Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #598
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST             Sunday, July 8 2001             Volume 01 : Number 598

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

Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 05:00:02 -0700
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Removal of Patrick Corliss as List Monitor

Hello Patrick,

Saturday, July 07, 2001, 4:19:47 AM, Patrick Corliss wrote:
> Effectively you are saying that the Alternate Chair cannot report serious
> concerns in a private communication to members of the Names Council.

What he is saying is that your inflammatory comments in that
communication indicate tendencies and positions which make you
unsuitable for the position.

> Interesting hypothesis !!

> It's also interesting that you have now disseminated my correspondence
> to every member of the General Assembly.  All 300 of them.  Nice move.

It's a public archive, Patrick.  You had no expectation of privacy.

>> As Chair, I cannot accept such commentary from an individual designated
>> as a List Monitor for this Assembly.   I am therefore terminating
>> Patrick's role as List Monitor immediately.

> So now we are down to two.

Before your and Danny's escapades started here, we had one, who acted
as he saw fit, and with a few exceptions did a decent job of it,
acting on his own initiative, instead of by committee.

The moderators should be independent and free to receive complaints
iand act on them independently.  Much like a ticketing system, the
moderators can say "I'm handling complaints #5-8 in the queue, and
dispensing with them."  Unless those decisions are appealed to the
Chair, that is the end of it.

- -- 
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: Sat, 07 Jul 2001 07:53:16 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Fw: ICANN's Karl Auerbach responds to Joe Sims over .kidsdomain

WXW and all assembly members,

  We [INEGroup] do not agree with either of the below mentioned
directions.  We believe that the free market system will in the end
decide what TLD's regardless or TYPE ( Restricted or non-restricted)
will survive and/or thrive.  Any attempt at trying to manipulate the
Free Market system in this manner will eventually fail over the
long haul.

William X. Walsh wrote:

> Hello James,
>
> Saturday, July 07, 2001, 12:40:42 AM, James Love wrote:
> > monopolistic environment.  If ICANN has any role in terms of deciding
> > who is best to run a registry, it would be for dictionary words, where
> > IMO, at least some strings lend themselves to non-market allocations
> > (museum, coop, union), or should be reserved for trade associations,
> > professional organizations or industry groups with greater moral claims
>
> I don't agree.  I believe that the market should decide if the strings
> have any meaning, and that the meaning of the strings is up to each
> individual registrant.
>
> Under the .museum rules, what qualifies an organization as a museum?
>
> Does an associate who collects and displays archaic computers at his
> shop, in a section called the Machine Museum, qualify?  Probably not
> if you delegate it to some museum organization, but by what right is
> he excluded?
>
> words/strings are not like logos/seals, which are CREATED by an
> association to identify it's members.  They exist outside of that
> scope, and their meaning is subjective.
>
> Union doesn't have to mean an organized labor organization, either.
>
> There is no "moral claim" to these terms that exist outside the DNS,
> and they absolutely should not exist inside the DNS.
>
> It cannot be emphasized enough that the DNS is NOT a directory
> service.   If you want a directory, there are numerous ones out there,
> including Dmoz.org, and Yahoo.com.  There are specialized directories
> as well.  That is not the role of the DNS.
>
> ICANN should stay completely out of deciding any meanings or
> restrictions on TLDs at all.  The standards for creating a restricted
> TLD should be EXTREMELY high, with a major justification for why those
> entities should be segregated, and why the string is the appropriate
> on to segregate them with.
>
> Should .union exist? Certainly, but what a waste of the namespace to
> restrict it to labor organizations only.
>
> --
> 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: Sat, 07 Jul 2001 15:59:44 +0200
From: Jefsey Morfin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Fw: ICANN's Karl Auerbach responds to Joe Sims over .kidsdomain

Dear Jamie,
there is a notion no one contest from either side what ever the sides. It 
is that the DNS is recursive. If you start considering the content of a TLD 
you also start considering the content of a site or of a sub-site or of a 
page or of a line. This is censorship: USCANN has a lot of experience and 
projects in that area: like the absurd plans over .org (someone told us 
about the possibility for the Congress to vote inapplicable laws, a 
possibility apparently considered by the BoD)

Recursiveness has also an advantage: it works both ways. If they exclude at 
TLD level they will be  excluded at root level. Obviously inclusive roots 
are their competition, but when you read the proposed Bill: it excludes the 
USCANN from its own root mission and actually makes the USCANN to be an 
alternative root to the one proposed to the Congress. Since the master-root 
would be defined by the Congress and the incomplete iCANN alternative 
version should be given notice to load it.

Interesting.

Jefsey

On 09:40 07/07/01, James Love said:
>The freedom to exclude is an important freedom.  If ICANN can open the
>door, at a minimum, to non dictionary TLDs, and really expand the root,
>eliminating the artificial scarcity rents, people would not complain
>about someone running a restricted TLD, any more than they complain
>about a restricted listserve, or a seal that is only available to people
>who meet the requirements of the seal (such as truste).   What we don't
>need is ICANN managing the content side of this, and we should leave
>that up to the registries and registrars, in a competitive and non
>monopolistic environment.  If ICANN has any role in terms of deciding
>who is best to run a registry, it would be for dictionary words, where
>IMO, at least some strings lend themselves to non-market allocations
>(museum, coop, union), or should be reserved for trade associations,
>professional organizations or industry groups with greater moral claims
>on the sting that they are likely to be using (the film industry for
>names like .movie, .film, .cinema, etc).   And even here, I would think
>that ICANN should just award the TLD to a good candidate, and get out of
>the way.
>
>Jamie
>
>--
>James Love
>Consumer Project on Technology
>http://www.cptech.org
>1.202.380.3080 fax 1.202.234.5176
>mailto:[email-masked]
>--
>This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
>Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
>("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
>Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

- --
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: Sat, 07 Jul 2001 10:29:24 -0400
From: James Love <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Dictionary words:  was ICANN's Karl Auerbach responds to Joe Sims over  .kids domain

Well, you can't have any opportunity to find out if a restricted domain
works, unless a registry is allowed to run a restricted domain.   If you
force the .com .org model on everyone, then there is no opportunity for
experiments, or choice, in terms of management models.  Since the
scarcity of strings is an artificial constraint, why impose monopolistic
management models?    

.com and .org are not words, and they have taken on a meaning that flows
from usage, or at least the early assumptions about their use.   Some
object that any distinction would be made between a string like .coop,
.museum or .union and a string like .biz, which is not a word, or any
number of other possiblities, such as combinations of words, but it
seems to me to be appropriate, because by making this distinction, you
can recognize I believe the legitimate interests of society to have some
say over how important social symbols are used (some dictionary words),
without having an excuse to be a control freak or monopolitist in areas
where there is no plausible claim to restrict access to the TLD space. 
There is no real land grab in the non-dictionary name space, only work,
investment and effort.  There is a land grab for the dictionary words,
and they should be decided according to a different policy.  

 Jamie

Jeff Williams wrote:
> 
> WXW and all assembly members,
> 
>   We [INEGroup] do not agree with either of the below mentioned
> directions.  We believe that the free market system will in the end
> decide what TLD's regardless or TYPE ( Restricted or non-restricted)
> will survive and/or thrive.  Any attempt at trying to manipulate the
> Free Market system in this manner will eventually fail over the
> long haul.
> 
> William X. Walsh wrote:
> 
> > Hello James,
> >
> > Saturday, July 07, 2001, 12:40:42 AM, James Love wrote:
> > > monopolistic environment.  If ICANN has any role in terms of deciding
> > > who is best to run a registry, it would be for dictionary words, where
> > > IMO, at least some strings lend themselves to non-market allocations
> > > (museum, coop, union), or should be reserved for trade associations,
> > > professional organizations or industry groups with greater moral claims
> >
> > I don't agree.  I believe that the market should decide if the strings
> > have any meaning, and that the meaning of the strings is up to each
> > individual registrant.
> >
> > Under the .museum rules, what qualifies an organization as a museum?
> >
> > Does an associate who collects and displays archaic computers at his
> > shop, in a section called the Machine Museum, qualify?  Probably not
> > if you delegate it to some museum organization, but by what right is
> > he excluded?
> >
> > words/strings are not like logos/seals, which are CREATED by an
> > association to identify it's members.  They exist outside of that
> > scope, and their meaning is subjective.
> >
> > Union doesn't have to mean an organized labor organization, either.
> >
> > There is no "moral claim" to these terms that exist outside the DNS,
> > and they absolutely should not exist inside the DNS.
> >
> > It cannot be emphasized enough that the DNS is NOT a directory
> > service.   If you want a directory, there are numerous ones out there,
> > including Dmoz.org, and Yahoo.com.  There are specialized directories
> > as well.  That is not the role of the DNS.
> >
> > ICANN should stay completely out of deciding any meanings or
> > restrictions on TLDs at all.  The standards for creating a restricted
> > TLD should be EXTREMELY high, with a major justification for why those
> > entities should be segregated, and why the string is the appropriate
> > on to segregate them with.
> >
> > Should .union exist? Certainly, but what a waste of the namespace to
> > restrict it to labor organizations only.
> >
> > --
> > 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

- -- 
James Love
Consumer Project on Technology
http://www.cptech.org
1.202.380.3080 fax 1.202.234.5176
mailto:[email-masked]
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

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

Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 10:43:16 -0500
From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Land Grab ? Go West Young Man....

- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "James Love" <[email-masked]>
> There is no real land grab in the non-dictionary name space, only work,
> investment and effort.  There is a land grab for the dictionary words,
> and they should be decided according to a different policy.  
> 

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

In cyberspace, "land" is more similar to IP Address Space.
Names are more like road signs or billboards. If given a choice,
most farmers would likely keep their land, instead of the billboards
that come and go on the land. It is interesting that people debate
the names, when the Internet is really constructed on numbers.

As for expansion of the name space, there appear to be FOUR
major movements. Some might label them in a range from Liberal
to Conservative. The Conservatives obviously do not want any new
names, no surprise there. The Liberals have now made it possible
to have almost any TLD and the market forces are working. Some
might call that a "Land Grab". When the Western U.S. was opened to
settlers, people called those people pioneers. That spirit is still alive
today.

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-Arizona.com
http://www.DOT.Arizona

- --
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: Sat, 07 Jul 2001 10:28:28 -0700
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Removal of Patrick Corliss as List Monitor

I apologize for not noticing earlier but my name was referenced in the
offending post in a negative manner that I believe may have contributed to
this decision by Danny.  If that is the case I want to make sure that I in no
way am insulted or bothered by Mr. Corliss's post.  I seemed fair comment to
me.

After very much thought I have decided to continue working in the GA and do
my best to contribute in a positive manner.  I believe we are slowly rounding
a corner in the road which may lead to bringing ICANN into a closer
compliance with the MOU and White Papers and DoC directives including those
incorporated from the President.  We are having the same arguments which the
GA and its predecessor had but now we are moving toward more advanced results
with a more bottom up diversity.

I understand that new rules will soon be in a form for proper presentation
for formal voting.  We have had lively debate on the Task Force for the UDRP
and will soon finish electing a Rep. for the TF Review which will help to
establish an individual constituency. This is very well and good.

Patrick, you have been given a gift not to be a monitor, take it and pursue
your other projects.

Eric

Patrick Corliss wrote:

> Hi Danny
>
> > I have noted the following message posted by Patrick Corliss to the
> > Council List:
> > http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/council/Arc05/msg00582.html
> >
> > It is my view that the statement put forth constitutes malfeasance.
>
> Effectively you are saying that the Alternate Chair cannot report serious
> concerns in a private communication to members of the Names Council.
>
> Interesting hypothesis !!
>
> It's also interesting that you have now disseminated my correspondence
> to every member of the General Assembly.  All 300 of them.  Nice move.
>
> > Defamatory remarks have been made by an official of the Assembly that
> > sufficiently malign some of our members on a publicly archived list.
>
> In relation to you I said:
>
> *  Danny and I are not communicating.
> *  Danny's proposed Organizing Committee has never got off the ground.
>
> Both true and fair comment.  So who are you defending?
>
> > As Chair, I cannot accept such commentary from an individual designated
> > as a List Monitor for this Assembly.   I am therefore terminating
> > Patrick's role as List Monitor immediately.
>
> So now we are down to two.
>
> Best regards
> Patrick Corliss
>
> --
> 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: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 10:42:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Patrick Greenwell <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Fw: ICANN's Karl Auerbach responds to Joe Sims over .kidsdomain

On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, William X. Walsh wrote:

> It cannot be emphasized enough that the DNS is NOT a directory
> service.   If you want a directory, there are numerous ones out there,
> including Dmoz.org, and Yahoo.com.  There are specialized directories
> as well.  That is not the role of the DNS.
>
> ICANN should stay completely out of deciding any meanings or
> restrictions on TLDs at all.  The standards for creating a restricted
> TLD should be EXTREMELY high, with a major justification for why those
> entities should be segregated, and why the string is the appropriate
> on to segregate them with.

Why not let the market decide that as well?

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
                               Patrick Greenwell
                       Earth is a single point of failure.
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

- --
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: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 14:08:30 -0500
From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Why not let the market decide that as well?....

- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Patrick Greenwell" <[email-masked]>
of the DNS.
> >
> > ICANN should stay completely out of deciding any meanings or
> > restrictions on TLDs at all.  The standards for creating a restricted
> > TLD should be EXTREMELY high, with a major justification for why those
> > entities should be segregated, and why the string is the appropriate
> > on to segregate them with.
> 
> Why not let the market decide that as well?
> 

http://www.cybertelecom.org/enum.htm
"The Report recommends that ENUM be administered through a
single unified database also known as a golden tree, that this unified
database be located at the e164.arpa domain, that the ITU facilitate the
administration of this database, and that the US work rapidly to implement
ENUM."

http://www.New.Net
e164.shop
e164.agent
e164.arts
e164.auction
e164.chat
e164.church
e164.club
e164.family
e164.free
e164.game
e164.gmbh
e164.golf
e164.hola
e164.law
e164.llc
e164.llp
e164.love   
e164.med
e164.mp3
e164.school
e164.scifi
e164.soc
e164.sport
e164.travel
e164.video
e164.xxx

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.Arizona

- --
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: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 13:21:47 -0700
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Dictionary words:  was ICANN's Karl Auerbach responds to Joe Sims over  .kids domain

Hello James,

Saturday, July 07, 2001, 7:29:24 AM, James Love wrote:
> object that any distinction would be made between a string like .coop,
> .museum or .union and a string like .biz, which is not a word, or any
> number of other possiblities, such as combinations of words, but it
> seems to me to be appropriate, because by making this distinction, you
> can recognize I believe the legitimate interests of society to have some
> say over how important social symbols are used (some dictionary words),
> without having an excuse to be a control freak or monopolitist in areas
> where there is no plausible claim to restrict access to the TLD space.

Why does "society" (meaning a small number of people who think they
know better what society "needs") have an interest in restricting use
of strings, and why is such an interest valid?

Open TLD use, first come first serve, is the only fair and equitable
policy.

- -- 
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: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 18:47:34 -0500
From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Fw: [azipa] some help needed on dotbizlottery.com

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Marlo Newman" <[email-masked]>
To: "Azipa@Yahoogroups. Com" <[email-masked]>
Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2001 6:20 PM
Subject: [azipa] some help needed on dotbizlottery.com

> Hi folks,
> On Monday or Tuesday we will go live with http://www.DotBizLottery.com
> I need some outside perspective on this site, improvements, typos, better
> visuals.
>
> The programming is not quite complete so don't try to place an order at
> least not yet ;)
>
> The concept is simple, Neulevel the registrar responsible for .biz domain
> names is selecting the winners of .biz domain names in a lottery fashion,
so
> the more entries you have in the hat the better your chances.
>
> You can't get a .biz domain name without going through this process at
least
> until after all of the prereg names are selected and the registry is live.
>
> Please take a minute and look this puppy over and tell me what you think
> before we launch it to the public.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Marlo Newman
> For InternetRegistration.com
>
>
> ==AZIPA=================================================================
> Arizona Internet Professionals Association http://www.azipa.org
> Next AZIPA event is 5:30pm Monday 7/23/01 at the Arizona Science Center
> RSVP and Showcase/Sponsor sign-up is at http://www.acteva.com/go/azipa
> Unless otherwise noted, list emails are NOT invitations for sales calls!
> Report list related problems/concerns at mailto:[email-masked]
> AZIPA Discussion List - for Internet related topics ***ONLY***
>   Subscribe: mailto:[email-masked]
>   Unsubscribe: mailto:[email-masked]
> See http://www.azipa.org/mail.html for full List Info and Guidelines.
> Thank you to the following AZIPA Discussion List sponsors/supporters
> * Greenberg Traurig, LLP - http://www.gtlaw.com
> * Business Journal of Phoenix - http://phoenix.bcentral.com
> * Inflow - http://www.inflow.com
> * City of Phoenix - http://www.ci.phoenix.az.us
> * Copper Square - http://www.coppersquare.com
> * CallSupportNow.com - http://www.callsupportnow.com
> * Sprint Broadband Wireless - http://www.sprintbroadband.com/phoenix
> =================================================================AZIPA==
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

- --
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: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 17:33:47 -0700
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Fw: [azipa] some help needed on dotbizlottery.com

And this post is relevant to the business of the DNSO GA in what way?

Saturday, July 07, 2001, 4:47:34 PM, Jim Fleming wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Marlo Newman" <[email-masked]>
> To: "Azipa@Yahoogroups. Com" <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2001 6:20 PM
> Subject: [azipa] some help needed on dotbizlottery.com

>> Hi folks,
>> On Monday or Tuesday we will go live with http://www.DotBizLottery.com
>> I need some outside perspective on this site, improvements, typos, better
>> visuals.
>>
>> The programming is not quite complete so don't try to place an order at
>> least not yet ;)
>>
>> The concept is simple, Neulevel the registrar responsible for .biz domain
>> names is selecting the winners of .biz domain names in a lottery fashion,
> so
>> the more entries you have in the hat the better your chances.
>>
>> You can't get a .biz domain name without going through this process at
> least
>> until after all of the prereg names are selected and the registry is live.
>>
>> Please take a minute and look this puppy over and tell me what you think
>> before we launch it to the public.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Marlo Newman
>> For InternetRegistration.com
>>
>>
>> ==AZIPA=================================================================
>> Arizona Internet Professionals Association http://www.azipa.org
>> Next AZIPA event is 5:30pm Monday 7/23/01 at the Arizona Science Center
>> RSVP and Showcase/Sponsor sign-up is at http://www.acteva.com/go/azipa
>> Unless otherwise noted, list emails are NOT invitations for sales calls!
>> Report list related problems/concerns at mailto:[email-masked]
>> AZIPA Discussion List - for Internet related topics ***ONLY***
>>   Subscribe: mailto:[email-masked]
>>   Unsubscribe: mailto:[email-masked]
>> See http://www.azipa.org/mail.html for full List Info and Guidelines.
>> Thank you to the following AZIPA Discussion List sponsors/supporters
>> * Greenberg Traurig, LLP - http://www.gtlaw.com
>> * Business Journal of Phoenix - http://phoenix.bcentral.com
>> * Inflow - http://www.inflow.com
>> * City of Phoenix - http://www.ci.phoenix.az.us
>> * Copper Square - http://www.coppersquare.com
>> * CallSupportNow.com - http://www.callsupportnow.com
>> * Sprint Broadband Wireless - http://www.sprintbroadband.com/phoenix
>> =================================================================AZIPA==
>>
>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>
>>

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

- -- 
Best regards,
William 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: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 19:44:41 -0500
From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Fw: [azipa] some help needed on dotbizlottery.com

Aren't you the programmer, software developer, for the .BIZ registry ?

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-Arizona.com
http://www.DOT.Arizona

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
To: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "ga ml" <[email-masked]>
Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2001 7:33 PM
Subject: Re: [ga] Fw: [azipa] some help needed on dotbizlottery.com

>
> And this post is relevant to the business of the DNSO GA in what way?
>
>
> Saturday, July 07, 2001, 4:47:34 PM, Jim Fleming wrote:
>
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Marlo Newman" <[email-masked]>
> > To: "Azipa@Yahoogroups. Com" <[email-masked]>
> > Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2001 6:20 PM
> > Subject: [azipa] some help needed on dotbizlottery.com
>
>
> >> Hi folks,
> >> On Monday or Tuesday we will go live with http://www.DotBizLottery.com
> >> I need some outside perspective on this site, improvements, typos,
better
> >> visuals.
> >>
> >> The programming is not quite complete so don't try to place an order at
> >> least not yet ;)
> >>
> >> The concept is simple, Neulevel the registrar responsible for .biz
domain
> >> names is selecting the winners of .biz domain names in a lottery
fashion,
> > so
> >> the more entries you have in the hat the better your chances.
> >>
> >> You can't get a .biz domain name without going through this process at
> > least
> >> until after all of the prereg names are selected and the registry is
live.
> >>
> >> Please take a minute and look this puppy over and tell me what you
think
> >> before we launch it to the public.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Marlo Newman
> >> For InternetRegistration.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
==AZIPA=================================================================
> >> Arizona Internet Professionals Association http://www.azipa.org
> >> Next AZIPA event is 5:30pm Monday 7/23/01 at the Arizona Science Center
> >> RSVP and Showcase/Sponsor sign-up is at http://www.acteva.com/go/azipa
> >> Unless otherwise noted, list emails are NOT invitations for sales
calls!
> >> Report list related problems/concerns at mailto:[email-masked]
> >> AZIPA Discussion List - for Internet related topics ***ONLY***
> >>   Subscribe: mailto:[email-masked]
> >>   Unsubscribe: mailto:[email-masked]
> >> See http://www.azipa.org/mail.html for full List Info and Guidelines.
> >> Thank you to the following AZIPA Discussion List sponsors/supporters
> >> * Greenberg Traurig, LLP - http://www.gtlaw.com
> >> * Business Journal of Phoenix - http://phoenix.bcentral.com
> >> * Inflow - http://www.inflow.com
> >> * City of Phoenix - http://www.ci.phoenix.az.us
> >> * Copper Square - http://www.coppersquare.com
> >> * CallSupportNow.com - http://www.callsupportnow.com
> >> * Sprint Broadband Wireless - http://www.sprintbroadband.com/phoenix
> >>
=================================================================AZIPA==
> >>
> >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >>
> >>
>
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> William 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: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 18:15:03 -0700
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Fw: [azipa] some help needed on dotbizlottery.com

Hello Jim,

Saturday, July 07, 2001, 5:44:41 PM, Jim Fleming wrote:

> Aren't you the programmer, software developer, for the .BIZ registry ?

No, I'm not employed by or under contract to any .biz registry.

But what does that have to do with the post in question anyway?

And further, how is your question above relevant to the business of
the DNSO-GA?

- -- 
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: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 20:22:07 -0500
From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [ga] Fw: [azipa] some help needed on dotbizlottery.com

I was under the impression that you programmed the .BIZ registry.

Is that not the case ?

Are you saying you have had nothing to do with the .BIZ registry ?

Isn't .BIZ one of the TLDs involved in what you recently described
as a "test-bed" ?

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

- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "William X. Walsh" <[email-masked]>
To: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "ga ml" <[email-masked]>
Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2001 8:15 PM
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Fw: [azipa] some help needed on dotbizlottery.com

> Hello Jim,
> 
> Saturday, July 07, 2001, 5:44:41 PM, Jim Fleming wrote:
> 
> 
> > Aren't you the programmer, software developer, for the .BIZ registry ?
> 
> No, I'm not employed by or under contract to any .biz registry.
> 
> But what does that have to do with the post in question anyway?
> 
> And further, how is your question above relevant to the business of
> the DNSO-GA?
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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

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

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #598
************************