NAIPR Message

FW: Summing up two years...


----------
From: 	Jim Fleming[SMTP:JimFleming at unety.net.]
Sent: 	Thursday, February 06, 1997 6:58 PM
To: 	'New Newdom'
Subject: 	Summing up two years...


The following sequence of seven messages seem to sum up
the last two years, since Network Solutions, Inc. began to
agressively move from being a small company and a member of
a three-company cooperative NSF team to the current status.

[1] <http://www.iahc.org/iahc-discuss/mail-archive/0176.html>
[2] <http://www.iahc.org/iahc-discuss/mail-archive/0177.html>
[3] <http://www.iahc.org/iahc-discuss/mail-archive/0178.html>
[4] <http://www.iahc.org/iahc-discuss/mail-archive/0181.html>
[5] <http://www.iahc.org/iahc-discuss/mail-archive/0184.html>
[6] <http://www.iahc.org/iahc-discuss/mail-archive/0186.html>
[7] <http://www.iahc.org/iahc-discuss/mail-archive/0187.html>

As shown below, the thread starts with a simple observation
about an article that appeared in the Washington Post regarding
Network Solutions, Inc. and the fact that they have no intention
of sharing registrations in the Top Level Domain .COM. NSI
evidently claims that their NSF agreement must be followed.
It is interesting that the NSF is not consulted on other matters
but when it comes to "sharing", the NSF becomes the clout.

>From there, the thread turns a corner at [3] and the discussion
heads in the direction where NSI is accused of positioning itself
in preparation for a move to claim rights to the .COM Top Level
Domain This is somewhat misguided, because any company or
government body can currently set up a .COM server and offer to
"mirror" NSI registrations for a fee to domain name holders. NSI
and the IANA have no ability to stop this action.

If the domain name holders feel that it is important enough to be
listed in the "mirrored" .COM server then they can pay the fee.
Depending on how many users the "mirrored" .COM server
supports, the .COM domain name owner may feel obligated to
pay. For example, if the Canadian government set up a .COM
server, most Fortune 1000 companies would likely be willing
to send $50 across the border to Canada each year, especially,
if most the of the Canadians used that .COM server either by
choice or law.

Once the misguided turn is taken in [3], the [4], [5], [6], [7] represent
a pattern that has been seen over and over for years. The IANA is
defended at all cost. A steady stream of the same players enter
the scene to defend the actions of Jon Postel (the IANA) in helping
to create the monopoly enjoyed by Network Solutions, Inc. The
defense is always the same, Jon Postel has the right to do as he
pleases with the Internet, despite the impact on people and
and companies, because he designed some protocols and wrote
some documents many years ago.

Using this "Pope logic", some might conclude that the inventor
of the automobile would get to decide who gets drivers licenses
or where one is allowed to drive. Others might conclude that the
lawyer who developed "zoning" laws gets to personally decide
where ALL people are allowed to build houses or live. Only on
the Internet can such warped, dictatorial, socialistic, views be
allowed to not only develop but be supported each year with
more and more blind enthusiasm. This pattern continues to
repeat month after month and year after year. There appears
to be no end....

...the claim is always, this is what the "consensus" wants...
...is it...?

JF



[1] @@@@ http://www.iahc.org/iahc-discuss/mail-archive/0176.html

Interesting NSI note

Vince Wolodkin (wolodkin at digitalink.com)
Thu, 06 Feb 1997 10:57:30 -0500 

I just read a quote from NSI in the Washington Post as follows:

          Network Solutions spokesman Christopher Clough said his
          company would not agree to let other organizations register
          addresses ending in .com before its agreement with the NSF
          expires next year. 

Which made me think up an interesting point.  NSI is continuing to
charge people for the next 2 years, even though they may only have one
year left as a registry in .com.  Shouldn't all monies collected by NSI
for a time after their contract expires be put in a escrow account for
the next contract?

Vince Wolodkin

[2] @@@@ http://www.iahc.org/iahc-discuss/mail-archive/0177.html

Re: Interesting NSI note

Carl Oppedahl (carl at oppedahl.com)
Thu, 06 Feb 1997 09:57:44 -0500 

At 10:57 AM 02/06/97 -0500, Vince Wolodkin wrote:
>I just read a quote from NSI in the Washington Post as follows:
>
>          Network Solutions spokesman Christopher Clough said his
>          company would not agree to let other organizations register
>          addresses ending in .com before its agreement with the NSF
>          expires next year. 
>
>Which made me think up an interesting point.  NSI is continuing to
>charge people for the next 2 years, even though they may only have one
>year left as a registry in .com.  Shouldn't all monies collected by NSI
>for a time after their contract expires be put in a escrow account for
>the next contract?

Yes, that's a very good point.  The other possibility is for the
application fee, now $100, to be reduced on a sliding scale based on how
many months are left on the NSI contract.  

[3] @@@@  http://www.iahc.org/iahc-discuss/mail-archive/0178.html

Re: Interesting NSI note

Aveek Datta (MoNoLiTH+ at CMU.EDU)
Thu, 6 Feb 1997 12:46:17 -0500 (EST) 

Excerpts from internet.listserv.iahc-discuss: 6-Feb-97 Re: Interesting
NSI note by Carl Oppedahl at oppedahl.c 
> Yes, that's a very good point.  The other possibility is for the
> application fee, now $100, to be reduced on a sliding scale based on how
> many months are left on the NSI contract.  

Considering NSI's track record, I highly doubt they are going to do anything
of the sort. Other than coming out and saying it, I think NSI is going to
try their hardest to keep running .COM. Probably something about how *they*
own COM and they have intellectual rights to those names. Which is about as
bogus as Alternic claims to their TLDs. Of course, reality sets in -- NSI is
part of a huge company with probably a huge legal budget... it'd be
interesting to see IANA try to stop the monster they've created.


 Aveek Datta           _ _ _   _                Email: aveek at andrew.cmu.edu
    _ __  ___ _ _  ___| (_) |_| |_     |W|   HomePage:         datta.ml.org
  _| '  \/ _ \ ' \/ _ \ | |  _| ' \ _  |E|    FreeDNS:           www.ml.org
 (_)_|_|_\___/_||_\___/_|_|\__|_||_(_) |B|       Work:      www.itc.cmu.edu

[4] @@@@  http://www.iahc.org/iahc-discuss/mail-archive/0181.html

Re: Interesting NSI note

bmanning at ISI.EDU
Thu, 6 Feb 1997 10:32:17 -0800 (PST) 

> it'd be interesting to see IANA try to stop the monster they've created.
> 
>  Aveek Datta           _ _ _   _                Email: aveek at andrew.cmu.edu

	And that monster would be ...the internet...?

-- 
--bill

[5] @@@@ http://www.iahc.org/iahc-discuss/mail-archive/0184.html

Re: Interesting NSI note

Aveek Datta (MoNoLiTH+ at CMU.EDU)
Thu, 6 Feb 1997 14:23:19 -0500 (EST) 

Excerpts from internet.listserv.iahc-discuss: 6-Feb-97 Re: Interesting
NSI note by bmanning at ISI.EDU 
>         And that monster would be ...the internet...?

Don't flatter yourself. IANA has done well on stuff like assigning ports
and what not, but a monopoly contract to NSI with no specific clauses
against charging or at least some sort of public forum on it was the
monster.

 
 Aveek Datta           _ _ _   _                Email: aveek at andrew.cmu.edu
    _ __  ___ _ _  ___| (_) |_| |_     |W|   HomePage:         datta.ml.org
  _| '  \/ _ \ ' \/ _ \ | |  _| ' \ _  |E|    FreeDNS:           www.ml.org
 (_)_|_|_\___/_||_\___/_|_|\__|_||_(_) |B|       Work:      www.itc.cmu.edu

[6] @@@@  http://www.iahc.org/iahc-discuss/mail-archive/0186.html

Re: Interesting NSI note

Perry E. Metzger (perry at piermont.com)
Thu, 06 Feb 1997 15:28:14 -0500 

<snip>

You might want to look at who's name is on the early RFCs for our
protocol stack.

Perry

[7] @@@@  http://www.iahc.org/iahc-discuss/mail-archive/0187.html

Re: Interesting NSI note

Michael Dillon (michael at memra.com)
Thu, 6 Feb 1997 12:27:31 -0800 (PST) 

<snip>

IANA is primarily the work of Jon Postel. And Jon is one of a small
handful of people that could rightly claim to have created the Internet.
Read your histroy for more details.


Michael Dillon                   -               Internet & ISP Consulting
Memra Software Inc.              -                  Fax: +1-250-546-3049
http://www.memra.com             -               E-mail: michael at memra.com

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@


--
Jim Fleming
Unir Corporation

e-mail:
JimFleming at unety.net
JimFleming at unety.s0.g0 (EDNS/IPv8)