
we were a first Tier ISP and held responsible for many of our client's 
computers whether we had seen them or not.)

I wonder how much longer any netizens will continue to participate within 
this group.  Many have left and those who remain signed up do not 
participate much if at all.

What is truly disgusting is the ineptness showed by some of our American 
participants who do not seem to have any understanding of their 
language.  They write without following the basic rules.   They disregard 
grammar structure, spelling rules, punctuation, et cetera.  How is anyone 
supposed to understand what they have written?

Disappointed,

~k

For every ten people who are clipping at the branches of evil, you're lucky 
to  find one who's hacking at the roots.

           -  -  -  -  -  -  Henry David Thoreau  (1817-1862) American 
philosopher

- --
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: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 09:19:09 -0700
From: [email-masked] (Kristy McKee)
Subject: Re: [ga] Nomination for representative to the NC Review TF - Eric Dierker (fwd)

If you reside in the USA and you want to use secure encryption across 
Country boundaries for your own network or in collaboration with others, 
you must go through a formal process within the USG.  We have assisted our 
clientele with this if anyone has questions.

~k

At 12:45 PM 6/27/2001 +0000, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
>Stefan,
>
>You wrote:
>>
>>I am not sure, whether this is the right venue to discuss .vn issues.
>
>Well, the subject has been brought up in support for a nomination by the 
>GA, and I don't see how the continuation of the debate could be ruled out 
>of order.
>
>Also, there have been some interesting developments, like the question 
>from WXW to you about cryptography below:
>
>[WXW wrote, quoting you:]
>> > On-line credit-card payments need https protocol, which includes
>> > encryption. Encryption is by the letter of the rules usually illegal (all
>> > the customers would need a permission). Will Hi-Tek get the rules changed
>> > first, or just produce again another factum which defies the rules?
>>
>>Where do you get this from?
>>
>>Encryption is not illegal.  It think you have a misunderstanding here.
>>High grade encryption was illegal to export from the US, but
>>SSL/https protocols were still available, and are still available.
>>And in any event, the US has relaxed the export controls extensively.
>>With the exception of a few countries now, the browser makers can
>>distribute high level encryption with their products to anyone (And
>>do).
>
>I just assume that you mean that encripted transmission is currently 
>illegal in VietNam, but I am curious to hear your authoritative answer, 
>and I am sure that the issue about different local laws influencing the 
>Internet is of interest to most of the people in the GA.
>
>Best regards
>Roberto
>
>PS: How are things in the ISTF?
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
>--
>This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
>Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
>("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
>Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

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

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

Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 11:01:54 -0400
From: Joanna Lane <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Domain Names as observed 

on 6/26/01 6:34 PM, Joop Teernstra at [email-masked] wrote:

> To be sure to get to the list, please go to
> www.democracy.org.nz/idno/domainnames.htm
> 
> Joop Teernstra LL.M.,
> councillor
> InternetNZ

Joop et al,
I have posted the current list and link to your URL at
http://www.internetstakeholders.com

Please let me know if you move your page, to ensure the link does not break.
Hope this helps.

Thanks,
Joanna

- --
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: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 10:21:27 -0500
From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Fw: http://www.NIC.BIZ

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
To: "krose@ntia. doc. gov" <[email-masked]>; "Lynn" <[email-masked]>;
"karl@cavebear. com" <[email-masked]>; "edyson@edventure. com"
<[email-masked]>; "vint cerf" <[email-masked]>; "mueller@syr. edu"
<[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>; "Kent Crispin"
<[email-masked]>; "Dave Crocker" <[email-masked]>; "Esther
Dyson" <[email-masked]>; "kepeters@bridgecompanies. com"
<[email-masked]>; "JandL" <[email-masked]>;
<[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 9:52 AM
Subject: http://www.NIC.BIZ

> Click http://www.NIC.BIZ where does it go ?
>
> Is WWW.NIC.BIZ going to be used by ISPs to direct people to their local
> information on registering their .BIZ name ?
>
> Will this be similar to the RFC 1918 Addressing ?...only with names ?
> in other words, will the names NIC.<TLD> be generic ?...for local hosting
?
> ....local marketing....advertising....etc ?
>
> http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/biz/registry-agmt-appx-11may01.htm
> ldap.biz
> multilingual.biz
> mybiz.biz
> network.biz
> <<<<<<<<<<<<< NIC.BIZ ??????
> nntp.biz
> ntp.biz
> order.biz
> pop.biz
> -------------
>
>
> http://www.pacificroot.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois.cgi
> [whois.pacificroot.com]
> Domain Name: nic.biz
>
> Registrant:
>  ARNI
>  Leah Gallegos
>  P.O. Box 9305
>  virginia beach, VA 23450-9305
>  United States
>  Telephone: 757-631-9838
>  Fax: 000-000-0000
>  Email: [email-masked]
>
>       Created: 20001025.2020
> Last Modified: 20001025.2020
>
> DNS Servers:
>  ns1.pacificroot.com
>  ns2.pacificroot.com
>
> --------------
>
> Registrant:   Unir Corporation   One Energy Center   40 Shuman Blvd.
> Naperville, IL 60563   US   Registrar: Dotster (http://www.dotster.com)
> Domain Name: NIC-BIZ.COM      Created on: 03-OCT-00      Expires on:
> 03-OCT-01      Last Updated on: 03-OCT-00   Administrative Contact:
> Fleming, Jim  [email-masked]      Unir Corporation      One
Naperville
> Plaza      Naperville, IL  60563      US      630-505-5801   Technical
> Contact:      Fleming, Jim  [email-masked]      Unir Corporation
> One Naperville Plaza      Naperville, IL  60563      US      630-505-5801
> Domain servers in listed order:      NS1.DOTSTERINC.COM 216.34.94.170
> NS2.DOTSTERINC.COM 64.85.73.15Register a domain name at www.dotster.com
>
>
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12215.html
> "Proof of Concept TLD Development...and Multiple TLD Clusters"
>
>
> Jim Fleming
> http://www.DOT-NZ.com
> http://www.DOT-BIZ.com
> 0:212 - BIZ World
>
>

- --
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: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 08:44:03 -0700
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Registrar acquisition and merger policy

The recent purchase of Registrars.com by Verisign, who also purchased
NameSecure.com, has made me realize that the ICANN needs to
incorporate policy documents governing acquisition policies.

I understand the motivation for Verisign, they are facing drops in
their new domain registration growth rates, and the transfer rate from
Verisign to other registrars is practically a flood.  Acquisitions
allow them to offset some of that, even if only temporarily.

I think a hard and fast policy should be create whereby if an existing
accredited registrar (or their parent company) already directly or
indirectly controls X% of the registered domain names, they should be
enjoined against further acquisitions of accredited registrars.

Enforcement actions can include:
            - Loss of accreditation (most severe)
            - Penalty fees payable to ICANN on a per domain basis
            until they come into compliance
            - 90 day warning to get into compliance. (least severe)

This would serve to bolster the principles of competition, which is
one of the guiding principles in the Green Paper, White Paper, and in
the actual DoC agreements.  It would serve to help avoid anything
resembling an attempt to become, or regain, a monopoly level position,
and ensure that there will be enough accredited registrars to provide
competitive advantages to registrants.

I'd be interested in hearing thoughts on this.

I'm sure our alt-chair will tell us to take this to ga-sys, or is it
ga-icann?  :)  Who can tell?

- -- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Userfriendly.com Domains
The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
DNS Services from $1.65/mo

- --
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: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 08:57:53 -0700
From: "Ben Edelman" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Analysis of Image Online Design .WEB Registrations to Date

In response to my Analysis of Registrations in the Atlantic Root Network
.BIZ TLD (<http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/edelman/dotbiz>), I received
several inquiries suggesting that I apply similar methods to registrations
in other TLDs.

I have repeated the majority of analysis on the Image Online Design .WEB
TLD, again focusing on questions about registration counts and use, again
reaching findings based on data freely available over the Internet.

My work in progress is posted at
<http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/edelman/web>.  I look forward to
feedback from others interested in these questions, and to continued
discussion on the subject.

Ben Edelman

- --
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: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 02:05:27 +1000
From: "Patrick Corliss" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Re: Language and Responsibility

Hi Eric

The following post did not make it to [ga-icann] because you use the word
"owner" in front of the list name.  Your posting follows.  Can I remind all
subscribers that:

(a)    They should not use the word "owner" when posting to a list, and
(b)    Postings must be relevant to the business of the GA.

Please note that I do not undertake to always re-post any failed postings.

Regards
Patrick Corliss

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2001 9:27 AM
Subject: Language and Responsibility

A language represents a culture.

We have watched over the last very few years a proliferation of a new
language.  It is the berth of the Internet speaks.  In it's own way it
represents a lack of divide and yet a great divide.  It is both the
cross and the sword of our WWW existence.  As we all learn better how to
speak it we destroy the nuances and cultural integrity of our own
anthropological languages of our heritage.

Udihe, Eyak and Arikapu face extinction in the next few years.  Navajo
Native American is dying along with Maori New Zealand. In India an
earthquake killed about 30,000 of the 800,000 or so speaking Kutchi.
Linguistic specialists estimate that about one language dies every two
weeks. Europe is estimated to lose over thirty in this new century. More
than half of Asia's 2,197 languages are considered by experts to be at
risk.

There are great strides being taken to preserve the languages and
awareness may save the day.  The Internet is now a killer of languages
and it should be a savior.  We must all endeavor to support
multilingualism whenever we can on the Net.

In the near future Vnnic.com will support a program of sponsoring
websites to help preserve languages.  We invite peoples from all places
to let us know how they would like to contribute their time and effort
to support a language as we technically support them to run a website
promoting their language.

As a man who has had the luxury to do much business all over the world I

can tell you languages are in a small part the words that are used and
in a large part about the history of a given culture and subculture and
sub-subculture.  I encourage you to research Language on your own and
discover the amazing facts such as languages are different even within
English because they represent different cultures.  No and the like is
universal for No but yes ain't universal for nothing.

Please take the time to realize by understanding how to say it in a new
way you look at things in a new light which leads to greater
understanding.

Eric Dierker

- --
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: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 02:16:26 +1000
From: "Patrick Corliss" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] [icann-announce] Open Call for Nominations to ICANN Indendent Review Panel; .biz and .info TLDs Activated

To: ICANN Announcement List <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 17:45:56 -0700
Subject: [icann-announce] Open Call for Nominations to ICANN Indendent
Review Panel; .biz and .info TLDs Activated

Open Call to the Internet Community For Nominations to the ICANN
Independent Review Panel

(26 July 2001)  The ICANN Bylaws call for the establishment of a
procedure by which the actions of the ICANN Board may be subjected to
independent third-party review. The ICANN Independent Review Panel
Nominating Committee is now accepting suggestions from the public for
nominations to the ICANN Independent Review Panel. Members of the public
may submit potential nominees until 26 July 2001.

Mission of the Independent Review Panel

The mission of the Independent Review Panel ("IRP") is to compare
contested actions of the ICANN Board to the Bylaws and Articles of
Incorporation and to declare whether the ICANN Board has acted
consistent with the provisions of those documents. The IRP is also
responsible for reviewing determinations regarding the presence of a
consensus on which an adopted policy is based, to the extent provided in
agreements between ICANN and third parties. The IRP should act in an
open and efficient manner.

Composition of Independent Review Panel

The members of the IRP are nominated by the IRP Nominating Committee and
must be confirmed by a 2/3 vote of the ICANN Board. The IRP will consist
of nine members.  The initial members of the IRP will have terms of
staggered length: three initial members shall be appointed for a 4-year
term; three for a 3-year term; and three for a 2-year term.

Qualifications for Independent Review Panel Members

  * A nominee to the IRP should be a person of high professional
standing and accomplishment.

  * A nominee to the IRP should be (i) a current or former judge, and/or
(ii) an individual with legal training who would qualify for judicial
appointment and who has experience conducting arbitration or a similar
dispute resolution proceeding.

  * A nominee to the IRP must hold no other office or position within
the ICANN structure.

  * The IRP Nominating Committee will make nominations primarily on
grounds of competence, experience, and accomplishment, and without
reference to strict geographic or other quotas. At the same time, the
IRP Nominating Committee will take account of various diversity factors,
including diversity in geographic representation and diversity in legal
systems, in making its choices.

To Submit a Candidate to the Nominating Committee

Members of the public are invited to submit suggestions to the IRP
Nominating Committee for consideration. To do so, please send the
candidate's name, contact information, and evidence of the candidate's
qualifications to [email-masked]. The Open Call period
for submitting suggestions to the IRP Nominating Committee will close 26
July 2001.

Background Information

For more information on the IRP, the IRP Nominating Committee and the
IRP Policy that will guide the work of the IRP and the IRP Nominating
Committee, see http://www.icann.org/committees/indreview/nomcom.htm.

============================================================================
========

Two New Top-Level Domains for the Internet: .biz and .info

Marina del Rey, California, USA (26 June 2001) -- The Internet
Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) today announced that
the first two of the recently authorized top-level domain names for the
Internet - .biz and .info - will be operational tomorrow. These are the
first new global top-level domains (TLDs) since .com and others were
launched in the 1980s.

The .biz and .info TLDs will at first be used just for informational web
sites.  These informational sites will be launched by the companies
selected to operate the new TLDs, NeuLevel, Inc.
(<http://www.neulevel.biz/>) and Afilias Limited
(<http://www.afilias.info/>).  General registration of names ending with
.biz and .info will soon be available through over 90 registrars
accredited by ICANN. Users will be able to reach these new registered
names as early as September, 2001.

"This is an historical milestone for the Internet community and for
ICANN," said M. Stuart Lynn, President and CEO of ICANN. "It
successfully benchmarks what has been a thoughtful community process
over the past year." ICANN is responsible for coordinating the
development of Internet policy for introducing new global TLDs.

The U.S. Department of Commerce promptly accepted ICANN's recommendation
yesterday to add the new TLDs. Under the Memorandum of Understanding
that governs the gradual transition of Internet coordination
responsibilities to ICANN, the Commerce Department's approval is still
required for adding TLDs but was not required for the agreements
themselves between ICANN and NeuLevel or Afilias.

These two new global TLDs are the first of seven approved by the ICANN
Board of Directors last November. Agreements still remain to be signed
for the remaining five top-level domains: .name, .pro, .aero, .coop, and
.museum.

Lynn noted these first steps took several months because of the need to
introduce new global TLDs in a measured and responsible manner with as
little risk as possible. "We are breaking new ground," he added. "We are
responsible for ensuring long-term Internet stability and minimizing
risk.  ICANN's seal of authenticity on these new TLDs guarantees they
will work properly for every Internet user from wherever they are."

NeuLevel, Afilias, and the operators of the other potential top-level
domain registries have worked through these extended processes in
partnership with ICANN and the Internet community. "We are  excited
about the launch of the new TLDs," noted Douglas Armentrout, CEO of
NeuLevel. "We look forward to building .biz  for businesses on the net."

"We can expect that these new top level domains will pioneer the way for
others to come," added Hal Lubsen, President of Afilias. "Stability is
paramount for the Internet."

Over the coming months, ICANN will evaluate the performance of these
seven new top-level domains as a "proof of concept." This evaluation
will inform the ICANN Board of Directors to guide future steps. Besides
technical performance, these evaluations will also address practical and
administrative issues such as methods for providing adequate protection
for trademark interests to inhibit cybersquatting.

======================================================================
To unsubscribe from this list, send an e-mail to <[email-masked]>
with "Unsubscribe" in the subject line.

- --
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: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 11:24:39 -0500
From: Andy Gardner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] [icann-announce] Open Call for Nominations to ICANN Indendent Review Panel

At 2:16 AM +1000 28/6/01, Patrick Corliss wrote:
>The members of the IRP are nominated by the IRP Nominating Committee and
>must be confirmed by a 2/3 vote of the ICANN Board.

Ah. How surprising.

The board writes the rules, and then gets to pick the people that will
"independently" review them.

Yeah, right. Been there, done that.

What's the bet Jones Day will end up doing it.

- -- 
Andrew P. Gardner
barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
Get active: http://www.tldlobby.com
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

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

Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 12:29:37 -0400
From: Sandy Harris <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Nomination for representative to the NC Review TF - Eric  Dierker (fwd)

[Replying to list only. Previous message had 8 cc's. Why?]

Roberto Gaetano wrote:

> I just assume that you mean that encripted transmission is currently illegal
> in VietNam, but I am curious to hear your authoritative answer, and I am
> sure that the issue about different local laws influencing the Internet is
> of interest to most of the people in the GA.

For crypto law, the standard resource is Koop's International Survey at:
http://cwis.kub.nl/~FRW/PEOPLE/koops/lawsurvy.htm

All it has on Vietnam is:

| 1. Export/ import controls 
|
| Import of encryption technology for protection of confidential data
| requires a license from the Ministry of Trade. If the technology is
| telecommunications equipment, an additional license from the VN Post
| Office is required.

One of Koop's students has a survey on digital signature law:
http://rechten.kub.nl/simone/ds-lawsu.htm

For general background on crypto history and politics, see:
http://www.freeswan.org/freeswan_trees/freeswan-1.91/doc/politics.html

and for lots more links:
http://www.freeswan.org/freeswan_trees/freeswan-1.91/doc/web.html#crypto.link
- --
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: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 12:11:22 -0500
From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Registrar acquisition and merger policy

What about programmers/developers, etc. ?

What is or was your involvement with the .BIZ TLD ?

Jim Fleming
http://www.DOT-BIZ.com
0:212 - BIZ World

- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 10:44 AM
Subject: [ga] Registrar acquisition and merger policy

> 
> The recent purchase of Registrars.com by Verisign, who also purchased
> NameSecure.com, has made me realize that the ICANN needs to
> incorporate policy documents governing acquisition policies.
> 
> I understand the motivation for Verisign, they are facing drops in
> their new domain registration growth rates, and the transfer rate from
> Verisign to other registrars is practically a flood.  Acquisitions
> allow them to offset some of that, even if only temporarily.
> 
> I think a hard and fast policy should be create whereby if an existing
> accredited registrar (or their parent company) already directly or
> indirectly controls X% of the registered domain names, they should be
> enjoined against further acquisitions of accredited registrars.
> 
> Enforcement actions can include:
>             - Loss of accreditation (most severe)
>             - Penalty fees payable to ICANN on a per domain basis
>             until they come into compliance
>             - 90 day warning to get into compliance. (least severe)
> 
> This would serve to bolster the principles of competition, which is
> one of the guiding principles in the Green Paper, White Paper, and in
> the actual DoC agreements.  It would serve to help avoid anything
> resembling an attempt to become, or regain, a monopoly level position,
> and ensure that there will be enough accredited registrars to provide
> competitive advantages to registrants.
> 
> I'd be interested in hearing thoughts on this.
> 
> I'm sure our alt-chair will tell us to take this to ga-sys, or is it
> ga-icann?  :)  Who can tell?
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
> William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
> Userfriendly.com Domains
> The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
> DNS Services from $1.65/mo
> 
> --
> 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: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 12:18:53 -0500
From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Analysis of Image Online Design .WEB Registrations to Date

Does this only apply to the proof-of-concept IPv4 Internet ?

Are you assuming .WEB will be a simplex cluster or have a dual (or tri)
cluster ?

http://root-dns.org/ZoneExchange/AIS.txt
; web. = 2

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12215.html
"Proof of Concept TLD Development...and Multiple TLD Clusters"

Jim Fleming
http://www.unir.com
Mars 128n 128e
http://www.unir.com/images/architech.gif
http://www.unir.com/images/address.gif
http://www.unir.com/images/headers.gif
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt
http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/sdks/platform/tpipv6/start.asp
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12213.html
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12223.html

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Ben Edelman" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 10:57 AM
Subject: [ga] Analysis of Image Online Design .WEB Registrations to Date

> In response to my Analysis of Registrations in the Atlantic Root Network
> .BIZ TLD (<http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/edelman/dotbiz>), I
received
> several inquiries suggesting that I apply similar methods to registrations
> in other TLDs.
>
> I have repeated the majority of analysis on the Image Online Design .WEB
> TLD, again focusing on questions about registration counts and use, again
> reaching findings based on data freely available over the Internet.
>
> My work in progress is posted at
> <http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/edelman/web>.  I look forward to
> feedback from others interested in these questions, and to continued
> discussion on the subject.
>
>
>
> Ben Edelman
>
> --
> 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 #570
************************