[bdinet] RE: Registration of Top Level Domain for Bangladesh

[Jim Browning]

>From:  Jim Fleming[SMTP:JimFleming at unety.net]
>Sent:  Sunday, March 30, 1997 11:10 PM
>
>On Sunday, March 30, 1997 11:30 PM, David R. Conrad[SMTP:davidc at apnic.net] 
wrote:

<discussion of TLD administration deleted>
>
>Here is an international example of why the people that
>handle IP allocations and domain names should be part
>of the same regional registry.

No, it was not an example of that.  It is yet another example of your 
ability to totally misconstrue other people's communications and 
misrepresent facts.


>Despite people's claims that IP allocations and domain
>name issues are not in any way related, we can see
>above that they are related because Internet infrastructure
>is hard to establish and if these two critical functions are
>separated inefficiencies and disputes can arise.

There was nothing like that at all in what you quoted..

>This is why ARIN (http://www.arin.net) makes no sense.
>Instead, the numerous TLD registries being created by
>the eDNS efforts (http://www.edns.net) should be allowed
>to step in (if they choose to) and handle some of the
>IP address allocation duties.

The eDNS efforts are all about people making money, not about the 
appropriate management of critical resources.  Fortunately, there is *NO 
WAY* the bulk of the world's service providers will accept what you are 
proposing, just as they have chosen to ignore the rogue TLDs.

>The original NSF, IS, DS, and RS InterNIC model can be
>used to grow the Internet Infrastructure in the U.S. and
>around the world. To divide the InterNIC at this point
>makes no sense.

Thank you so much for finally accepting the point so many people have been 
trying to make, and for arguing it so eloquently on our behalf...It's nice 
to hear that you see no need for the AlterNIC...

>If the InterNIC model is cloned in various locations around
>the world, then discussions like those above will have
>an obvious agency where the people should turn. This
>will avoid the run arounds and the vague language as
>seen above where APNIC advises the IANA (when asked)
>yet the IANA makes the decisions.

It is very interesting that, after making your desire to influence policy 
so well know, you now are saying that IANA should not listen to the 
organizations most directly affected by its policies..  What is wrong with 
consensus building and feedback?

Ohh...   for minute there I forgot about the black helicopters.  I guess 
IANA is using them now, or are they over at APNIC?  I misplaced the 
encryption key to the helicopter schedule...

The foundation of your arguments continues to crumble from a lack of 
substance...

--
Jim Browning