Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #571
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST           Thursday, June 28 2001           Volume 01 : Number 571

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

Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:39:30 +1200
From: Steven Heath <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Propoganda

Joop Teernstra [mailto:[email-masked]]

>> At 23:07 26/06/01 +1200, DPF wrote:
>> I have been nominated (and accepted) as a potential GA representative
>> on the Names Council review Taskforce.

> By whom?

I nominated David Farrar for this position.

Steven Heath
Councillor, Internet Society of NZ (.nz Manager)
- --
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 15:48:56 -0700
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] The marketing of a country through their ccTLD

Why is this relevant to the GA list?  Because it is only right that I be
given an opportunity to clear the Name of the Vietnamese People. Please
visit the What's new News. And click through to the Consulate and the
Embassy and take the time to learn about my Vietnam.  It is completely
different than the one Mr. Probst described.  As Editor in Chief I will
update this news regularly. If you monitor the Forum we will see if
intelligent discussion can take place completely without rules and or
monitors - I truly wonder. I am very serious that the UDRP will be
developed right there in open transparency.

I would expect a lot of criticism over this project.  I do not want to
derail the excellent progress going on here at this time, so I humbly
ask that you bash me and mine there and not here.  Thank you.

Eric,

> The registration of .VN web addresses will be accessible
> to the global Internet community
> on Wednesday, June 27, 2001 at 5pm (PDT)
> at http://www.VNNIC.com, on a first-come, first-serve.
>
> .VN is your ticket to the VirtualNet!

- --
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 18:40:51 -0500
From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Subject: 1:41 VI   ....Re: [ga] The marketing of a country through their ccTLD

- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Eric Dierker" <[email-masked]>
> >
> > .VN is your ticket to the VirtualNet!
> 
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt
1:41 VI   (VIRGIN-ISLANDS-(U.S.))

Does .VI == Virtual Internet ?

http://www.vi.net

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

- --
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 19:35:06 -0500
From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] 0:212 .BIZ Votes

http://root-dns.org/VueDig/VueDig_3.php?record=NS&tld=biz&submit=Submit

AlterNIC : 160.79.129.192
VueDig Results : Answer = 6 : Authority = 0 : Additional = 6. 
biz. 15M IN NS ns2.hypa.net.
biz. 15M IN NS nomad.tallship.net.
biz. 15M IN NS condor.tallship.net.
biz. 15M IN NS falcon.tallship.net.
biz. 15M IN NS rectum.tallship.net.
biz. 15M IN NS ns1.hypa.net.

Australian Root Server Confederation : 203.21.205.2
VueDig Results : Answer = 0 : Authority = 1 : Additional = 0. 
No records found.

Common Interest Network Information Center Society : 216.15.192.130
VueDig Results : Answer = 0 : Authority = 0 : Additional = 0. 
No records found.

i-DNS.net International : 208.184.174.7
VueDig Results : Answer = 0 : Authority = 1 : Additional = 0. 
No records found.

Legacy Root Servers : 198.41.0.4
VueDig Results : Answer = 2 : Authority = 0 : Additional = 2. 
biz. 2D IN NS NS.RIPE.NET.
biz. 2D IN NS NS.ICANN.ORG.

Name.Space : 209.48.2.11
VueDig Results : Answer = 0 : Authority = 1 : Additional = 0. 
No records found.

New.net Inc : 206.132.100.42
VueDig Results : Answer = 0 : Authority = 1 : Additional = 0. 
No records found.

North American Root Server Confederation : 216.129.136.8
VueDig Results : Answer = 2 : Authority = 0 : Additional = 2. 
biz. 1d3h34m37s IN NS NS.RIPE.NET.
biz. 1d3h34m37s IN NS NS.ICANN.ORG.

The OpenNIC Project : 209.21.75.51
VueDig Results : Answer = 4 : Authority = 0 : Additional = 4. 
biz. 2D IN NS ns4-opennic.pacroot.glue.
biz. 2D IN NS ns1-opennic.pacroot.glue.
biz. 2D IN NS ns2-opennic.pacroot.glue.
biz. 2D IN NS ns3-opennic.pacroot.glue.

Open Root Server Confederation : 199.166.24.1
VueDig Results : Answer = 7 : Authority = 0 : Additional = 7. 
biz. 2D IN NS condor.tallship.net.
biz. 2D IN NS falcon.tallship.net.
biz. 2D IN NS ns1.hypa.net.
biz. 2D IN NS ns2.hypa.net.
biz. 2D IN NS satan.tallship.net.
biz. 2D IN NS nomad.tallship.net.
biz. 2D IN NS rectum.tallship.net.

The Internet Namespace Cooperative : 64.6.65.10
VueDig Results : Answer = 0 : Authority = 1 : Additional = 0. 
No records found.

The PacificRoot : 204.107.129.2
VueDig Results : Answer = 6 : Authority = 0 : Additional = 6. 
biz. 15M IN NS rectum.tallship.net.
biz. 15M IN NS ns1.hypa.net.
biz. 15M IN NS ns2.hypa.net.
biz. 15M IN NS nomad.tallship.net.
biz. 15M IN NS falcon.tallship.net.
biz. 15M IN NS condor.tallship.net.

The Universal Registry : 167.216.193.21
Result = No Response

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

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: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 12:35:00 +1200
From: Joop Teernstra <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Propoganda

At 10:39 28/06/01 +1200, Steven Heath wrote:
>Joop Teernstra [mailto:[email-masked]]
>
> >> At 23:07 26/06/01 +1200, DPF wrote:
> >> I have been nominated (and accepted) as a potential GA representative
> >> on the Names Council review Taskforce.
>
> > By whom?
>
>I nominated David Farrar for this position.

Yes, I saw. You must have confidence that David is the right man for the job.

I am waiting for David to reply to the questions himself.
And I have a few more to add about the disappearance of the idno-discuss list.

- -joop

Joop Teernstra LL.M.,
councillor
InternetNZ

- --
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 18:08:24 -0700
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] biz and info live in root

I don't know if anyone noticed or not, but this week the .biz and
.info TLDs were added into the root zones with ns.icann.org and
ns.ripe.net as the nameservers.

Both of these names resolve:
http://www.nic.biz/
http://www.nic.info/  (redirects to Afilias site)

whois.nic.biz, neulevel.biz, www.neulevel.biz, and
ipclaims.neulevel.biz also resolve.

afilias.info,www.afilias.info, and whois.nic.info also resolve.

- -- 
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 18:50:31 -0700
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Propoganda

Hello Joop,

Wednesday, June 27, 2001, 5:35:00 PM, Joop Teernstra wrote:

> At 10:39 28/06/01 +1200, Steven Heath wrote:
>>Joop Teernstra [mailto:[email-masked]]
>>
>> >> At 23:07 26/06/01 +1200, DPF wrote:
>> >> I have been nominated (and accepted) as a potential GA representative
>> >> on the Names Council review Taskforce.
>>
>> > By whom?
>>
>>I nominated David Farrar for this position.

> Yes, I saw. You must have confidence that David is the right man for the job.

> I am waiting for David to reply to the questions himself.
> And I have a few more to add about the disappearance of the idno-discuss list.

I might suggest that you watch your moves.

I've deliberately minimized my engagements with you, but if you think
you have any right to grill anyone over IDNO related stuff, then you
will find yourself on the wrong end of that discussion, in very long,
very pointed messages containing plenty of URL references.

Including your own little temper tantrum when you pulled the IDNO
website and had the mailing list turned off because people were asking
you to step down (which when you were made aware of how those actions
were proving your critics right, you claimed were an "error" and had
them turned back on).

- -- 
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 22:21:49 EDT
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] closure of idno list?

Due to my own recent connectivity issues, I was not aware that someone had 
shut down the idno list.  Was this action taken as a result of a formal idno 
decision?  Who is/was the list manager?  Can anyone offer an explanation as 
to why the list was closed?
- --
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 22:42:33 EDT
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] Individuals' Constituency

Posted earlier today -- Karl Auerbach's "Proposed Resolution Regarding a DNSO 
Constituency for Individuals Who Own Domain Names":  
http://www.cavebear.com/icann-board/diary/june-4-2001.htm#res_2

"Recognizing that individuals who have registered domain names have a 
significant stake in domain name policy;

Recognizing that the creation of new DNSO constituencies is subject to the 
requirements of Article VI, Section 3 of the ICANN By-Laws;

Recognizing that there is a long-standing community consensus for the 
formation of a constituency for individuals who have registered domain names;

Recognizing that there have been difficulties in the formation of a stable 
entity to act as the basis for such a constituency;

The ICANN Board of Directors Resolves:

The ICANN Board of Directors declares its desire that there be formed a DNSO 
constituency for individuals who have registered domain names.
 
That the ICANN Board of Directors requests that the Internet Community 
self-organize and create one or more detailed and concrete proposals for a 
DNSO constituency for individuals who have registered domain names.
 
Such proposals shall be presented to ICANN before its year 2001 annual 
meeting. 
Such proposals shall describe at least the following: 

The proposed structure 
Sources of funding 
Criteria for membership 
Willingness to reconcile differences with others who have submitted proposals
 
The ICANN Board of Directors expresses its intention to promptly consider 
such proposals and hopes that a constituency for individuals who have 
registered domain names may soon be formed." 

- --------------
Karl's full diary entry is well worth reading.  Enjoy.
- --
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 03:16:07 GMT
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ga] closure of idno list?

> Due to my own recent connectivity issues, I was not aware that someone had 
> shut down the idno list.  Was this action taken as a result of a formal idno 
> decision?  Who is/was the list manager?  Can anyone offer an explanation as 
> to why the list was closed?

No one at all has decided to shut down the list.  Actrix who host the list shut 
it down as no one had paid the bill.  The bills were not going to me even 
though I was the temporary list owner.  I am not sure who had been receiving 
them.  I was unaware the list had been closed down until Joop e-mailed me and 
aksed why it wasn't working.  I checked and indeed it wasn't so I asked Actrix 
and they said no-one has paid the bill.

The challenge we have is who is willing to pay for the hosting charges?  I'll 
certainly contribute some but not in a position to put in $200 a year by myself.

DPF

- --
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 22:26:09 -0500
From: Andy Gardner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] closure of idno list?

At 3:16 AM +0000 28/6/01, [email-masked] wrote:
>> Due to my own recent connectivity issues, I was not aware that someone had
>> shut down the idno list.  Was this action taken as a result of a formal idno
>> decision?  Who is/was the list manager?  Can anyone offer an explanation as
>> to why the list was closed?
>
>No one at all has decided to shut down the list.  Actrix who host the list
>shut
>it down as no one had paid the bill.  The bills were not going to me even
>though I was the temporary list owner.  I am not sure who had been receiving
>them.  I was unaware the list had been closed down until Joop e-mailed me and
>aksed why it wasn't working.  I checked and indeed it wasn't so I asked Actrix
>and they said no-one has paid the bill.
>
>The challenge we have is who is willing to pay for the hosting charges?  I'll
>certainly contribute some but not in a position to put in $200 a year by
>myself.

if I recall correctly, we had a member offer to host the mailing lists at
no charge, but Joop managed to convince the then chairperson that that
person was WXW in disguise, so he was unceremoniously dumped from the
mailing list selection "committee".

- -- 
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: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 15:34:03 +1200
From: Joop Teernstra <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] closure of idno list?

At 22:21 27/06/01 -0400, [email-masked] wrote:
>Due to my own recent connectivity issues, I was not aware that someone had
>shut down the idno list.  Was this action taken as a result of a formal idno
>decision?  Who is/was the list manager?  Can anyone offer an explanation as
>to why the list was closed?

These are questions for David Farrar, who took over the list management in 
February of this year.
No formal decisions have been taken.

- -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

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

Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 21:16:26 -0700
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] closure of idno list?

Hello Andy,

Wednesday, June 27, 2001, 8:26:09 PM, Andy Gardner wrote:

> At 3:16 AM +0000 28/6/01, [email-masked] wrote:
>>> Due to my own recent connectivity issues, I was not aware that someone had
>>> shut down the idno list.  Was this action taken as a result of a formal idno
>>> decision?  Who is/was the list manager?  Can anyone offer an explanation as
>>> to why the list was closed?
>>
>>No one at all has decided to shut down the list.  Actrix who host the list
>>shut
>>it down as no one had paid the bill.  The bills were not going to me even
>>though I was the temporary list owner.  I am not sure who had been receiving
>>them.  I was unaware the list had been closed down until Joop e-mailed me and
>>aksed why it wasn't working.  I checked and indeed it wasn't so I asked Actrix
>>and they said no-one has paid the bill.
>>
>>The challenge we have is who is willing to pay for the hosting charges?  I'll
>>certainly contribute some but not in a position to put in $200 a year by
>>myself.

> if I recall correctly, we had a member offer to host the mailing lists at
> no charge, but Joop managed to convince the then chairperson that that
> person was WXW in disguise, so he was unceremoniously dumped from the
> mailing list selection "committee".

And he never apologized to that member.  Other offers for free hosting
it were also rejected.

The commercial option was chosen because it was at a place that was
associated with someone that would do whatever Joop wanted.

- -- 
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: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 17:07:31 +1200
From: Joop Teernstra <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] closure of idno list?

At 03:16 28/06/01 +0000, [email-masked] wrote:

>The challenge we have is who is willing to pay for the hosting charges?  I'll
>certainly contribute some but not in a position to put in $200 a year by 
>myself.

Sorry to hear that.
Then perhaps for the meantime the IDNO should make do with a free 
yahoogroups list, until it is incorporated and has a treasurer who can 
collect and account for the membership fees and re-imburse out-of-pocket 
expenses.

I'm still paying for the hosting of the website at 
www.democracy.org.nz/idno/  (around NZ$405).

Better take further idno organizing offline here in the GA.  idno-discuss 
members here on the GA list who want to help paying bills, please contact 
me or David.

- --Joop--
Founder of the Cyberspace Association.
Former bootstrap of the IDNO (www.idno.org)
Developer of    The Polling Booth
www.democracy.org.nz

- --
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 00:30:49 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Registrar acquisition and merger policy

WXW and all assembly members,

William X. Walsh wrote:

> 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.

  This is not possible with publicly held companies unless the SEC,
FTC and the FCC advise or otherwise determine that such and acquisition
would detrimentally impact competition.  In the case of Verisign
acquiring Register.com that threshold was evidently not considered
to be met, and therefore the acquisition was not opposed.  Any
contract or clause in the White/Green papers could not have
prevented such acquisitions or similar one in the future.

  I discussed this in part during the ongoing debate regarding the
Verisign redo of the contract with ICANN regarding splitting
out .net, .org from .com.  Now that that contract is approved
by DOC, gave Verisign a green light to buy out nearly whomever
they wish in the registrar business as well as any new Registries
that may come along such as .BIZ and .INFO for example...
Food for future thought perhaps??

  In addition Versign is under not restriction to buy out privately
held companies (non publicly traded stock companies) that are
registries or registrars also.  Could Atlantic.net, ORSC, or even
New.net be a possibility?  Yes they could and possibly one or
more of these, plus others, would be a good acquisition for
Verisign to consider....  Again food for thought?  Perhaps!

P.S. I hope Danny Younger will enjoy his new employer...  >;)

>
>
> 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

Regards,

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 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

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

Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 00:31:39 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] closure of idno list?

David, Joop and all assembly members,

  This situation seems to be and ongoing one for the IDNO.  None
the less it seems fairly evident to me that the IDNO members should
be passing the hat to gain the required funding to support themselves
or seek a "White Knight".  Failing these two approaches, I suppose
the IDNO ML will continue to be down...

  P.S.  This kinda goes to show ya, that there is no free lunch...
           Cheep maybe, free, not likely...

[email-masked] wrote:

> > Due to my own recent connectivity issues, I was not aware that someone had
> > shut down the idno list.  Was this action taken as a result of a formal idno
> > decision?  Who is/was the list manager?  Can anyone offer an explanation as
> > to why the list was closed?
>
> No one at all has decided to shut down the list.  Actrix who host the list shut
> it down as no one had paid the bill.  The bills were not going to me even
> though I was the temporary list owner.  I am not sure who had been receiving
> them.  I was unaware the list had been closed down until Joop e-mailed me and
> aksed why it wasn't working.  I checked and indeed it wasn't so I asked Actrix
> and they said no-one has paid the bill.
>
> The challenge we have is who is willing to pay for the hosting charges?  I'll
> certainly contribute some but not in a position to put in $200 a year by myself.
>
> DPF
>
> --
> 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 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 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

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

Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 23:00:22 -0700
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] closure of idno list?

Hello Joop,

Wednesday, June 27, 2001, 10:07:31 PM, Joop Teernstra wrote:

> I'm still paying for the hosting of the website at 
> www.democracy.org.nz/idno/  (around NZ$405).

Let's be honest here.

You are paying for the host of your personal website of
democracy.org.nz and you host the IDNO website in a subdirectory.

You've had many free offers to host the website and list.

- -- 
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: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 09:45:11 +0200
From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Registrar acquisition and merger policy

- --On 27. juni 2001 08:44 -0700 "William X. Walsh" 
<[email-masked]> wrote:

> 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.

When you say "loss of accreditation", I take it you mean that the acquiring
company as well as the acquired company would lose accreditation?
Otherwise, it won't hurt at all...

Ultimately, there has to be a viable business for multiple registrars;
if Verisign is buying registrars at fire-sale prices because they were
failing, that may be better than them simply disappearing and leaving chaos,
but if Verisign is buying (US) registrars to get rid of competition, there 
should
be some way to hit them with the Sherman act.

Unfortunately I don't think the registrar business is big enough to attract
the attention of the EU competition commissioner yet.

- --
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 01:40:04 -0700
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Registrar acquisition and merger policy

Hello Harald,

Thursday, June 28, 2001, 12:45:11 AM, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
> When you say "loss of accreditation", I take it you mean that the acquiring
> company as well as the acquired company would lose accreditation?
> Otherwise, it won't hurt at all...

Yes, and of any other subsidiary registrars.

> Ultimately, there has to be a viable business for multiple registrars;
> if Verisign is buying registrars at fire-sale prices because they were
> failing, that may be better than them simply disappearing and leaving chaos,
> but if Verisign is buying (US) registrars to get rid of competition, there 
> should
> be some way to hit them with the Sherman act.

I'm not talking about preventing all acquisitions, just those that
would result in a single company controlling a quite large percentage
of registered domain names.

If Verisign is unable to buy them without putting their accreditation
at stake, then the registrar needs to find another who is willing to
buy them out, and if that means they have to accept a lower offer,
that is just a fact of life.

I think that the principle of fostering competition, especially at
this state still, means a limit set lower than the threshold necessary
to trigger a sherman act violation.

These are contractual requirements, so it has nothign to do with any
government regulatory bodies.

> Unfortunately I don't think the registrar business is big enough to attract
> the attention of the EU competition commissioner yet.

Well, this is about self organization and contract requirements
according to ICANN.  Let's hold them to that and make contract
requirements that help foster those principles that are supposed to be
driving this process.

- -- 
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: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:41:27 +0200 (MET DST)
From: DNSO Secretariat <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Reminder NC telecon, Friday 29 June, phone numbers

REMINDER
- --------
The next NC teleconference will be held on 29 June 2001,
at 15:00 Paris time (13:00 UTC), for other places see
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/.

The agenda has been published on the web site in:
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20010629.NCtelecon-agenda.html

Dial in number: +1-312-470-0198 (USA) 
USA Toll Free Number: 877-602-6814 

Passcode #: 23170 

Conference leader: Mr Roger Cochetti 

10 ports "listen only" will be reserved for remote participants 

The full participants are the 21 NC members as listed in 
http://www.dnso.org/constituency/ncmembers.html, DNSO Secretariat, 
ICANN Officers and Invited Guests 

The conference Scribe will be Maca Jamin 

The conference MPEG3 recording will be provided by Bret Fausett 

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: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 08:55:46 -0400
From: Sotiris Sotiropoulos <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] EU Gives Initial Backing to '.eu' Internet

http://www.reuters.com/news_article.jhtml?type=internetnews&StoryID=90816

Regards,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos

- --
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 15:06:39 +0200
From: Stefan Probst <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Nomination for representative to the NC Review TF -  Eric Dierker (fwd)

OK,
since this is not about hi-tek, I will answer here to the list, and not 
privately.

At 23:23 26.6.2001 -0700, William X. Walsh wrote:
> > 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?

There is a decision from DGPT of November 2000 which says, that only a few 
offices can use encryption freely. All others have to get permission. DGPT 
is something like the Post and Telecom Ministry here in Vietnam.
The relevant paragraph of the decision is IMHO much too short-sighted, but 
it is written ....

>But in any event, .vn is merely loosening the restrictions on their
>domain, and I can't say that I would blame hi-tek for that, if you
>choose to want to blame anyone.

I do not blame Hi-Tek for that.
New regulations concerning the Internet should be out soon. According to 
VNPT's (Vietnam Post and Telecom) website (i.e. as closest as you can get) 
they are not yet out. We will see, what the new regulations allow, and what 
not.

>The registry makes that decision.

Actually no. The registry is only carrying out decisions of the relevant 
ministries.

>They do not need a dispute policy, most ccTLDs say they abide by
>rulings of courts of competent jurisdiction over the registry or the
>registrant, and that's it.  This UDRP nonsense in gTLDs is something
>supralegal that shouldn't be encouraged for ccTLDs to use.

I don't agree, since jurisdictions in most developing countries would 
probably be unable to resolve any problems, because there are no laws to 
cover those issues. Besides that lots of other problems.

>As for whois, that is also optional for the registry.

No RFCs which regulate that?

>   There is
>nothing binding them to do it, but I'm sure they will, after all,
>whois is one of the easiest things to implement.

And for fair on-line registrations you should have one.

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

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

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #571
************************