Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #805
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST           Sunday, October 21 2001           Volume 01 : Number 805

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

Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2001 16:38:42 -0500
From: "John Palmer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] WARNING REGARDING THE WEBSITE DOTUSA.COM

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

- ------=_NextPart_000_00DA_01C15985.ADB139C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

WARNING REGARDING THE WEBSITE DOTUSA.COM

It has come to our attention that a website has
recently emerged claiming to be a registrar for=20
the .USA top level domain. This web site appears
to be operated by a company called TLD Networks.

Please be aware that AGN Domain Name Service is
the exclusive registry/registrar for the .USA
top level domain. We claimed this TLD back
in 1995 from IANA and have been the sole registry and registrar
for this TLD since that time. ADNS has not=20
authorized TLD Networks to take registrations
for .USA domains. We are working with our legal
staff to obtain a restraining order against=20
TLD Networks. We will also report this internet
fraud to the US Department of Commerce and=20
the California Attorney General's Office.

DO NOT REGISTER A .USA DOMAIN WITH DOTUSA.COM.=20
YOU WILL MOST LIKELY LOSE YOUR MONEY, EVEN
IF THESE PEOPLE ARE PROSECUTED.=20

If you would like to register a .USA domain,
the ONLY website currently authorized to=20
process your registration is www.adns.net.=20

For more information, please contact ADNS
at [email-masked]

- ------=_NextPart_000_00DA_01C15985.ADB139C0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.3103.1000" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV>
<P><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>WARNING REGARDING THE WEBSITE =
DOTUSA.COM</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>It has come to our attention that a =
website=20
has<BR>recently emerged claiming to be a registrar for <BR>the .USA top =
level=20
domain. This web site appears<BR>to be operated by a company called TLD=20
Networks.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Please be aware that AGN Domain Name =
Service=20
is<BR>the exclusive registry/registrar for the .USA<BR>top level domain. =
We=20
claimed this TLD back<BR>in 1995 from IANA and have been the sole =
registry and=20
registrar<BR>for this TLD since that time. ADNS has not <BR>authorized =
TLD=20
Networks to take registrations<BR>for .USA domains. We are working with =
our=20
legal<BR>staff to obtain a restraining order against <BR>TLD Networks. =
We will=20
also report this internet<BR>fraud to the US Department of Commerce and =
<BR>the=20
California Attorney General's Office.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>DO NOT REGISTER A .USA DOMAIN WITH =
DOTUSA.COM.=20
<BR>YOU WILL MOST LIKELY LOSE YOUR MONEY, EVEN<BR>IF THESE PEOPLE ARE=20
PROSECUTED. </FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>If you would like to register a .USA =
domain,<BR>the=20
ONLY website currently authorized to <BR>process your registration is =
</FONT><A=20
href=3D"http://www.adns.net"><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>www.adns.net</FONT></A><FONT=20
face=3DArial size=3D2>. </FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>For more information, please contact =
ADNS<BR>at=20
</FONT><A href=3D"mailto:[email-masked]"><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>[email-masked]</FONT></A></P></DIV></BODY></HTML>

- ------=_NextPart_000_00DA_01C15985.ADB139C0--

- --
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, 20 Oct 2001 17:47:35 -0400
From: Joanna Lane <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re:  Roeland's Motion

> I  also fully support the reworded version of Roeland's motion.
> Put my name on the list of seconders.
> 
> Ken Stoen
> 
> [email-masked]
> [email-masked]

Me too.

Joanna

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[email-masked]>
> To: <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 10:36 AM
> Subject: [ga] Re: Roeland's Motion
> 
> 
>> I have re-worded Roeland's motion to better reflect what may be an
> emerging
>> GA consensus view.  Your comments are needed.
>> 
>> 
>> Whereas the Domain Name Supporting Organization Formation Concepts
> (adopted
>> by the ICANN Board March 4, 1999), state that "The ICANN Board should
>> periodically review the status of the constituency groups to determine
>> whether all DNSO interests are adequately represented"
>> 
>> Whereas members of the General Assembly have repeatedly expressed their
>> concern that the DNSO as currently constituted is not sufficiently
>> representative
>> 
>> Whereas problems outlined by the DNSO Review have not been remedied
>> internally, and efforts undertaken by the Names Council have failed to
>> sufficiently address these concerns
>> 
>> It is therefore
>> 
>> RESOLVED that the ICANN Board be advised that:
>> 
>> 1.  Members of the General Assembly believe that DNSO dysfunctionality
>> requires direct ICANN Board intervention
>> 
>> 2.  The General Assembly seeks to establish a representative balance by
> being
>> placed on equal footing with the current DNSO Names Council, creating a
>> bicameral DNSO.
>> 
>> 3.  The General Assembly seeks initial budgetary/Secretariat support for
> the
>> DNSO/GA to perform its functions.
>> 
>> 4.  The General Assembly will work with ICANN to develop an appropriate
>> funding model to support its activities.
>> 
>> 5.  The General Assembly seeks representation on the ICANN Board (to be
>> filled by a representitive voting the recorded consensus of the DNSO/GA)
>> 
>> 6.  The General Assembly seeks to have both an Advocate and a Consensus
>> Leader, both elected positions of the DNSO/GA with budgetary control and
>> responsibility for all DNSO/GA staff.
>> 
>> --
>> 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: Sat, 20 Oct 2001 15:08:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: Rick H Wesson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] WARNING REGARDING THE WEBSITE DOTUSA.COM

John,

On Sat, 20 Oct 2001, John Palmer wrote:

> WARNING REGARDING THE WEBSITE DOTUSA.COM
>
> It has come to our attention that a website has
> recently emerged claiming to be a registrar for
> the .USA top level domain. This web site appears
> to be operated by a company called TLD Networks.

hey can't anyone run a registry for any tld they wish?

> Please be aware that AGN Domain Name Service is
> the exclusive registry/registrar for the .USA
> top level domain. We claimed this TLD back
> in 1995 from IANA and have been the sole registry and registrar

AFAIK, IANA didn't deligate .USA to anyone, infact IANA hasn't deligated a
3 letter iso-3166 country code since .COM was deligated to SRI way back.

> for this TLD since that time. ADNS has not
> authorized TLD Networks to take registrations
> for .USA domains. We are working with our legal
> staff to obtain a restraining order against
> TLD Networks. We will also report this internet
> fraud to the US Department of Commerce and
> the California Attorney General's Office.

bet DoC is getting lots of mail these days.

> DO NOT REGISTER A .USA DOMAIN WITH DOTUSA.COM.
> YOU WILL MOST LIKELY LOSE YOUR MONEY, EVEN
> IF THESE PEOPLE ARE PROSECUTED.

yes, everyone wishing to register a .usa SLD should be careful.

- -rick

- --
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, 20 Oct 2001 15:17:06 -0700
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Finance

Jeff has turned me down flatly.  We have no authorization and no
compensation and no ready structure.  I need someone to carry this
burden.  Anyone who takes this roll is a ****  for it has no returns and
subjects you to abuse of which the list is only a public portion there
of.  Perhaps Peter de Blanc could manage it for us as he has done well
for the ccTLDs.

Please let us move forward.

Eric

GOING FISHING WITH THE BOY

- --
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, 20 Oct 2001 17:42:39 -0500
From: "Kevin M. Kelly" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Re:  Roeland's Motion

Please add my name to the growing list of supporters of Roeland's motion.

Regards,
Kevin M. Kelly
http://www.KellyWebworks.com

<snip>
- --
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, 20 Oct 2001 17:58:47 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Outreach/Multilingualism and Finance (wg-review results)

Eric and all assembly members,

  I thank you for the opportunity, but I respectfully decline.  As you know
I am spokesman for INEGroup, we cover some 100+ countries.  I am
sometimes involved in our funding already as well as my duties as CEO
of my company amongst a few other Private VC enterprises that
aid in funding pre-ipo or private placement start up corporations.
Given this, it would seem that I would be in a position of being
in conflict or interest with your request.  However, if I have an outline
of what the funding is specifically for, I am sure I can help
you achieve whatever goal it is that you seek.  In that vain I have
a few questions.  The are as follows:

1.) I that you originally accepted the charge of gaining funding for
     whatever goal you have in mind, will the use of the possible
     collected funds be directed by you?

2.) What is the goal and use(s) for these funds?

3.) Does the ICANN BoD or the CEO in specific approve of this
     potential funding prior to the current Motion submitted for review
     to the GA members yesterday?

4.) What is the time horizon for the raising of these funds?

5.) Has there been a determined amount needed?

6.) Whom or what are the recipient of these funds?

7.) How is the initial funding effort to be paid for if at all?

8.) Once funds are collected, whom may be the disbursement agent(s) for
     the use of these funds?  What are their qualifications?

Eric Dierker wrote:

> Dear Members,
>
> I apologize for the tardiness of this report.
>
> A little under a year ago in the WG-Review Mr. Greg Burton assigned me
> the task of Outreach/Multilingualism.  He advised not to let it die with
> the WG.  Our small company has contributed in time and asset resource
> usage over $100k to the project.  The idea was to seek and find and then
> develop a global network for inclusion of the dotcommoner into the
> politics of the Internet.  (make no mistake that is what ICANN results
> in)
>
> Outreach is not a problem but we are at a point where we may need
> financing.
>
> Please review this site, not for country specifics but for the system
> and methodology.
> http://www.tokten-vn.org.vn/
> In some hybrid sense this will be incorporated and probably partnered
> with the UN.
>
> Please put Internet Cafe into your favorite search engine.  We believe
> now that there may well be over a million known and 1.5 including those
> not licensed or registered. In all of the hundreds I have visited they
> have multilinguals who are more than happy to translate.  {Vint's
> comments on accuracy justifying exclusion are bull}
> We are convinced that while we reach globalization, the community
> surrounding and supporting these places (sometimes called pc rooms or
> bangs or even bars) will reflect community views in voting. We will need
> great input on the communiqués going to such places so as to accurately
> reflect our consensus - or not.
>
> Now please visit our Danny's web site at
> http://www.icannworld.org/icannworld.htm
> Here the participating cafes will contribute to translation and
> community input.  Referring back to the Tokten model we hope to create
> cooperation by bringing people back to their roots and propagating
> cultural adoption.
> We already have it working in the shoeshine boy model.
>
> I think all of you intelligent folks can understand that within just a
> short period of time we of the GA will be able to reach millions with a
> fair amount of accuracy.  Those we reach will be from all over the globe
> and generally dotcommoners.  This will give backbone to Roeland's
> motion.  This can force implementation of a true AL.  This can be the
> bedrock for a true democracy on the net.
>
> FINANCE
>
> Any one can see that this valuable resource should be able to finance
> itself through a corporate sponsorship in exchange for an honorable
> mention within our correspondence with the people we target. (wouldn't
> afilias be funny but they have the funding and by contract need to spend
> it)
> Jeff Williams I ask for you to take up this mantle as I am overloaded
> and cannot work the structure operations and still have time for
> finance.
>
> MULTILINGUALISM
>
> I want to thank Elisabeth for helping (albeit unknowingly) to this
> cause.  Her presentation at Melbourne of the various linguas and my
> subsequent visit to a cafe (beer hall in Melbourne) and discussions with
> fellow travelers from all over the globe while surfing the net gave rise
> to the projects impetuous.
>
> DEBATE
>
> This project is not owned by the GA or ICANN.  We can easily implement
> it with another group.  But our company would like to give it to the
> GA.  Do not worry we recognize there are one hundred reasons to endorse
> it or use it or reject it.  One reason that comes immediately to mind
> for rejection is David and Roeland and how they have been treated when
> trying to participate.  Another is the constant abuse I receive here ;>}
>
> The implications of security and our global war on terrorism are not
> ignored.  If developed properly this network can be of great benefit.
> Marketing is Education and Education is Marketing - Let us market
> greater cultural and inclusive understanding.
>
> The project can also self fund through a $1 US donation per cafe.
> Hi-Tek Multimedia is a family company of refugee immigrants, even me as
> a second gen Basque/Irish separatist, and we can and will commercialize
> this project but we would rather give it to our great InterNation and
> it's netizens.
>
> Happiness, Independence, Freedom and Pride to all.
>
> Eric
>
> --
> 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, 20 Oct 2001 18:30:12 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Finance

Eric and all assembly members,

Eric Dierker wrote:

> Jeff has turned me down flatly.

  Not quite true Eric.  Please try to be more accurate in the future
if you would be so kind.  I have answered you in specific detail
and have declined for specific reasons I stated, twice!  It was
YOU that wanted this task Eric.  Ok, you got it!  Now you want
to pass it off.  That's fine too!  But first things first.  Roelands
and Danny's motion needs to be voted upon before we
can have any authorization for the funding effort to really
get moving.  In the mean time, YOU Eric are still in charge.
You can start lining up your potential funders while we wait
for the ballot.

  We all await Hi-Tek.com's contribution in $$ commitment!

> We have no authorization and no
> compensation and no ready structure.  I need someone to carry this
> burden.  Anyone who takes this roll is a ****  for it has no returns and
> subjects you to abuse of which the list is only a public portion there
> of.  Perhaps Peter de Blanc could manage it for us as he has done well
> for the ccTLDs.
>
> Please let us move forward.

  Indeed proceed!  >:)

>
>
> Eric
>
> GOING FISHING WITH THE BOY

  I go fishing with my two little girls Eric!

>
>
> --
> 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: Sun, 21 Oct 2001 00:38:52 +0100
From: "Paul Cotton" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] WARNING REGARDING THE WEBSITE DOTUSA.COM

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

- ------=_NextPart_000_007E_01C159C8.C1C61500
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

John,

{snip}
If you would like to register a .USA domain,
the ONLY website currently authorized to=20
process your registration is www.adns.net.
{end snip}

Authorized by whom exactly and can you point us to some proof of that =
authorization?

Regards

Paul Cotton

- ------=_NextPart_000_007E_01C159C8.C1C61500
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4807.2300" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>John,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>{snip}</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>If you would like to register a .USA =
domain,<BR>the=20
ONLY website currently authorized to <BR>process your registration is =
</FONT><A=20
href=3D"http://www.adns.net"><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>www.adns.net</FONT></A><FONT=20
face=3DArial size=3D2>.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>{end snip}</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Authorized by whom exactly and can you =
point us to=20
some proof of that authorization?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Regards</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Paul Cotton</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

- ------=_NextPart_000_007E_01C159C8.C1C61500--

- --
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, 20 Oct 2001 18:52:31 -0700
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] WARNING REGARDING THE WEBSITE DOTUSA.COM

Talk about the pot calling the kettle.....

Saturday, Saturday, October 20, 2001, 2:38:42 PM, John Palmer wrote:

> WARNING REGARDING THE WEBSITE DOTUSA.COM

> It has come to our attention that a website has
> recently emerged claiming to be a registrar for 
> the .USA top level domain. This web site appears
> to be operated by a company called TLD Networks.

> Please be aware that AGN Domain Name Service is
> the exclusive registry/registrar for the .USA
> top level domain. We claimed this TLD back
> in 1995 from IANA and have been the sole registry and registrar
> for this TLD since that time. ADNS has not 
> authorized TLD Networks to take registrations
> for .USA domains. We are working with our legal
> staff to obtain a restraining order against 
> TLD Networks. We will also report this internet
> fraud to the US Department of Commerce and 
> the California Attorney General's Office.

> DO NOT REGISTER A .USA DOMAIN WITH DOTUSA.COM. 
> YOU WILL MOST LIKELY LOSE YOUR MONEY, EVEN
> IF THESE PEOPLE ARE PROSECUTED. 

> If you would like to register a .USA domain,
> the ONLY website currently authorized to 
> process your registration is www.adns.net. 

> For more information, please contact ADNS
> at [email-masked]

- -- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Userfriendly.com Domains
The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
DNS Services from $1.65/mo

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

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

Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2001 04:42:08 +0200
From: Jefsey Morfin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] WARNING REGARDING THE WEBSITE DOTUSA.COM

- --=====================_48959089==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

On 01:38 21/10/01, Paul Cotton said:
>John,
>{snip}
>If you would like to register a .USA domain,
>the ONLY website currently authorized to
>process your registration is <http://www.adns.net>www.adns.net.
>{end snip}
>
>Authorized by whom exactly and can you point us to some proof of that 
>authorization?
>Regards
>Paul Cotton

Paul,
the RFC 920 stipulates how a moTLD is to be created and registered. This is 
the role of the IANA function. This RFC is very specific about what a TLD 
Manager is and must bring to the Global Internet Community and to its 
Registrants community.

There is absolutely nothing mandatory about that, but the only two registry 
registration centers in History have been Tymnet International from 1978 to 
1986 (for PTTs, Telcos, public international services...) and IANA for the 
Internet and from a date I try to trace. The two naming sequences are fully 
consistent yet in reverse order, and the two systems have been 
interconnected for a while. Both Tymnet International practices and IANA 
practices documented in RFC 920 and 1591 are quite consistent in term of 
prerequisite for a registry to be registered. The IANA seems therefore to 
be the most suitable place today to register a TLD. However as per the 
quoted RFCs the IANA only represents the Global Internet Community: if it 
does not perform, the new Registries have no other way than to inform the 
Community and to take date. This is clear legitimacy by all international 
business rules. In the case of ADNS their rights are well established since 
they actually related with the IANA.

Now what are these rights. Consistently Tymnet International and the IANA 
have considered that the name is *entrusted* into the TLD registry - by 
ISO, as being the name of a corporation, or by chosen agreement of the 
registrants.

Tymnet International and public services used the 3 letters ISO code, IANA 
the 2 letters code.

Corporation names were used by Tymnet Internaional.: HP, BULL, ESA, DEC, 
IBM, BOFA, DUPONT, PHILIPS, LEUMI, etc ... either active or in 
propositions/projects

Chosen names are not many (Tymnet used ".INTL"; IANA: ".com", etc...) but 
there is an overlap as I proposed "ARPA" also adopted by the IANA for ".arpa".

Both for TI and for IANA the registration or a registry is free and 
immediate and it only dependeds on the agreement that the registry is 
entitled to it by the users. This was the case from 1978 to 2000 when new 
TLD were discussed and is the clear position by the ccTLD. Only for one 
year legitimate TLD were refused (.linux, .sys) to or taken (.biz) from 
their community and application fees are leveraged by the ICANN. This shows 
that the registry registration is mislead and is no more available. This 
returns the registration to the Global Internet Community - i.e. to 
declaration and public knowledge.

Based upon my Tymnet International experience, on RFC 920 and 1591, on IANA 
constant practice , on the ICANN ICP-1 document and practice until Oct. 
2000, on the ccTLD Best Practices and on the inclusive roots practices, we 
have worked out a Root & TLD Best Practices ( http://boroon.com ) to face 
several problems including Root financing, TLD squatting, TLD collision 
resolution (after the ICANN had created the first deliberate collisions). 
There might be other documents draft on the matter. However the TLD 
criteria and the TLD declaration also described there has been used enough 
to gain some de facto recognition among inclusive roots and to establish 
that conforming TLDs - what ever their support or not of the RT/BP - are 
legitimate as far as these documents are concerned (what is .USA situation).

The GAC has been consistent with all this and has declared the TLD not 
trademarkable. Jurisprudence too. This means that commercial rules apply. 
And therefore there will be a trade off between legitimate rules and power 
of the parties. TI, IANA, ICANN, ccTLDs have always been consistent: "we 
are not concerned by TLD Manager disputes"  what means we are only 
interested in users (except ICANN in the ".biz" case). In the case of 
.USA  there is no doubt that ADNS is the justice winner.

BTW the ICP-3 position is misleading in term of IP protection. Telling "I 
am not interested in you using or not the TLD I want" is absurd as the 
court will decide in favor of the registrants; so if one existing TLD has a 
good number of happy registrants, the ICANN will lose. The corporations 
with a reasonable legitimacy at being a TLD Manager may lose it to anyone 
establishing an independent TLD and signing a reasonable number of 
registrants. Disregarding a problem seldom solves it.

The proper solution is the one Jun Murai (BoD Member in charge of the root 
servers) is advocating. Stop being foolish about inclusive roots and 
stabilize the things under an unique basic root as before. However Internet 
Security and Stability Protection and some talks about GovNet will probably 
lead to a global review of the naming system.

I hope this responds your question. Jefsey

- --=====================_48959089==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

<html>
On 01:38 21/10/01, Paul Cotton said:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite><font face="arial" size=2>John,</font><br>
<font face="arial" size=2>{snip}</font><br>
<font face="arial" size=2>If you would like to register a .USA
domain,<br>
the ONLY website currently authorized to <br>
process your registration is
<a href="http://www.adns.net">www.adns.net</a>.</font><br>
<font face="arial" size=2>{end snip}</font><br>
&nbsp;<br>
<font face="arial" size=2>Authorized by whom exactly and can you point us
to some proof of that authorization?</font><br>
<font face="arial" size=2>Regards</font><br>
<font face="arial" size=2>Paul Cotton</font></blockquote><br>
<br>
Paul,<br>
the RFC 920 stipulates how a moTLD is to be created and registered. This
is the role of the IANA function. This RFC is very specific about what a
TLD Manager is and must bring to the Global Internet Community and to its
Registrants community.&nbsp; <br>
<br>
There is absolutely nothing mandatory about that, but the only two
registry registration centers in History have been Tymnet International
from 1978 to 1986 (for PTTs, Telcos, public international services...)
and IANA for the Internet and from a date I try to trace. The two naming
sequences are fully consistent yet in reverse order, and the two systems
have been interconnected for a while. Both Tymnet International practices
and IANA practices documented in RFC 920 and 1591 are quite consistent in
term of prerequisite for a registry to be registered. The IANA seems
therefore to be the most suitable place today to register a TLD. However
as per the quoted RFCs the IANA only represents the Global Internet
Community: if it does not perform, the new Registries have no other way
than to inform the Community and to take date. This is clear legitimacy
by all international business rules. In the case of ADNS their rights are
well established since they actually related with the IANA.<br>
<br>
Now what are these rights. Consistently Tymnet International and the IANA
have considered that the name is *entrusted* into the TLD registry - by
ISO, as being the name of a corporation, or by chosen agreement of the
registrants. <br>
<br>
Tymnet International and public services used the 3 letters ISO code,
IANA the 2 letters code. <br>
<br>
Corporation names were used by Tymnet Internaional.: HP, BULL, ESA, DEC,
IBM, BOFA, DUPONT, PHILIPS, LEUMI, etc ... either active or in
propositions/projects<br>
<br>
Chosen names are not many (Tymnet used &quot;.INTL&quot;; IANA:
&quot;.com&quot;, etc...) but there is an overlap as I proposed
&quot;ARPA&quot; also adopted by the IANA for &quot;.arpa&quot;. <br>
<br>
Both for TI and for IANA the registration or a registry is free and
immediate and it only dependeds on the agreement that the registry is
entitled to it by the users. This was the case from 1978 to 2000 when new
TLD were discussed and is the clear position by the ccTLD. Only for one
year legitimate TLD were refused (.linux, .sys) to or taken (.biz) from
their community and application fees are leveraged by the ICANN. This
shows that the registry registration is mislead and is no more available.
This returns the registration to the Global Internet Community - i.e. to
declaration and public knowledge.<br>
<br>
Based upon my Tymnet International experience, on RFC 920 and 1591, on
IANA constant practice , on the ICANN ICP-1 document and practice until
Oct. 2000, on the ccTLD Best Practices and on the inclusive roots
practices, we have worked out a Root &amp; TLD Best Practices (
<a href="http://boroon.com/" eudora="autourl">http://boroon.com</a> ) to
face several problems including Root financing, TLD squatting, TLD
collision resolution (after the ICANN had created the first deliberate
collisions). There might be other documents draft on the matter. However
the TLD criteria and the TLD declaration also described there has been
used enough to gain some de facto recognition among inclusive roots and
to establish that conforming TLDs - what ever their support or not of the
RT/BP - are legitimate as far as these documents are concerned (what is
.USA situation).<br>
<br>
The GAC has been consistent with all this and has declared the TLD not
trademarkable. Jurisprudence too. This means that commercial rules apply.
And therefore there will be a trade off between legitimate rules and
power of the parties. TI, IANA, ICANN, ccTLDs have always been
consistent: &quot;we are not concerned by TLD Manager
disputes&quot;&nbsp; what means we are only interested in users (except
ICANN in the &quot;.biz&quot; case). In the case of .USA&nbsp; there is
no doubt that ADNS is the justice winner.<br>
<br>
BTW the ICP-3 position is misleading in term of IP protection. Telling
&quot;I am not interested in you using or not the TLD I want&quot; is
absurd as the court will decide in favor of the registrants; so if one
existing TLD has a good number of happy registrants, the ICANN will lose.
The corporations with a reasonable legitimacy at being a TLD Manager may
lose it to anyone establishing an independent TLD and signing a
reasonable number of registrants. Disregarding a problem seldom solves
it.<br>
<br>
The proper solution is the one Jun Murai (BoD Member in charge of the
root servers) is advocating. Stop being foolish about inclusive roots and
stabilize the things under an unique basic root as before. However
Internet Security and Stability Protection and some talks about GovNet
will probably lead to a global review of the naming system.<br>
<br>
I hope this responds your question. Jefsey<br>
<br>
</html>

- --=====================_48959089==_.ALT--

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

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

Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2001 11:55:01 +0800
From: "Andy Duff" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Re:  Roeland's Motion

> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of
> Andy Gardner

> At 10:52 AM -0700 20/10/01, PMIW,  Ken Stoen wrote:
> >I  also fully support the reworded version of Roeland's motion.
> >Put my name on the list of seconders.
> 
> Likewise.

I support Roeland's motion.

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

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

Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2001 13:08:56 +1300
From: Joop Teernstra <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] Re:  Roeland's Motion, AMENDMENTS

At 14:28 20/10/01 -0700, Roeland Meyer wrote:
>1) I would rather keep it very simple, not giving them anything to get
>distracted about. This includes request of reaffirmation. They've already
>affirmed it once, don't give them a chance to re-open an old debate.

Up to you, but I think with the additional clause your motion will gain 
broader consensus.

>2) This also goes for election/representation issues. They do not touch
>bicamerality, which is a structure and not a process. Membership
>qualifications, in the GA, are already established. So are membership
>qualification in the NC. Not only do they not need to be changed but, even
>suggesting that we do so makes this entire motion open to diversion. IMHO,
>we've had sufficient diversion. We have sufficient process for now to handle
>bicamerality and to create more process if this actually gets moved forward.
>First we instantiate the concept and then we make it work.

I understand where you are coming from.
Good, as long as you realize that the IDNowners start with a heavily 
diluted "GA chamber" full of converse interests.
This is almost like the compromise that Roberto proposed in Melbourne.
It's better than nothing, that's all.

- --Joop

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

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

Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2001 00:07:32 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Re:  Roeland's Motion, AMENDMENTS

Joop and all assembly members,

Joop Teernstra wrote:

> At 14:28 20/10/01 -0700, Roeland Meyer wrote:
> >1) I would rather keep it very simple, not giving them anything to get
> >distracted about. This includes request of reaffirmation. They've already
> >affirmed it once, don't give them a chance to re-open an old debate.
>
> Up to you, but I think with the additional clause your motion will gain
> broader consensus.

  Looks like thus far it is doing pretty well as it is...

>
>
> >2) This also goes for election/representation issues. They do not touch
> >bicamerality, which is a structure and not a process. Membership
> >qualifications, in the GA, are already established. So are membership
> >qualification in the NC. Not only do they not need to be changed but, even
> >suggesting that we do so makes this entire motion open to diversion. IMHO,
> >we've had sufficient diversion. We have sufficient process for now to handle
> >bicamerality and to create more process if this actually gets moved forward.
> >First we instantiate the concept and then we make it work.
>
> I understand where you are coming from.
> Good, as long as you realize that the IDNowners start with a heavily
> diluted "GA chamber" full of converse interests.

  The GA is full of diverse and converse interests.  That is nothing new
at all.  In fact it is one of the few great strengths that the GA has.  This
should be true of the IDNO as well.  However the IDNO seems to
be full of rancor still...  Perhaps that will change...

>
> This is almost like the compromise that Roberto proposed in Melbourne.
> It's better than nothing, that's all.

  Hummm?  Not sure where you are coming from here really.  It is
much different than anything I have seen Roberto offer.  In fact the
BC issue with Constituency membership of this nature has only occured
a few other times.  And in Melbourne New.Net did not exist...

>
>
> --Joop
>

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

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

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #805
************************