Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #745
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST        Wednesday, September 19 2001        Volume 01 : Number 745

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

Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 19:17:46 -0700
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Re: Motion for new moderators and some leadership from   th e Chair

This was an old message that sat in a mail queue for along time, btw.
 It was kinda odd seeing it go the list this late.

Sunday, Sunday, September 16, 2001, 12:09:34 PM, Roeland Meyer wrote:

|>> From: William X Walsh [mailto:[email-masked]]
|>> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 9:49 AM
|>> 
|>> Monday, Monday, August 27, 2001, 9:44:55 AM, Roeland Meyer wrote:

|>> > As things are finally settling down to getting some work 
|>> done, I am loath to
|>> > disrupt the infrastructure.
|>> 
|>> First of all, your subject line change is just the kind of behavior
|>> that the rules prohibit.

> I did not chose the subject line. It is a on-going discussion thread. Of
> course, you would rather we have disorganized chaos, it would appear.

Yes, actually you did change it.  When I responded to your post, I put
the subject line back, Roeland. Your subject line was out of line, and
a clear violation of the rules.

|>> As it turns out, it may be that the moderators lack the requisite
|>> tools to do their job.  If that is in fact true, then it is the
|>> chair's responsibility to find a way to fix that.

> Why is it the chair's responsibility? More importantly, what makes you so
> sure that it is fixable at this time? What makes you think that such effort
> is cost/effective?  Sometimes, we have to live with "good enough".

Because I know how easy it is to code those tools, as should you.

- -- 
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, 17 Sep 2001 21:37:05 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: "political advantage"

Make and all assembly members,

Mike Roberts wrote:

> Joanna -
>
> >In case you hadn't noticed,
> >terrorists do not vote, they throw bombs, and they avoid any form of
> democratic process.
>
> Terrorists do vote;

  I doubt it.  Perhaps.  You must know some that do to be so definitive?
I myself know of none that do.  Nor have I ever heard or known of
any that have.
So, perhaps the NSA or the FBI needs to interview you more closely?

> they infiltrate democratic institutions and
> processes while they are putting their attack together.

Yes, and many of those to whom you refer to are our own country men.
They too are being "Smoked out", as the president said yesterday,
and shall continue to be "Smoked out" and dealt with appropriately.
I for one hope that they are dealt with in the most severe method(s)
warranted and available.

>

>  The openness
> of free universities plays into their hands.

  Yes, unfortunately this is true.  The price of freedom sometimes comes
high.  I for one, would not trade that price for less freedom.  In times
like these I think of that Scottish Patriot, William Wallace.

>  Our German colleagues
> have been learning over the weekend about the Islamic fundamentalist
> sect that operated at the Technical University of Hamburg-Harburg and
> sent three of themselves as suicide hijackers to the U.S.

  Already old news.  But true.

>
>
> >To try to turn this
> >catastrophic tragedy to political advantage, by citing it as a reason to
> >delay the implementation of democratic control over an autocratic entity,
> suggests that somebody needs a serious reality check, or is sick, or both.
>
> It's simply incredible that someone sitting across the bay from
> Manhattan would have so lost touch with what is happening as to make
> an assertion such as this.  Here are three headlines from this
> morning's New York Times, which can hardly be classed as a xenophobic
> paper:
>
> " Bush Warns of a Wrathful, Shadowy and Inventive War,"
>
> "Lawmakers Hear Ashcroft Outline Antiterror Plans."
>
> " Investigators Explore Boundaries of Everything the Law Allows."
>
> As Americans go back to work, we are not going back to the same
> world.that.

  Yes we are.  It is the awareness and attitudes will have changed.

>  Our civil liberties are not what we casually thought they
> were a week ago.  Travelers this morning are having their possessions
> searched at airports all over the country down to the last nail file.

  These searches were once done before in the 70's and early 80's.
They were discontinued prematurely.  They were always a good idea.
They serve to ENHANCE our civil liberties, rather than detract from it.

>
> In the next few days, the Congress is going to give new powers to law
> enforcement to invade our personal lives looking for the very few who
> choose to attack us. When I get on the plane next Sunday to go to
> Washington, I will know that the new orders to the Air Force are to
> shoot it down if hijacked.

  Yes this is a new possibility.  And if enacted is terribly unfortunate.
However in no reasonable way does it relate to you yammerings
that you characterize as "Populist Notions" should be or are justifiable
be considered mere "Notions"...

>
>
> In the last great challenge to American freedoms in the 50's and
> 60's, I gave three years of my career and my marriage to military
> service.

  I gave much more.  Some gave their lives.  Are you bragging or complaining?

>  Today, I am sad for the losses sustained last week in New
> York and all across the country and I am even sadder that another
> young generation of Americans is about to suffer loss of life in
> defending them again.

  Indeed this is a sad thing.  But at the same time I am proud of them,
and I may again be called upon to be one of them.  For that I am grateful.

>
>
> So if I sound angry and self-righteous about the all-too-frequent
> trash on this list, I am.  This anonymous narcissistic garbage is not
> an exercise of freedom, it is an abuse of freedom.

  This diatribe of yours is indeed, trash for the most part.  I am
saddened that it appears here.  But I am still proud that you have
the opportunity to spew forth such trash none the less.  That is what
freedom and liberty is really all about.

>
>
> Life at ICANN isn't going to be the same either.  Given the military
> mindset and anti-terrorist measures in Washington and other capitals,
> there is going to be a much greater stress on operational oversight
> of the DNS, on stability and on synchronization with related Internet
> security steps. There is going to be much less interest in who is
> represented by whom on the Board.

  Agreed that much more oversight is needed.  Much more security of the
DNS is and has been needed for some time.  I have "Preached" it for
over 3 years now to little of no significant avail to the ICANN BoD
and staff.  I disagree that much less interest on who is represented
by whom on the BoD however.  Never before has this been more
important than sense Sept. 11th...

>
>
> The GA, bastion of rugged individualism, has an opportunity to
> contribute to the solutions to these challenges.  But if you're not
> interested in being part of common solutions and the compromises
> involved in them, and if throwing rocks at me for being the messenger
> of the new reality gives you a bigger thrill, go right ahead and lay
> a claim to irrelevance.

  Perhaps you should take your own advice much more seriously on this
score, Mike...????

>
>
> - Mike
>
> At 3:44 -0400 9/17/01, Joanna Lane wrote:
> >http://angua.rince.de/icann-europe/2001/09/msg00004.html
> >------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >*    From: Mike Roberts <[email-masked]>
> >*    Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 21:23:56 -0700
> >
> >------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >At the time, going on three weeks ago, I had in mind something like
> >US $100 from several thousand individuals who actually were willing
> >to put their money where their mouth was about having a functioning
> >At Large organization.
> >
> >Today, that idea is out the window, along with a lot of other
> >populist notions about any old terrorist around the globe getting to
> >vote on how to run the DNS.
> >
> >When civilization takes a step backward, as it did last week, it
> >usually means a period in which the people with the guns make the
> >decisions.  Anyone watching the American President on tv in recent
> >days knows that's where we're at.  It may be a while before the
> >luxury of debating what constitutes consensus in a terrorist-less
> >society returns.
> >
> >If you were thinking about contributing to an ICANN ALSO, send it to
> >the Red Cross instead.
> >
> >- Mike
> >
> >______________________________________________________
> >
> >Hello Mike,
> >
> >Excuse me? Unless I am very much mistaken, the implication here is that
> >there should not now be a functioning ALSO because "any old terrorist" would
> >disguise themselves as an honest, law abiding citizen, then capture the
> >bottom-up consensus building mechanism. In case you hadn't noticed,
> >terrorists do not vote, they throw bombs, and they avoid any form of
> >democratic process. The implication that there should not now be a
> >functioning ALSO until the USA rids the world of terrorism is equally
> >laughable. Terrorism is nothing new, and however many guns are thrown at it,
> >it will always exist in one insidious form or another. To try to turn this
> >catastrophic tragedy to political advantage, by citing it as a reason to
> >delay the implementation of democratic control over an autocratic entity,
> >suggests that somebody needs a serious reality check, or is sick, or both.
> >
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >Joanna
> >
> >P.S. We don't need to debate what constitutes consensus. There is a
> >mechanism in place already.
> >
> >The URLs for Best Practices: DNSO Citation:
> >http://www.dnso.org/dnso/gaindex.html
> >(Under "Other Information Documents"; "August 2001:
> >Proposal for Best Practices for the DNSO GA")
> >Part I:
> >http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20010813.GA-BestPractices.html
> >Part II:
> >http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20010813.GA-BP-flowchart.pdf
> >(Access to the .pdf file requires installing the Adobe Acrobat
> >Reader, which is available for free down load at
> >http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.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

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: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 22:12:19 -0500
From: Andy Gardner <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Re: "political advantage"

>Terrorists do vote; they infiltrate democratic institutions and
>processes while they are putting their attack together.

Errrm. Aren't you getting confused with IP Lawyers?

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

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

Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 14:22:22 +1200
From: Joop Teernstra <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: "political advantage"

At 15:03 17/09/01 -0700, Mike Roberts wrote:

>Terrorists do vote; they infiltrate democratic institutions and processes 
>while they are putting their attack together.  The openness of free 
>universities plays into their hands.  Our German colleagues have been 
>learning over the weekend about the Islamic fundamentalist sect that 
>operated at the Technical University of Hamburg-Harburg and sent three of 
>themselves as suicide hijackers to the U.S.

We have been discussing  issues of stakeholder representation  here. I fail 
to see the connection with the openness of Universities in the Western world.

<snip>
>As Americans go back to work, we are not going back to the same 
>world.  Our civil liberties are not what we casually thought they were a 
>week ago.  Travelers this morning are having their possessions searched at 
>airports all over the country down to the last nail file. In the next few 
>days, the Congress is going to give new powers to law enforcement to 
>invade our personal lives looking for the very few who choose to attack 
>us. When I get on the plane next Sunday to go to Washington, I will know 
>that the new orders to the Air Force are to shoot it down if hijacked.

Ay.  The United States, stung by the scorpion, slapping at itself. Just 
what the terrorist intended.

<snip>

>So if I sound angry and self-righteous about the all-too-frequent trash on 
>this list, I am.  This anonymous narcissistic garbage is not an exercise 
>of freedom, it is an abuse of freedom.

Some of it is, yes. We learn to filter. Would you like to see a stricter 
censorship of postings? Or do you prefer to see the GA as irrelevant, 
thanks to such postings?

>Life at ICANN isn't going to be the same either.  Given the military 
>mindset and anti-terrorist measures in Washington and other capitals, 
>there is going to be a much greater stress on operational oversight of the 
>DNS, on stability and on synchronization with related Internet security 
>steps. There is going to be much less interest in who is represented by 
>whom on the Board.

This may be true, but it is regrettable none the less. Ultimately stability 
comes with agreements among parties affected.
Instability is brought on by resentment.
Security in an open and free world is an illusion.

>The GA, bastion of rugged individualism, has an opportunity to contribute 
>to the solutions to these challenges.  But if you're not interested in 
>being part of common solutions and the compromises involved in them, and 
>if throwing rocks at me for being the messenger of the new reality gives 
>you a bigger thrill, go right ahead and lay a claim to irrelevance.

Mike, I think it is appreciated that you deign to post here at all.
But messengers "of the new reality" are aplenty now.

Would you be willing to  act as a messenger of the USG and tell this global 
forum of people that are all part of ICANN  what common solutions and 
compromises are needed?

Joop Teernstra LL.M.
Councillor
InternetNZ

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

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

Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 13:30:13 +0200
From: Jefsey Morfin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Fwd: [council] Condemn Cowardly Attack

On 02:37 18/09/01, Eric Dierker said:
>Where were you when my brothers lost domain names and property rights to 
>IP manipulated WIPE?  Where we you when they shut off the inclusiveness of 
>the WG-Review?  Where were you when my sisters lost 50K on a lottery which 
>was politically manipulated?  Where were you when the attacked our friends 
>and comrades with other roots?  Where were you when they granted Palestine 
>a ccTLD and denied others?

IMHO, Eric perfectly describes the spirit of the frustrations generated by 
the ICANN. We now face a strange dilemna. If those who have diagnosed the 
single authoritative root of the problem (ICANN policy) propose some 
solutions it will be "politicking abusing the situation". If those who 
created the problem try to find a solution - like Mike - in following their 
logic everyones see how inadequate it is.

So, what do we do as it appears there is no George W. at the ICANN?

IMHO there is a complete parallel between the reasons why the US and the 
ICANN meet problems. From what I gather US citizens are brillantly reacting 
though solidarity and in trying to understand, even at the cost of 
discovering things they will not like, with the firm intent to build 
together from what they find, good and bad. I find the approach sound: why 
not to follow the same processus in here?

Jefsey

- --
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: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 14:32:52 +0200
From: Jefsey Morfin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: "political advantage"

Dear Mike,
we all share your concerns. But you/ICANN have to get real.

On 00:03 18/09/01, Mike Roberts said:
>Terrorists do vote; they infiltrate democratic institutions and processes 
>while they are putting their attack together.

If terrorist overthrow us by vote, this will be known long before :-) as it 
would mechnaically mean peace.

>As Americans go back to work, we are not going back to the same 
>world.  Our civil liberties are not what we casually thought they were a 
>week ago.

The world is exactly the same. Your vision of the world has changed. Your 
liberties should be the same. They only need to be protected better than 
you thought.

>Travelers this morning are having their possessions searched at airports 
>all over the country down to the last nail file. In the next few days, the 
>Congress is going to give new powers to law enforcement to invade our 
>personal lives looking for the very few who choose to attack us.

The danger is not that your true friends knows everything about you. The 
danger is that some pseudo friend sells your information on you to your 
enemies. May be Safe Harbor will protect the Americanns after all?

>So if I sound angry and self-righteous about the all-too-frequent trash on 
>this list, I am.  This anonymous narcissistic garbage is not an exercise 
>of freedom, it is an abuse of freedom.

This is a fuse. When there is no fuse ... I wander if you noticed the 
personnal caliber and education of the people involved and if you tried to 
figure out their motivations and state of mind. These were no dumb people 
under influence or drug. Did you try to figure out what building such an 
operation may represent? 25 people giving their life after years of 
preparation, without any leak, without anyone quitting. And be sure there 
is a second and a third wave under way, it would be military absurd 
otherwise and these people are not absurd.

>Life at ICANN isn't going to be the same either.  Given the military 
>mindset and anti-terrorist measures in Washington and other capitals, 
>there is going to be a much greater stress on operational oversight of the 
>DNS, on stability and on synchronization with related Internet security 
>steps. There is going to be much less interest in who is represented by 
>whom on the Board.

The diversity of the BoD is supposed to be a way to help the ICANN doing a 
better job. Would I be in military charge of the Internet my priority would 
be to get a serious BoD and to keep operations  simple, stable and open to 
all:  getting rid of the lawyers, implementing professional operational 
staff, removing any limited number point of failures, getting maximum 
people on it for cross-control and a larger more stable infrastructure I 
might use.

I would realy be interested in seeing the NATO replacing the DoC and 
building the net as an open, resilient and efficient tool for joint 
development. I suspect NATODRP would be an easy and fair automated process.

>The GA, bastion of rugged individualism, has an opportunity to contribute 
>to the solutions to these challenges.  But if you're not interested in 
>being part of common solutions and the compromises involved in them, and 
>if throwing rocks at me for being the messenger of the new reality gives 
>you a bigger thrill, go right ahead and lay a claim to irrelevance.

Mike, you are not the messenger of a new reality. You are the messenger of 
a shaken appreciation of the reality. Many see the fact that your 
appreciation is shaken as a plus, not against you, but because that 
appreciation was in charge and therefore lead to the problem. You have to 
accept that and keep dialoging because we have to find a common solution: 
As you are probably no more than 50% wrong while the others are no more 
than 50% right.

We all did our mistakes, please help each other now not doing worse while 
at correcting them. What we need is experience and wiseness in probing 
everything. Programmers know that well, it never hurt to debug.

Jefsey.

- --
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: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 10:22:15 -0400
From: "John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D." <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: "political advantage"

From: "Mike Roberts" <[email-masked]>
>   Our civil liberties are not what we casually thought they
> were a week ago.

I had no idea that the free world had already surrendered.  Obviously, if we
convert to some sort of fanatical dictatorship, then our problems with
terrorists will be over.  That would be a simple and wrong solution.

Democratic values are not a threat.

- --
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: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 21:57:32 +0000
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: "political advantage"

Mike,

I did not reply to your first message (on ICANN-EU) as I thought it was just 
an emotional reaction to facts. I do reply now, because I believe that there 
is a difference in the approach to the terrible events of last week, and 
more important to the road ahead.

Mike Roberts wrote:

><snip>
>
>In the last great challenge to American freedoms in the 50's and
>60's, I gave three years of my career and my marriage to military
>service.  Today, I am sad for the losses sustained last week in New
>York and all across the country and I am even sadder that another
>young generation of Americans is about to suffer loss of life in
>defending them again.

I am skeptical on the rhetoric of freedom, as on the manicheism intrinsinc 
in the "fight of the good against the evil". Too often the proclaimed fight 
for freedom (or the proclaimed fight for religion) has produced many 
innocent victims, that were all but enemies of the freedom (or of the 
religion).

>
>So if I sound angry and self-righteous about the all-too-frequent
>trash on this list, I am.  This anonymous narcissistic garbage is not
>an exercise of freedom, it is an abuse of freedom.
>
>Life at ICANN isn't going to be the same either.  Given the military
>mindset and anti-terrorist measures in Washington and other capitals,
>there is going to be a much greater stress on operational oversight
>of the DNS, on stability and on synchronization with related Internet
>security steps. There is going to be much less interest in who is
>represented by whom on the Board.

Let me tell you that, much to my surprise, the reaction so far has been 
extremely positive.
I am impressed by how the message of "life continues" goes across, on how 
after the initial moments of panic a cold-blooded attitude has taken over.
I admire how President Bush has taken again his place in his office after 
just few hours, giving a strong sign that terrorism would not change his 
life too much. I admire how, with the possible exception of few dangerous 
idiots, that exist everywhere and are not exclusive feature of a country, 
the American people have not fallen into the trap of terrorist=foreigner. I 
admire how the market has reacted keeping the stock exchange substantially 
solid (even if with an unusual sustaining intervention of the Government).

This is the only possible answer to the terrorism.
Their target was not to make few thousand deaths, but to undermine the 
economic and political system, pushing it to a reaction that would have 
provoked a further deterioration of the situation. Following that, the 
terrorists could have had an easy task in recruiting further supporters, for 
instance among the relatives and acquaintances of the victims of a possible 
US bombing.
This is what the American country (people and government) have understood 
(incidentally, what Israel has not [yet] understood, methinks).
The key is to be able to use with terrorists the methods of the 
international cooperation and the courts of justice and not with the blind 
retaliation, to be able to undermine the support to the terrorists by the 
populations that may be tempted to do so by their desperate situation, to be 
able to go back to everyday's business with a broken hart for the victims, 
but with the additional strength given by the belief that the terrorists 
will not win.

>
>The GA, bastion of rugged individualism, has an opportunity to
>contribute to the solutions to these challenges.  But if you're not
>interested in being part of common solutions and the compromises
>involved in them, and if throwing rocks at me for being the messenger
>of the new reality gives you a bigger thrill, go right ahead and lay
>a claim to irrelevance.

And I believe that the GA *is* contributing to the solutions to these 
challenges, but with the limits that the GA has had since the beginning.
There is no way to eliminate individualism from the GA, nor would it be 
adviseable. Given the current structure of ICANN and the DNSO, I do not 
think that the the GA can reasonably have the role of a body that has to 
express the consensus of the community on the different subjects: there is 
neither extensive "popular" support, nor extensive representation of all the 
interests at stake for doing so.
In an ideal world, maybe. In my original idea of what the GA should have 
been, it surely was. But now, we have to face reality and take the GA for 
what it can reasonably express (I repeat, for the time being): a forum where 
everybody can express his/her opinion and where ideas can be circulated.
Let's go back to work to achieve this.
Then, once we will have a proven track of constructive dialogue with civil 
discourse rules, we can go to the next step and give ourselves more advanced 
and challenging targets.

Best regards
Roberto

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

- --
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: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 17:52:04 -0400
From: "John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D." <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] It Beats Voting....

And if you are going to infiltrate, make sure to bring along your VISA
card....

From: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 9:53 PM
Subject: Re: Contact Information Changes

> > Hello,
> >
> > I am consulting to several foreign
> > companies, and I have noticed your company
> > is located in the United States.  Can you
> > tell me whether it is possible for an Iraqi
> > company to register a domain name with
> > register.com, or is that prevented by the US
> > economic embargo of Iraq?
> >
> > Please reply by email, thank you.
> >
> ************************
>
> Thank you for your inquiry.
>
> Anyone in any country at any time may register with Register.com.  All that
is needed is a valid credit card.
>
> Thank you for using register.com, the First Step on the Web(TM).
>
> Garett Spence
> Customer Support
> register.com, inc.
> http://www.register.com
> Toll free in the U.S. and Canada: (800) 899-9724
> Outside the U.S. and Canada: +1 (902) 749-2701

- --
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: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 16:13:53 -0700
From: Roeland Meyer <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] FW: Embargos and proscriptions

|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: Roeland Meyer [mailto:[email-masked]]
|> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 11:15 AM
|> To: 'Tim Devries'; Smith, Rick; [email-masked]
|> Subject: Embargos and proscriptions
|> 
|> 
|> 
|> The following link details various embargos in effect.
|> 
|> http://pmdtc.org/country.htm
|> 
|> Almost all of these entail defense and munitions. ITAR has 
|> long considered
|> cryptographic material a munition, under ITAR category XVII (see:
|> http://pmdtc.org/usml.htm). Personal opinion: we may see 
|> this definition
|> expanded, as it has in the past. The problem is, expansion is easy,
|> contraction is somewhat more difficult.
|> 
|> [disclaimer]
|> MHSC has been involved in ITAR issues since 1997. Our 
|> initial business plan
|> was to provide secured services and individual privacy 
|> through encryption
|> techniques and services, for both individuals and 
|> organizations. We couldn't
|> get that past ITAR initially and when we could, the market 
|> wasn't there yet
|> (couldn't get any traction. Most folks frankly, don't give a 
|> rat's tush
|> about security, especially if they have to do anything extra 
|> for it). MHSC
|> goes out of its way to avoid even the appearance of legal 
|> violations and to
|> limit its risk of legal liability. MHSC is no longer in this 
|> business (see:
|> http://www.mhsc.net/services.htm).
|> 
|> --
|> IANAL = I Am Not A Lawyer. Before taking legal action based 
|> on anything I
|> say or write, you are strongly encouraged to seek the advice 
|> of an attorney.
|> 
|> --
|> R O E L A N D  M J  M E Y E R
|> Managing Director
|> Morgan Hill Software Company
|> tel: +1 925 373 3954
|> cel: +1 925 352 3615
|> fax: +1 925 373 9781 
|> http://www.mhsc.com
|> 
|> 
|> 
|> |> -----Original Message-----
|> |> From: Tim Devries [mailto:[email-masked]]
|> |> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 12:56 PM
|> |> To: Smith, Rick; [email-masked]
|> |> Subject: Re: Afghanistan
|> |> 
|> |> 
|> |> 
|> |> Does anyone even have a list of IP blocks allocated on a 
|> national or
|> |> regional level?
|> |> 
|> |> ----- Original Message -----
|> |> From: "Smith, Rick" <[email-masked]>
|> |> To: <[email-masked]>
|> |> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 9:23 AM
|> |> Subject: Afghanistan
|> |> 
|> |> 
|> |> >
|> |> >
|> |> > Has anyone started to deny all traffic to/from Afghanistan ?
|> |> >
|> |> > Wouldn't that be worth it ?
|> |> >
|> |> > Or did I miss that post?
|> |> >
|> |> > R
|> |> >
|> |> 
|> 
- --
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: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 19:21:56 EDT
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] Restructuring Working Group

The At-Large Study Committee will soon be presenting its final 
recommendations to the ICANN Board.  Conclusions will be predicated in part 
upon whatever substantive input is received by the Committee prior to their 
working deadline (October 26).  As the ALSC was chartered to seek a 
"consensus" on the concept, structure and processes relating to an At-Large 
membership, it is vital that the General Assembly acts to ensure that a 
"consensus" has been achieved.

Although the Names Council has indicated that it will be launching a Task 
Force to attend to these matters, the General Assembly will, on this 
occasion, act independently of the Council and present its own "unfiltered" 
supporting recommendations directly to the ALSC.   We have a stake in this 
reorganization that we alone must act to protect -- the concept of the "Open 
Forum" (which is not articulated anywhere in the ALSC draft), is at risk; we 
must justify the continued existence of an Assembly and fight to have it 
preserved in the ICANN structure that will be forthcoming.

Our Assembly has an obligation to support the ICANN mission by lending our 
expertise to this project; we must collaborate with the ALSC and with the 
existing constituencies to define the best possible structure for the 
Internet community's representation and participation in ICANN.  This effort 
will require the equivalent of an open Working Group (with a 30-day timeline) 
to produce results that may thereafter be ratified by a vote of the full 
Assembly.  

The emphasis must be placed on "results".  Compromise will be necessary if 
consensus is to be achieved, and this will require forging an acceptable path 
somewhere between the NAIS report and the ALSC draft.   

I have faith in the ability of the General Assembly to rise to meet this 
challenge.   We all seek a more responsive, representative and participatory 
body.  Having been presented with a "bare-bones" structure by the ALSC, we 
will need to assist in adding flesh to the skeleton in a manner which 
safeguards our mutual interests and which continues to promote our founding 
principles.  

Let us concentrate our efforts, focus on our task, set aside our rhetoric and 
roll up our sleeves... we have a job to do.

- --
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: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 16:16:44 -0700
From: "Asaad Y. Alnajjar   (Millennium Inc.)" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] It Beats Voting....

Actually, couple months ago, I checked into this issue and the answer 
was still NO.

Eventhough, the dollar amount is not significant, still you need 
to go through the whole approval procedure through the Treasury and 
the UN monitoring office. Completed transactions would in fact be 
a violation of the sanctions.

That is why .IQ is still not operational yet.

Kindly let me know if the law has been modified? Which Article and 
what Date?

Regards,

Asaad Alnajjar
CEO Millennium Inc.
Los Angeles, CA, USA

At Tuesday, 18 September 2001, "John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D." <john@johnberryhill.
com> wrote:

>And if you are going to infiltrate, make sure to bring along your VISA
>card....
>
>From: <[email-masked]>
>Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 9:53 PM
>Subject: Re: Contact Information Changes
>
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > I am consulting to several foreign
>> > companies, and I have noticed your company
>> > is located in the United States.  Can you
>> > tell me whether it is possible for an Iraqi
>> > company to register a domain name with
>> > register.com, or is that prevented by the US
>> > economic embargo of Iraq?
>> >
>> > Please reply by email, thank you.
>> >
>> ************************
>>
>> Thank you for your inquiry.
>>
>> Anyone in any country at any time may register with Register.com.
All that
>is needed is a valid credit card.
>>
>> Thank you for using register.com, the First Step on the Web(TM).
>>
>> Garett Spence
>> Customer Support
>> register.com, inc.
>> http://www.register.com
>> Toll free in the U.S. and Canada: (800) 899-9724
>> Outside the U.S. and Canada: +1 (902) 749-2701
>
>--
>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 #745
************************