Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #593
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST            Thursday, July 5 2001            Volume 01 : Number 593

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 13:27:55 -0500
From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] President Younger's Independence Day Address to the World

Can you explain where all of the money flows in the Domain Business ?

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter de Blanc" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Jim Fleming'" <[email-masked]>; "'Bret A. Fausett'"
<[email-masked]>; "'Gomes, Chuck'" <[email-masked]>; "'Patrick
Corliss'" <[email-masked]>; "'Philip Sheppard'"
<[email-masked]>
Cc: "'M. Stuart Lynn, ICANN'" <[email-masked]>; "'[ga]'" <[email-masked]>
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 1:20 PM
Subject: RE: [ga] President Younger's Independence Day Address to the World

> Jim:
>
> I can afford it because I sold the ISP Internet access division of my
> company to a public company some time ago. I pay my own expenses, I
> guess you'd say it is 'pro bono'.
>
> The VI registry is a small registry, and is closed at the second level
> to locals only. Financially, it operates under a subsidy.
>
> Peter de Blanc
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Fleming [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 1:09 PM
> To: Peter de Blanc; 'Bret A. Fausett'; 'Gomes, Chuck'; 'Patrick
> Corliss'; 'Philip Sheppard'
> Cc: 'M. Stuart Lynn, ICANN'; '[ga]'
> Subject: Re: [ga] President Younger's Independence Day Address to the
> World
>
>
> Peter,
>
> In my opinion,  I think you might want to focus on the money, as
> suggested by Chuck Gomes.
>
> Can you explain where all of the money flows in the Domain Business ?
>
> In most MLMs- Multi-Level-Marketing organizations, people have some
> sense for where the money flows.
>
> As a starting point, how can you afford to "jet set" around the world
> all year ? What are the gross revenues from the .VI Registry you run ?
>
>
> 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: "Peter de Blanc" <[email-masked]>
> To: "'Bret A. Fausett'" <[email-masked]>; "'Gomes, Chuck'"
> <[email-masked]>; "'Patrick Corliss'" <[email-masked]>;
> "'Philip Sheppard'" <[email-masked]>
> Cc: "'M. Stuart Lynn, ICANN'" <[email-masked]>; "'[ga]'" <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 11:07 AM
> Subject: RE: [ga] President Younger's Independence Day Address to the
> World
>
>
> > We need to separate this "Individual Domain Name Holders, and other
> > persons who are NOT a member of any constituency from those who ARE
> > members of a (DNSO) constituency.
> >
> > Within the DNSO, of course the secretariat provides service to the
> > entire DNSO.
> >
> > What is at issue, is who can request services from the secretariat, or
>
> > authorize incurring costs.
> >
> > Historically, direction to the secretariat to set up lists, incur
> > costs, etc, has come from the Names Council, who represents the
> > constituencies. After all, the constituencies elected their NC reps.
> >
> >
> > Perhaps what is needed is a clear definition of who is authorized to
> > make these requests, and a procedure for GA chair to generate such
> > requests for authorization.
> >
> > Should the GA chair be able to generate such requests unilaterally?
> >
> > Or
> >
> > Should such requests be generated after consensus is reached on the
> > subject on the GA list or in face to face meetings
> >
> > Peter de Blanc
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Bret
> > A. Fausett
> > Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 11:23 AM
> > To: Gomes, Chuck; 'Patrick Corliss'; Philip Sheppard
> > Cc: M. Stuart Lynn, ICANN; [ga]
> > Subject: Re: [ga] President Younger's Independence Day Address to the
> > World
> >
> >
> > Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> > > Let me see if I understand this.  The constituencies pay for the
> > > services, but the GA wants to call the shots?
> >
> > The GA is _supposed to be_ an umbrella organization encompassing all
> > the constituencies, so the idea that resources could be allocated to
> > it without charging those who participate in it a separate fee isn't
> > that hard to accept. I hope the current problem of this being a de
> > facto place for unaffiliated DNSO participants will be cured when an
> > individual domain name owners constituency is finally chartered and
> > operational.
> >
> >       -- Bret
> >
> > --
> > 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
> >
>

- --
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, 5 Jul 2001 20:31:42 +0200 (CEST)
From: Marc Schneiders <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Help pass  HR 2417 .KIDS

And, what is worse, DNS should not be used for censorship. 

- -- 
[email-masked]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  
 http://www.ORG-domain-name-owners-lobby-against-ICANNs-sellout-to-VeriSign.ORG
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, at 10:45 [=GMT-0700], William X. Walsh wrote:

> Hello Bruce,
> 
> Help DEFEAT this bill, if you really care about a .kids domain.
> 
> This domain should not be created by US congressional fiat.
> 
> 
> Thursday, July 05, 2001, 10:11:35 AM, Bruce James wrote:
> 
> 
> > H. R. 2417
> 
> >                                                       IN THE HOUSE OF
> > REPRESENTATIVES
> > To facilitate the creation of a new global top-level Internet domain that
> > will be a haven for material that will promote positive experiences of
> > children and families using the Internet, to provide a safe online
> > environment for children, and to help prevent children from being exposed to
> > harmful material on the Internet, and for other purposes.
> 
> 
> > I urge all of the GA to write, phone and email your local congressperson to
> > *Co-Sponsor HR 2417*. This bill needs co-sponsors to get anywhere. Please
> > use the link below to find their address.
> 
> >                             http://www.house.gov/writerep/
> 
> > This new gTLD .KIDS is a very good idea for the safety of our children! We
> > need your *HELP*!
> 
> 
> 
> > /Bruce James
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 11:50:32 -0700
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Help pass HR 2417 .KIDS

Hello Bruce,

Thursday, July 05, 2001, 11:15:10 AM, Bruce James wrote:

>     Roberto:

>     The US Congress is not going to let the DoC do anything to the free
> ICANN from the USG control. That is why this bill will pass.

It will die in committee, like the vast majority of other bills,
including previous bills by these two outspoken ICANN critics, whose
colleagues don't seem to share their zealousness for the issue.

This bill should not pass.  It is not proper.

- -- 
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, 5 Jul 2001 15:16:20 -0400 
From: "Cade,Marilyn S - LGA" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] taking positions on country specific legislation

Folks, I have a question about process and topics for a minute.  I was not
aware that the GA thought that  it's role included endorsing country
specific legislation and find this of concern. 

- -----Original Message-----
From: Bruce James [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 2:15 PM
To: Roberto Gaetano; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ga] Help pass HR 2417 .KIDS

    Roberto:

    The US Congress is not going to let the DoC do anything to the free
ICANN from the USG control. That is why this bill will pass.

    /Bruce

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 12:41
Subject: Re: [ga] Help pass HR 2417 .KIDS

Bruce James wrote:

>To facilitate the creation of a new global top-level Internet domain that
>will be a haven for material that will promote positive experiences of
>children and families using the Internet, to provide a safe online
>environment for children, and to help prevent children from being exposed
>to
>harmful material on the Internet, and for other purposes.
>
>
>I urge all of the GA to write, phone and email your local congressperson to
>*Co-Sponsor HR 2417*. This bill needs co-sponsors to get anywhere. Please
>use the link below to find their address.
>
>                             http://www.house.gov/writerep/
>
>This new gTLD .KIDS is a very good idea for the safety of our children! We
>need your *HELP*!

I strongly disagree for the following reasons:

1. The creation of a specific TLD for kids will not achieve any result,
except to attract side by side sites really meant for kids with other
off-topic or even counterproductive material, like kids pornography, unless
the Registry will not be given the power to police the contents of the Web
sites worldwide, which is illegal in some countries.

2. The creation of a TLD by decision of the US Congress is severely
limitating the power of ICANN and ratifying the subordinate role of ICANN to
USG. The immediate effect of this decision will be a reaction by non-US
actors, and the real risk of a split of the Internet. Which is, BTW, why I
do believe that US Congress will never pass such a bill. Please note that
the creation of a .kids.us SLD will be perfectly acceptable because it will
act under US law and not have any international ripercussion.

Anyway, as a supporter of a really international Internet co-ordination body
(which ICANN is not, BTW), I have to confess that the idea that US Congress
might make such a stupid mistake like passing the bill and forcing the rest
of the world to evaluate different alternatives outside the "longa manus" of
uncle Sam tickles my imagination.

Yeah, who knows, in the future we might remember this early July for another
"Independence Day", the beginning of a movement of independence of the
Netizens from US Government. Might not be so bad, after all, to have a tea
party with 13 brand new root servers! ;>)

Regards
Roberto

_________________________________________________________________
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: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 12:39:06 -0700
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] taking positions on country specific legislation

Hi Marylin,

I find nothing that prohibits it except for a few thoughts.  Lobbying by a
non-profit is a skecthy area at best.  If ICANN is a subcontractor with the DoC
then that has some interesting problems.  We specifically have a GAC to advise
us but specifically do not have the reverse.  There is a prohibition of a
governmental employee or official working for ICANN (I still do not get Bildt).

OTOH policy with regards to Domain Names is clearly our business. All the
position papers and RFCs clearly effect lawmakers.  It is congress that asks for
input from our staff and BoD, surely they should get some from the GA. Under
contract the ccTLDs owned by countries are advised by APNIC et al.

So I would suggest that you are right technically but that if we do not only
other voices are heard.  We will have to decide if it should be in or out of a
IDNH constituency and the same issues will have to be studied.  I am of the
opine at this time that if everyone agrees not to do it then Individuals and the
GA should not.  But if everyone else is going to do it then we should
participate.

Sincerely,
Eric

"Cade,Marilyn S - LGA" wrote:

> Folks, I have a question about process and topics for a minute.  I was not
> aware that the GA thought that  it's role included endorsing country
> specific legislation and find this of concern.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bruce James [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 2:15 PM
> To: Roberto Gaetano; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [ga] Help pass HR 2417 .KIDS
>
>     Roberto:
>
>     The US Congress is not going to let the DoC do anything to the free
> ICANN from the USG control. That is why this bill will pass.
>
>     /Bruce
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]>
> To: <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 12:41
> Subject: Re: [ga] Help pass HR 2417 .KIDS
>
> Bruce James wrote:
>
> >To facilitate the creation of a new global top-level Internet domain that
> >will be a haven for material that will promote positive experiences of
> >children and families using the Internet, to provide a safe online
> >environment for children, and to help prevent children from being exposed
> >to
> >harmful material on the Internet, and for other purposes.
> >
> >
> >I urge all of the GA to write, phone and email your local congressperson to
> >*Co-Sponsor HR 2417*. This bill needs co-sponsors to get anywhere. Please
> >use the link below to find their address.
> >
> >                             http://www.house.gov/writerep/
> >
> >This new gTLD .KIDS is a very good idea for the safety of our children! We
> >need your *HELP*!
>
> I strongly disagree for the following reasons:
>
> 1. The creation of a specific TLD for kids will not achieve any result,
> except to attract side by side sites really meant for kids with other
> off-topic or even counterproductive material, like kids pornography, unless
> the Registry will not be given the power to police the contents of the Web
> sites worldwide, which is illegal in some countries.
>
> 2. The creation of a TLD by decision of the US Congress is severely
> limitating the power of ICANN and ratifying the subordinate role of ICANN to
> USG. The immediate effect of this decision will be a reaction by non-US
> actors, and the real risk of a split of the Internet. Which is, BTW, why I
> do believe that US Congress will never pass such a bill. Please note that
> the creation of a .kids.us SLD will be perfectly acceptable because it will
> act under US law and not have any international ripercussion.
>
> Anyway, as a supporter of a really international Internet co-ordination body
> (which ICANN is not, BTW), I have to confess that the idea that US Congress
> might make such a stupid mistake like passing the bill and forcing the rest
> of the world to evaluate different alternatives outside the "longa manus" of
> uncle Sam tickles my imagination.
>
> Yeah, who knows, in the future we might remember this early July for another
> "Independence Day", the beginning of a movement of independence of the
> Netizens from US Government. Might not be so bad, after all, to have a tea
> party with 13 brand new root servers! ;>)
>
> Regards
> Roberto
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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-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

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 12:52:22 -0700
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] taking positions on country specific legislation

Hello Marilyn,

Thursday, July 05, 2001, 12:16:20 PM, Cade,Marilyn S - LGA wrote:

> Folks, I have a question about process and topics for a minute.  I was not
> aware that the GA thought that  it's role included endorsing country
> specific legislation and find this of concern. 

Even when this legislation effects ICANN and the DNSO and their work?

- -- 
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, 5 Jul 2001 15:15:54 -0500
From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] 0:212 - BIZ World Question on NIC.BIZ

http://www.icann.org/announcements/icann-pr04jul01-3.htm
Announcement  4 July 2001
Information About .biz and .info Top-Level Domains Available
available at web sites operated by their registry operators
<http://www.nic.biz> and <http://www.nic.info>.
- -----------------------------------------------------

NIC.BIZ is not listed here...
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 
- -----------------------------------------------------

...current whois for NIC.BIZ
http://www.pacificroot.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois.cgi
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: 20010627.1116

DNS Servers:
 ns2.beachshore.net
 ns1.quasar.net
- ----------------------------------------

Who owns NIC.BIZ ???

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12574.html
RFC-2001-07-01-000 IPv8 Expansion of Proof of Concept TLD Development

Jim Fleming
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, 5 Jul 2001 16:29:36 -0400 
From: "Gomes, Chuck" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] President Younger's Independence Day Address to the Worl d

Bret,

Resources allocated for the benefit of the GA is a different issue than the
GA making decisions as to how resources contributed by others are used.
Input from the GA should be encouraged in the latter situation, but I'm not
sure that the GA should be given approval/disapproval rights.

I also think that an individuals constituency might resolve a lot of the
issues here.

Chuck

- -----Original Message-----
From: Bret A. Fausett [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 11:23 AM
To: Gomes, Chuck; 'Patrick Corliss'; Philip Sheppard
Cc: M. Stuart Lynn, ICANN; [ga]
Subject: Re: [ga] President Younger's Independence Day Address to the
Worl d

Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> Let me see if I understand this.  The constituencies pay for the services,
> but the GA wants to call the shots?

The GA is _supposed to be_ an umbrella organization encompassing all the
constituencies, so the idea that resources could be allocated to it without
charging those who participate in it a separate fee isn't that hard to
accept. I hope the current problem of this being a de facto place for
unaffiliated DNSO participants will be cured when an individual domain name
owners constituency is finally chartered and operational.

      -- Bret
- --
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, 5 Jul 2001 12:46:08 -0700
From: Kent Crispin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Dealing with bounced and returned mail

On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 10:09:53PM +1000, Patrick Corliss wrote:
> And the NC, which is elected to serve,

The NC is not elected to "serve".  

The NC is elected, it says in the Bylaws, to "MANAGE the consensus
process".  The primary fault with the NC is not that it doesn't serve
the whims of various tiny subsets of the GA -- in fact it spends
entirely too much time and energy catering to them.  The primary fault
of the NC is that it does a miserable job of MANAGING.

- -- 
Kent Crispin                               "Be good, and you will be
[email-masked]                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
- --
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, 5 Jul 2001 16:39:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: Paul Svensson <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] language legalities

On the NeuLevel www.nic.biz webpage it's stated:
>Due to legal restrictions, all legal forms and documents are available in English only.

Could someone explain what's the issue here,
what restrictions are they referring to ?

	/Paul

- --
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, 05 Jul 2001 13:55:47 -0700
From: "William S. Lovell" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] .kids domain

In his usual insulting manner, Mr. William X. Walsh entirely misses
the point.   If  ICANN were forced to create a .kids domain by the
U. S. Congress, there it would be, on the Internet, and once that
was done there is nothing any other country could do about it.
There are no "laws of that country" as to the U. S. that permit
the Congress to take this action, although it is likely to do so
anyway unless enough people jump into this fray.

Bill Lovell

"William X. Walsh" wrote:

> Hello L,
>
> Wednesday, July 04, 2001, 8:27:23 PM, L Gallegos wrote:
>
> > This proposed legislation does make a point, though, doesn't it?
> > How can ICANN claim to be a multinational organization and the
> > root a global entity when it is owned and controlled by the US
> > government?  Isn't it, then, a US root with a huge market share,
> > managed by a private US corporation?  With ICANN not having to
> > answer to anyone but the state AG and DoC and with DoC simply
> > rubber stamping anything that ICANN decides per their stated
> > policy, we seem to have just what was said at the February
> > hearing:
>
> <sigh>
>
> More grandstanding.
>
> Let's face reality, wherever ICANN was based, it would subject to the
> laws of the country it was domiciled in, and could be compelled to act
> based on laws in that country.
>
> --
> 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

- --
Any terms or acronyms above that are not familiar
to the reader may possibly be explained at:
"WHAT IS": http://whatis.techtarget.com/
GLOSSARY: http://www.icann.org/general/glossary.htm

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

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 16:59:56 -0400
From: "Ben Edelman" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] 0:212 - BIZ World Question on NIC.BIZ

I believe NIC.BIZ is reserved separately in .BIZ Appendix K.  See
<http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/unsponsored/registry-agmt-appk-26apr01
.htm>, section D, first bullet point.

Ben Edelman

"Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]> wrote in message
news:<[email-masked]>...
> http://www.icann.org/announcements/icann-pr04jul01-3.htm
> Announcement  4 July 2001
> Information About .biz and .info Top-Level Domains Available
> available at web sites operated by their registry operators
> <http://www.nic.biz> and <http://www.nic.info>.
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> NIC.BIZ is not listed here...
> 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
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> ...current whois for NIC.BIZ
> http://www.pacificroot.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois.cgi
> 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: 20010627.1116
>
> DNS Servers:
>  ns2.beachshore.net
>  ns1.quasar.net
> ----------------------------------------
>
> Who owns NIC.BIZ ???
>
>
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12574.html
> RFC-2001-07-01-000 IPv8 Expansion of Proof of Concept TLD Development
>
> Jim Fleming
> 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

- --
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, 5 Jul 2001 17:07:38 -0400
From: "L Gallegos" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] 0:212 - BIZ World Question on NIC.BIZ

On 5 Jul 2001, at 16:59, Ben Edelman wrote:

> I believe NIC.BIZ is reserved separately in .BIZ Appendix K.  See
> <http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/unsponsored/registry-agmt-appk-2
> 6apr01 .htm>, section D, first bullet point.
> 

And the significance is?  NIC.BIZ has been reserved for the original 
.biz since it was re-delegated last May (2000).  Nuelevel's 
duplicate is just that.  For that matter, anything registered under 
the duplicate TLD is a duplicate.   

Leah

> Ben Edelman
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]> wrote in message
> news:<[email-masked]>...
> > http://www.icann.org/announcements/icann-pr04jul01-3.htm >
> Announcement  4 July 2001 > Information About .biz and .info Top-Level
> Domains Available > available at web sites operated by their registry
> operators > <http://www.nic.biz> and <http://www.nic.info>. >
> ----------------------------------------------------- > > NIC.BIZ is
> not listed here... >
> http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/biz/registry-agmt-appx-11may01.ht
> m > ldap.biz > multilingual.biz > mybiz.biz > network.biz >
> <<<<<<<<<???? NIC.BIZ ???? > nntp.biz > ntp.biz > order.biz >
> ----------------------------------------------------- > > ...current
> whois for NIC.BIZ > http://www.pacificroot.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois.cgi
> > 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:
> 20010627.1116 > > DNS Servers: >  ns2.beachshore.net >  ns1.quasar.net
> > ---------------------------------------- > > Who owns NIC.BIZ ??? >
> > > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12574.html >
> RFC-2001-07-01-000 IPv8 Expansion of Proof of Concept TLD Development
> > > Jim Fleming > 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
> 
> --
> 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

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

Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 17:17:44 -0400
From: Joanna Lane <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] taking positions on country specific legislation

Marilyn,

on 7/5/01 3:16 PM, Cade,Marilyn S - LGA at [email-masked] wrote:

> 
> Folks, I have a question about process and topics for a minute.  I was not
> aware that the GA thought that  it's role included endorsing country
> specific legislation and find this of concern.

Ask yourself why some members feel the need to talk to their government
representative about ICANN related issues in the first place.

I was not aware that the GA thought that it's role excluded consideration of
country specific legislation affecting the DNS. It is entirely appropriate
for Bruce to advocate a position on this legislation in the GA forum, and to
suggest ways in which the GA can be heard on the issue, either collectively
or individually.

With respect, your concern is misplaced.

Regards,
Joanna
 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bruce James [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 2:15 PM
> To: Roberto Gaetano; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [ga] Help pass HR 2417 .KIDS
> 
> 
> Roberto:
> 
> The US Congress is not going to let the DoC do anything to the free
> ICANN from the USG control. That is why this bill will pass.
> 
> /Bruce
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]>
> To: <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 12:41
> Subject: Re: [ga] Help pass HR 2417 .KIDS
> 
> 
> Bruce James wrote:
> 
>> To facilitate the creation of a new global top-level Internet domain that
>> will be a haven for material that will promote positive experiences of
>> children and families using the Internet, to provide a safe online
>> environment for children, and to help prevent children from being exposed
>> to
>> harmful material on the Internet, and for other purposes.
>> 
>> 
>> I urge all of the GA to write, phone and email your local congressperson to
>> *Co-Sponsor HR 2417*. This bill needs co-sponsors to get anywhere. Please
>> use the link below to find their address.
>> 
>> http://www.house.gov/writerep/
>> 
>> This new gTLD .KIDS is a very good idea for the safety of our children! We
>> need your *HELP*!
> 
> 
> I strongly disagree for the following reasons:
> 
> 1. The creation of a specific TLD for kids will not achieve any result,
> except to attract side by side sites really meant for kids with other
> off-topic or even counterproductive material, like kids pornography, unless
> the Registry will not be given the power to police the contents of the Web
> sites worldwide, which is illegal in some countries.
> 
> 2. The creation of a TLD by decision of the US Congress is severely
> limitating the power of ICANN and ratifying the subordinate role of ICANN to
> USG. The immediate effect of this decision will be a reaction by non-US
> actors, and the real risk of a split of the Internet. Which is, BTW, why I
> do believe that US Congress will never pass such a bill. Please note that
> the creation of a .kids.us SLD will be perfectly acceptable because it will
> act under US law and not have any international ripercussion.
> 
> Anyway, as a supporter of a really international Internet co-ordination body
> (which ICANN is not, BTW), I have to confess that the idea that US Congress
> might make such a stupid mistake like passing the bill and forcing the rest
> of the world to evaluate different alternatives outside the "longa manus" of
> uncle Sam tickles my imagination.
> 
> Yeah, who knows, in the future we might remember this early July for another
> "Independence Day", the beginning of a movement of independence of the
> Netizens from US Government. Might not be so bad, after all, to have a tea
> party with 13 brand new root servers! ;>)
> 
> Regards
> Roberto
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
> 

- --
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 #593
************************