On Tuesday, February 25, 1997 11:54 AM, Bill Woodcock[SMTP:woody at zocalo.net] wrote:
@ > Is this your opinion ?
@ > What have you based that decision on ?
@ > Since you do not seem to post anything to the list,
@ > how do you formulate that opinion ?
@ Jim, she doesn't need to have an opinion on everything you have an
@ opinion on. In fact, if she did, she wouldn't have any time to get
@ her work done. MORE TO THE POINT, if she does have an opinion, SHE'S
@ SMART ENOUGH NOT TO POST IT TO THIS LIST, which is for discussion of
@ Everyone other than you is REALLY TIRED of talking about NAMES, which
@ ARE ARE CATEGORICALLY UNINTERESTING. PLEASE STOP, or TAKE IT
I am sure that many people can debate the technical ins
and outs of domain names and IP addresses and how they are
or are not related. I will not waste your time debating how
IN-ADDR.ARPA delegations have to deal with many of the
same domain name issues. Let's agree names are names
and integers are integers and both can become "uninteresting".
What is interesting is policy and procedure. Private people
are talking about being funded by a private company to inherit
resources entrusted to that company by the U.S. Government.
In my opinion, the public has the right to be heard.
If for some reason people do not want the public to be heard
then my concerns grow larger. Since most of the domain name
issues have now been solved, I am more than happy to focus
on integers, but this does not change my concerns.
Resources are resources and the public good must be taken
into account when making decisions about managing those
resources. It is one thing for people to claim they are acting
in the interest of the public, it is another to demonstrate
that in forums like this.
Once again, I suggest that all of the ARIN leaders publish
a public platform/policy/position statement for the public to
read. If you can not do that then I question how much this
ARIN proposal is motivated by concern for the public.
JimFleming at unety.net
JimFleming at unety.s0.g0 (EDNS/IPv8)