Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #580
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST             Sunday, July 1 2001             Volume 01 : Number 580

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

Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2001 12:28:29 +0200
From: Jefsey Morfin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Fw: Announcement of the 2nd Meeting of the CSTB Study Committee  on Internet Navigation and the Domain Name System

Is the title of this document not abusive? Should it not read USnet instead 
of Internet?
Jefsey

On 20:21 30/06/01, Bruce James said:
>Subject: Announcement of the 2nd Meeting of the CSTB Study Committee on
>Internet Navigation and the Domain Name System
>
>
>
>The Computer Science and Telecommunications Board (CSTB)
>of the National Academies announces the second meeting of
>its study committee on
>
>INTERNET NAVIGATION AND THE DOMAIN NAME SYSTEM:
>Technical Alternatives and Policy Implications
>
>This project will examine the impact of technological developments
>and policy changes on the domain name system and other mechanisms
>that individuals rely upon to navigate the Internet.  The final report
>(to be issued in 2002) is expected to characterize the research,
>development, institutions, policies, and procedures needed
>to ensure that navigation on the Internet remains feasible and can improve
>in capability throughout the coming decade.  The report will include a
>discussion of the important and unresolved issues concerning trademarks.
>(See below for the full project scope)  This study is sponsored by the
>U. S. Department of Commerce and the National Science Foundation
>and is mandated by the U. S. Congress through Public Law 105-305.
>
>* Second Meeting of the Project
>The next committee meeting of this study will take place on July 11-13
>at the School of Information Management and Systems at the
>University of California at Berkeley.  The sessions open to
>observers include:
>
>** Wednesday July 11
>
>*** Multilingual Names
>John Klensin, AT&T and Committee Member (Chair)
>Paul Hoffman, Internet Mail Consortium
>Tan Tin Wee, National University of Singapore
>David Lawrence, Nominum
>
>*** Uses of the Domain Name System
>KC Claffy, Cooperative Association for Internet Data Analysis,
>San Diego Supercomputer Center, Univ. of Calif. at San Diego
>Karl Auerbach
>
>** Thursday July 12
>
>*** Naming and Searching
>Clifford Lynch, Coalition for Networked Information
>Marti Hearst, University of California at Berkeley
>Leslie Daigle, Verisign (by telephone)
>
>*** Internet Keywords
>Keith Teare, RealNames
>Yves Arrouye, RealNames
>
>*** Search Engines, Directory Systems and Information Services
>Eric Brewer, University of California at Berkeley and Inktomi
>
>*** New Directions
>Carl Malamud, NetTopBox
>Joe Hellerstein, University of California at Berkeley
>Mark Handley (invited), A&T Center for Internet Research
>
>** Advance Registration for Observers
>Since space is limited for observers, advance registration is
>strongly recommended; please contact Margaret Huynh at
><[email-masked]> or 202-334-2605 by 3 p.m. (eastern time)
>on July 9th to register.  Ms. Huynh can also provide details
>concerning the times for each session, directions, and on-site
>parking.  Additional details concerning this meeting
>or the study may be found at the Web site of the National
>Academies <www.nationalacademies.org>.  Click on
>"current projects" (at the top of the screen) and search
>for the name of this study.
>
>* Public Comment and Project Updates
>Public comments to the study committee are welcome and may
>be made at any time by sending email to <[email-masked]>.
>CSTB will also be providing periodic updates on the project
>and notices of upcoming sessions open to the public via an
>e-mail list.  If you wish to receive these updates, please send
>your request to <[email-masked]> as well.
>
>* Detailed Project Scope
>This project will examine the future of Internet navigation and the
>domain name system (DNS) in light of the evolution and interaction
>of Internet usage, information technology, the economy, and society.
>The original purpose of the DNS was to provide identifiers for network
>objects that are more easily remembered and enduring than the
>numerical addresses and port numbers used by the network infrastructure.
>However, domain names are now often used for purposes for which
>they were not originally intended, such as searching, corporate
>identification and marketing.  And certain domain names, especially
>those in the .com top-level domain, have acquired substantial
>economic value, leading to conflict and competition over their ownership
>and a perceived scarcity of desirable names.
>
>The continuing increase in the number of Internet users and sites,
>the deepening integration of the Internet into the economy and social
>processes; the growth in embedded computing devices, and the
>possible introduction of permanent personal and object identifiers -
>among other factors - pose challenges to the continued viability and
>usefulness of the DNS, as currently constituted. This project will
>describe and evaluate emerging technologies and identify how they
>might affect the ability of users to find what they are seeking on the
>Internet and the role of the DNS.  Some of the topics to be considered
>include: extension of the DNS through the addition of generic top level
>domains and multilingual domain names; introduction of new name
>assignment and indexing schemes (including alternate root servers);
>adoption of new directory structures or services for locating information
>resources, services, or sites of interest; and deployment of improved
>user interfaces.
>
>The technologies that support finding information on the Internet are
>deployed within a complex and contentious national and international
>policy context.  As is true in other contexts relating to trademarks and
>comparable identifiers, the "right" to use a particular domain name
>can often be disputed.  These disputes include conflicts among
>commercial claimants as well as conflicts between non-commercial
>and commercial claimants.  Effective solutions must consider the
>potentially competing interests of domain name owners and trademark
>holders; the different interests of stakeholders including businesses,
>from small firms to multinational corporations; educational, arts, and
>research institutions; not-for-profit charitable and service organizations;
>government entities at all levels from town to nation; nation-states
>and international organizations; and individuals (i.e., the general
>public); as well as public interests such as freedom of speech
>and personal privacy.
>
>The project's report will examine the degree to which the options
>offered by new technology or new uses of existing technology
>can mitigate concerns regarding commercial and public interests
>(which will include a discussion of trademark-related issues),
>facilitate or impede further evolution of the Internet, and affect
>steps being taken to enhance competition among domain name
>registrars, the portability of Internet names, and the stability of the
>Internet.  For each of the prospective technologies, the final report
>is expected to characterize the institutions, governance structures,
>policies, and procedures that should be put in place to complement
>it and will specify the research (if any) required to design, develop,
>and implement the technology successfully.  Also identified will be
>the options foregone or created by particular technologies and
>the difficulties associated with each technological alternative.
>
>This project is sponsored by the U.S. Department of Commerce and
>the National Science Foundation and is mandated by the U.S.
>Congress through Public Law 105-305.  For additional information,
>contact the study director, Alan Inouye, at <[email-masked]>
>or (202) 334-2849.
>
>Additional information describing the National Academies
>study process may be found at
><http://www.nationalacademies.org/about/ensuring.html>.
>Additional information concerning CSTB may be found
>at <www.cstb.org>.
>
>
>/Bruce
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>--
>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, 1 Jul 2001 21:04:03 +1000
From: "Patrick Corliss" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] List Decorum

On Sat, 30 Jun 2001 19:45:06 -0700, William X. Walsh wrote:
> > And William, please stop abusing, insulting and harassing people.
> 
> I haven't been Patrick, and an apology from you had better be
> forthcoming.

Hi William

Here's ten in five days without counting your private emails.

On Tue, 26 Jun 2001 23:23:43 -0700
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg03087.html

> While I agree with your analysis of hi-tek's misleading statements
> about their relationship with .vn (I've been in private correspondenc
> also with Erik also, where I know for a fact he made several
> misrepresentations of the actual facts of the .vn situation),

Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 18:50:31 -0700
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg03116.html

> 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).

Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 21:16:26 -0700
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg03122.html

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

Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:17:29 -0700
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-sys/Arc00/msg00168.html

> So why don't you learn a thing or two about facts yourself, something
> you are routinely short on.

Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:56:42 -0700 
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-icann/Arc00/msg00111.html

> If you can't see that, then your prejudice and arrogance is blinding
> you, as usual.

Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 21:14:18 -0700
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-sys/Arc00/msg00176.html

> Grow up Chris.

Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:54:41 -0700
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-roots/Arc00/msg00925.html

> Don't know much about US Laws or the legal systems do you?

Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 09:18:59 -0700
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-roots/Arc00/msg00935.html

> Len is a well known character in the AU legal system, who has a
> reputation in the courts for filing frivolous lawsuits, and widely
> threatening anyone who challenges him on facts with lawsuits
> themselves.

Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 17:35:47 -0700
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg03217.html

> I never called Palmer a clueless newbie, though I did say he was
> showing his ignorance.

Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 17:35:47 -0700 
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg03217.html

> Might want to get your facts straight before you attack someone Bill.
> I hope your clients get better facts checking from you than this.

Regards
Patrick Corliss

- --
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, 01 Jul 2001 12:39:14 +0200
From: Jefsey Morfin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Original purpose of the DNS

- --=====================_6571013==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

Bruce,
you should not get confused between the need and the organization of a 
response to the need.

Names chosen by the users need to be supported and the DNS is a solution. 
But that DNS solution does not create the names and carries not intrinsic 
right over the User's choice, unless the Users agree to restrict their 
rights upon proposition of the DNS designers. Hence the need of Internet 
Users and DNS Designers "constituencies".

you should also note that the DNS has been adopted on the internet in a 
totally different context. Please consider RFC920 and tell me how much of 
it relates to the current practice of the DNs.

Jefsey

On 00:32 01/07/01, Bruce James said:
>The original purpose of the DNS was to provide identifiers for network
>objects that are more easily remembered and enduring than the
>numerical addresses and port numbers used by the network infrastructure.
>However, domain names are now often used for purposes for which
>they were *not* originally intended, such as searching, corporate
>identification and marketing.  And certain domain names, especially
>those in the .com top-level domain, have acquired substantial
>economic value, leading to conflict and competition over their ownership
>and a perceived scarcity of desirable names.
>/Bruce
>

- --=====================_6571013==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

<html>
Bruce,<br>
you should not get confused between the need and the organization of a
response to the need. <br>
<br>
Names chosen by the users need to be supported and the DNS is a solution.
But that DNS solution does not create the names and carries not intrinsic
right over the User's choice, unless the Users agree to restrict their
rights upon proposition of the DNS designers. Hence the need of Internet
Users and DNS Designers &quot;constituencies&quot;.<br>
<br>
you should also note that the DNS has been adopted on the internet in a
totally different context. Please consider RFC920 and tell me how much of
it relates to the current practice of the DNs.<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp; <br>
Jefsey<br>
<br>
<br>
On 00:32 01/07/01, Bruce James said:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>The original purpose of the DNS was
to provide identifiers for network<br>
objects that are more easily remembered and enduring than the<br>
numerical addresses and port numbers used by the network
infrastructure.<br>
However, domain names are now often used for purposes for which<br>
they were *not* originally intended, such as searching, corporate<br>
identification and marketing.&nbsp; And certain domain names,
especially<br>
those in the .com top-level domain, have acquired substantial<br>
economic value, leading to conflict and competition over their
ownership<br>
and a perceived scarcity of desirable names.<br>
<font size=2><b>/Bruce<br>
&nbsp;</font></b></blockquote></html>

- --=====================_6571013==_.ALT--

- --
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, 01 Jul 2001 07:32:21 -0500
From: Bruce James <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Original purpose of the DNS

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

- ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C101FF.F6F2F390
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I can only refer you back to the study:

    http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-full/Arc07/msg03704.html

/Bruce

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Jefsey Morfin
  To: [email-masked]
  Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2001 05:39
  Subject: Re: [ga] Original purpose of the DNS

  Bruce,
  you should not get confused between the need and the organization of a
response to the need.

  Names chosen by the users need to be supported and the DNS is a solution.
But that DNS solution does not create the names and carries not intrinsic
right over the User's choice, unless the Users agree to restrict their
rights upon proposition of the DNS designers. Hence the need of Internet
Users and DNS Designers "constituencies".

  you should also note that the DNS has been adopted on the internet in a
totally different context. Please consider RFC920 and tell me how much of it
relates to the current practice of the DNs.

  Jefsey

  On 00:32 01/07/01, Bruce James said:

    The original purpose of the DNS was to provide identifiers for network
    objects that are more easily remembered and enduring than the
    numerical addresses and port numbers used by the network infrastructure.
    However, domain names are now often used for purposes for which
    they were *not* originally intended, such as searching, corporate
    identification and marketing.  And certain domain names, especially
    those in the .com top-level domain, have acquired substantial
    economic value, leading to conflict and competition over their ownership
    and a perceived scarcity of desirable names.
    /Bruce

- ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C101FF.F6F2F390
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT size=3D2>I can only refer you back to the=20
study:</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT size=3D2></FONT></STRONG>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <A=20
href=3D"http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-full/Arc07/msg03704.html">http:=
//www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-full/Arc07/msg03704.html</A></FONT></STRONG>=
</DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT size=3D2></FONT></STRONG>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>/Bruce</DIV>
<DIV><BR>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=[email-masked] href=3D"mailto:[email-masked]">Jefsey =
Morfin</A>=20
  </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=[email-masked]=20
  href=3D"mailto:[email-masked]">[email-masked]</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, July 01, 2001 =
05:39</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [ga] Original =
purpose of the=20
  DNS</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>Bruce,<BR>you should not get confused between the need =
and the=20
  organization of a response to the need. <BR><BR>Names chosen by the =
users need=20
  to be supported and the DNS is a solution. But that DNS solution does =
not=20
  create the names and carries not intrinsic right over the User's =
choice,=20
  unless the Users agree to restrict their rights upon proposition of =
the DNS=20
  designers. Hence the need of Internet Users and DNS Designers=20
  "constituencies".<BR><BR>you should also note that the DNS has been =
adopted on=20
  the internet in a totally different context. Please consider RFC920 =
and tell=20
  me how much of it relates to the current practice of the =
DNs.<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
  <BR>Jefsey<BR><BR><BR>On 00:32 01/07/01, Bruce James said:<BR>
  <BLOCKQUOTE class=3Dcite cite=3D"" type=3D"cite">The original purpose =
of the DNS=20
    was to provide identifiers for network<BR>objects that are more =
easily=20
    remembered and enduring than the<BR>numerical addresses and port =
numbers=20
    used by the network infrastructure.<BR>However, domain names are now =
often=20
    used for purposes for which<BR>they were *not* originally intended, =
such as=20
    searching, corporate<BR>identification and marketing.&nbsp; And =
certain=20
    domain names, especially<BR>those in the .com top-level domain, have =

    acquired substantial<BR>economic value, leading to conflict and =
competition=20
    over their ownership<BR>and a perceived scarcity of desirable=20
    names.<BR><FONT=20
size=3D2><B>/Bruce<BR>&nbsp;</FONT></B></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY><=
/HTML>

- ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C101FF.F6F2F390--

- --
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, 1 Jul 2001 08:48:09 -0400
From: "Ken Stubbs" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [ga] Some other ideas about the questions... [ga-udrp]   UDRP  Questionnaire

again we see the noise level being raised by posting to the entire list of
these admonitions

why dont you ALL take these types of activities off list and leave the list
for constructive commentary

ken stubbs

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Dierker" <[email-masked]>
To: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "William S. Lovell" <[email-masked]>; "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>;
"Danny Younger" <[email-masked]>; "Patrick Corliss"
<[email-masked]>
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2001 12:02 AM
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [ga] Some other ideas about the questions... [ga-udrp]
UDRP Questionnaire

> Friends,
> I am sure most of you have been around long enough to remember when I
> took Walsh on in order to prevent problems for Mr. Burton getting the
> WG-Review papers through.  I will do it again if the occassion requires
> it for Mr. Lovell getting his rules up and running. It is a small price
> to pay for such a small cog in a slowly grinding machine. But as I have
> been asked by dear friends and as I have asked Mr. Lovell and Mr.
> Namecritic just simply ignore the attacks.  On this occassion I will not
> be banned but I will be attacked in an ugly way with publishing of
> private posts and taking matters out of context. But I will stand tall
> and thank the examples and teaching of such wonderful people as Joanna,
> Jefsey, Joop, Jeff, Sotiris, Jim, Patrick, Danny Roeland and so many
> others.
>
> Mr. Walsh please stop being abusive of the fine people that contribute to
> this list.  You may not be legally sophisticated enough to understand but
> you have defamed the reputation of a fine Attorney.  His work here is
> voluntary and very helpful to possibly millions I would hate to see him
> driven away by the liability you create for him.  I do not expect you to
> understand but he may not commit passive admissions.  You see on this
> list we have a set of decorum concepts which work well, but in law
> failure to attack you back and make a stand may be viewed by some as an
> admission to the truth of your accusations. (I hereby deny all your
> accusations on his behalf)
>
> You may play games on this list but when you mess with others right to
> their good name in their profession you cross the line.  This line I will
> not cross but I will defend. One more attack on another's professionalism
> and I will want you to post every private post I have ever made so that
> we can have at it in public and both get banned.
>
> Other than that, have a great day, I did!!
> Sincerely,
> Eric
>
> ps I am referring to all of your posts attacking him, not just this one.
> "William X. Walsh" wrote:
>
> > Hello William,
> >
> > Saturday, June 30, 2001, 4:59:32 PM, William S. Lovell wrote:
> >
> > > This from William X. Walsh?  Who in a recent post answering a
> > > "clueless newbie" (who predictably has not been seen again),
> > > included the immortal lines (and I paraphrase) "you are just
> > > showing your ignorance?"
> >
> > I never called Palmer a clueless newbie, though I did say he was
> > showing his ignorance.
> >
> > And anyone who thinks Palmer is a newbie or new (or that he is no
> > longer on this forum) doesn't know who they are speaking of.
> >
> > Might want to get your facts straight before you attack someone Bill.
> >
> > I hope your clients get better facts checking from you than this.
> >
> > --
> > 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-full" 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
>

- --
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, 01 Jul 2001 14:49:28 +0200
From: Jefsey Morfin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Original purpose of the DNS

- --=====================_12872708==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

oh! Bruce,
I was only refering to your text: bo nned for you to loop through a non 
authoritative point of point of view.

BTW you might be interested in Mokapertis' RFC1034:
<quote>
The terms "domain" or "domain name" are used in many contexts beyond the 
DNS described here. Very often, the term domain name is used to refer to a 
name with structure indicated by dots, but no relation to the DNS. This is 
particularly true in mail addressing [Quarterman 86].
<unquote>
Interesting. Jefsey

On 14:32 01/07/01, Bruce James said:
>I can only refer you back to the study:
>
> 
><http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-full/Arc07/msg03704.html>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-full/Arc07/msg03704.html
>
>/Bruce
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <mailto:[email-masked]>Jefsey Morfin
>To: <mailto:[email-masked]>[email-masked]
>Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2001 05:39
>Subject: Re: [ga] Original purpose of the DNS
>
>Bruce,
>you should not get confused between the need and the organization of a 
>response to the need.
>
>Names chosen by the users need to be supported and the DNS is a solution. 
>But that DNS solution does not create the names and carries not intrinsic 
>right over the User's choice, unless the Users agree to restrict their 
>rights upon proposition of the DNS designers. Hence the need of Internet 
>Users and DNS Designers "constituencies".
>
>you should also note that the DNS has been adopted on the internet in a 
>totally different context. Please consider RFC920 and tell me how much of 
>it relates to the current practice of the DNs.
>
>Jefsey
>
>
>
>On 00:32 01/07/01, Bruce James said:
>>The original purpose of the DNS was to provide identifiers for network
>>objects that are more easily remembered and enduring than the
>>numerical addresses and port numbers used by the network infrastructure.
>>However, domain names are now often used for purposes for which
>>they were *not* originally intended, such as searching, corporate
>>identification and marketing.  And certain domain names, especially
>>those in the .com top-level domain, have acquired substantial
>>economic value, leading to conflict and competition over their ownership
>>and a perceived scarcity of desirable names.
>>/Bruce
>>

- --=====================_12872708==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

<html>
oh! Bruce, <br>
I was only refering to your text: bo nned for you to loop through a non
authoritative point of point of view.<br>
<br>
BTW you might be interested in Mokapertis' RFC1034:<br>
&lt;quote&gt;<br>
The terms &quot;domain&quot; or &quot;domain name&quot; are used in many
contexts beyond the DNS described here. Very often, the term domain name
is used to refer to a name with structure indicated by dots, but no
relation to the DNS. This is particularly true in mail addressing
[Quarterman 86]. <br>
&lt;unquote&gt;<br>
Interesting. Jefsey<br>
<br>
On 14:32 01/07/01, Bruce James said:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite><font size=2><b>I can only refer
you back to the study:</b></font><br>
&nbsp;<br>
<font size=2><b>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<a href="http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-full/Arc07/msg03704.html">http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-full/Arc07/msg03704.html</a></b></font><br>
&nbsp;<br>
/Bruce<br>
<br>
&nbsp;
<dl>
<dd>----- Original Message ----- 
<dd>From:</b> <a href="mailto:[email-masked]">Jefsey Morfin</a> 
<dd>To:</b> <a href="mailto:[email-masked]">[email-masked]</a> 
<dd>Sent:</b> Sunday, July 01, 2001 05:39
<dd>Subject:</b> Re: [ga] Original purpose of the DNS<br>
<br>

<dd>Bruce,
<dd>you should not get confused between the need and the organization of
a response to the need. <br>
<br>

<dd>Names chosen by the users need to be supported and the DNS is a
solution. But that DNS solution does not create the names and carries not
intrinsic right over the User's choice, unless the Users agree to
restrict their rights upon proposition of the DNS designers. Hence the
need of Internet Users and DNS Designers 
&quot;constituencies&quot;.<br>
<br>

<dd>you should also note that the DNS has been adopted on the internet in
a totally different context. Please consider RFC920 and tell me how much
of it relates to the current practice of the DNs.
<dd>&nbsp;&nbsp; 
<dd>Jefsey<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>

<dd>On 00:32 01/07/01, Bruce James
said:<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>
<dd>The original purpose of the DNS was to provide identifiers for
network
<dd>objects that are more easily remembered and enduring than the
<dd>numerical addresses and port numbers used by the network
infrastructure.
<dd>However, domain names are now often used for purposes for which
<dd>they were *not* originally intended, such as searching, corporate
<dd>identification and marketing.&nbsp; And certain domain names,
especially
<dd>those in the .com top-level domain, have acquired substantial
<dd>economic value, leading to conflict and competition over their
ownership
<dd>and a perceived scarcity of desirable names.<font size=2>
<dd>/Bruce
<dd>&nbsp;</b></font></blockquote>
</dl></blockquote></html>

- --=====================_12872708==_.ALT--

- --
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, 1 Jul 2001 06:04:00 -0700
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Re: List Decorum

Hello Patrick,

Yes I received copies of your retaliatory complaints against me to
ga-abuse.

My statements are statements of fact, not personal attacks.

Sunday, July 01, 2001, 4:04:03 AM, Patrick Corliss wrote:

> On Sat, 30 Jun 2001 19:45:06 -0700, William X. Walsh wrote:
>> > And William, please stop abusing, insulting and harassing people.
>> 
>> I haven't been Patrick, and an apology from you had better be
>> forthcoming.

> Hi William

> Here's ten in five days without counting your private emails.

> On Tue, 26 Jun 2001 23:23:43 -0700
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg03087.html

>> While I agree with your analysis of hi-tek's misleading statements
>> about their relationship with .vn (I've been in private correspondenc
>> also with Erik also, where I know for a fact he made several
>> misrepresentations of the actual facts of the .vn situation),

> Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 18:50:31 -0700
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg03116.html

>> 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).

> Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 21:16:26 -0700
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg03122.html

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

> Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:17:29 -0700
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-sys/Arc00/msg00168.html

>> So why don't you learn a thing or two about facts yourself, something
>> you are routinely short on.

> Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:56:42 -0700 
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-icann/Arc00/msg00111.html

>> If you can't see that, then your prejudice and arrogance is blinding
>> you, as usual.

> Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 21:14:18 -0700
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-sys/Arc00/msg00176.html

>> Grow up Chris.

> Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:54:41 -0700
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-roots/Arc00/msg00925.html

>> Don't know much about US Laws or the legal systems do you?

> Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 09:18:59 -0700
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-roots/Arc00/msg00935.html

>> Len is a well known character in the AU legal system, who has a
>> reputation in the courts for filing frivolous lawsuits, and widely
>> threatening anyone who challenges him on facts with lawsuits
>> themselves.

> Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 17:35:47 -0700
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg03217.html

>> I never called Palmer a clueless newbie, though I did say he was
>> showing his ignorance.

> Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 17:35:47 -0700 
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg03217.html

>> Might want to get your facts straight before you attack someone Bill.
>> I hope your clients get better facts checking from you than this.

> Regards
> Patrick Corliss

- -- 
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: Sun, 1 Jul 2001 06:31:11 -0700
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Re: DO NOT WRITE TO OR COPY GA-ABUSE

Hello Patrick,

Sunday, July 01, 2001, 2:36:08 AM, Patrick Corliss wrote:

> On Sat, 30 Jun 2001 19:45:06 -0700, William X. Walsh wrote:

>> I did not send the complaint to the list.

> Yes you did.  So it was cross-posted.  The URL is:
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc07/msg03217.html

> You also provided extra copies to me and Danny.
> So we both got THREE copies.  Mine, ga and ga-abuse.

Actually, what happened was that Mr Lovell took a message I had
written to ga-abuse (and 90% of the time when I make a complaint about
someone I let them know it, so he got a CC of it), and sent it to the
list, with ga-abuse@ and Danny and Patrick's addresses in the CC line.

I then replied to all (which we have to do on this list since they
won't set the reply-to header properly) without noticing the Ga-abuse@
alias in there.  Had I noticed it, I would have removed it.

I apologize to Patrick for not noting that this was the message he was
complaining about, and for not paying attention to notice what Bill
had done and avoid letting his mistake cause me to make one as well.

- -- 
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: Mon, 2 Jul 2001 00:14:00 +1000
From: "Patrick Corliss" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] DO NOT WRITE TO OR COPY GA-ABUSE

On Sun, 1 Jul 2001 06:31:11 -0700, William X. Walsh wrote:
> I apologize to Patrick for not noting that this was the message he was
> complaining about, and for not paying attention to notice what Bill
> had done and avoid letting his mistake cause me to make one as well.

Hi William

Thank you for your courtesy but it is not necessary.  I agree that you were
responding to Bill's cross-posting to [ga] and [ga-abuse] by hitting "reply
all".  In those particular circumstances, I was being unfair to you.

I am not sure why the DNSO Secretariat cannot include this prohibition in
her set of cross-posting rules.  I have asked her several times to do so.

She could, I would think, set the rules so only the [ga-abuse] gets posted.

I have also mentioned it to Philip Sheppard and others on the Name Council.
Perhaps we need Danny's authority as Chair to achieve this minor request.

Elisabeth?  Philip?  Danny?  Anyone?

Best regards
Patrick Corliss

- --
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 #580
************************