From owner-apple Tue Jun 3 00:10:24 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id AAA24467 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 00:10:24 +0900 (JST) Received: from netscape.com (h-205-217-237-47.netscape.com [205.217.237.47]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id AAA24461; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 00:10:20 +0900 (JST) Received: from yoda.netscape.com (yoda.mcom.com [205.217.249.5]) by netscape.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA20406; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 08:12:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from khart.mcom.com ([205.217.254.248]) by yoda.netscape.com (Netscape Mail Server v2.02) with ESMTP id AAA26905; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 15:12:13 +0000 Message-ID: <3392E198.946A72C6@netscape.com> Date: Mon, 02 Jun 1997 17:07:04 +0200 From: khart@netscape.com (Kenneth Hart) Reply-To: khart@netscape.com Organization: Netscape Communications Corp. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.0b5 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: davidc@apnic.net CC: apple@apnic.net Subject: [Fwd: Ripe and APNIC Rescue IANA - a quick heads up] X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------E692ED728FB34F02784EBA85" Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------E692ED728FB34F02784EBA85 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit David, Is this article right? Just curious but how much money is APNIC planning to contribute to fund IANA? - kh -- Kenneth Hart Principal Consultant Netscape Communications Corp. Strategic Sales Group, Europe CNIT BP 370-2, place de la Défense 92053 Paris la Défense, France Tel: +33-1 41 97 55 65 ** Fax: +33-1 41 97 55 20 mailto:khart@netscape.com ** http://home.netscape.com --------------E692ED728FB34F02784EBA85 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: Received: from maleman.mcom.com ([198.93.92.3]) by yoda.netscape.com (Netscape Mail Server v2.02) with SMTP id AAA26055 for ; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 14:51:43 +0000 Received: from xwing.netscape.com (xwing.mcom.com [205.218.156.54]) by maleman.mcom.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id HAA05284 for ; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 07:50:07 -0700 Received: from listbox.com (majordomo.pobox.com [208.210.124.23]) by xwing.netscape.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA04592 for ; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 07:51:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 28484 invoked by alias); 2 Jun 1997 14:51:24 -0000 Delivered-To: the_cook_report-outgoing@listbox.com Received: (qmail 28471 invoked by uid 516); 2 Jun 1997 14:51:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 28254 invoked from network); 2 Jun 1997 14:51:05 -0000 Received: from access.netaxs.com (mail@207.8.186.2) by majordomo.pobox.com with SMTP; 2 Jun 1997 14:51:05 -0000 Received: from unix1.netaxs.com (mail@unix1.netaxs.com [207.8.186.3]) by access.netaxs.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA25914; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 10:45:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from cook@localhost) by unix1.netaxs.com (8.8.5/8.8.4) id KAA13890; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 10:45:37 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 10:45:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Gordon Cook To: the_cook_report@listbox.com Subject: Ripe and APNIC Rescue IANA - a quick heads up Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-the_cook_report@listbox.com Precedence: list Reply-To: cook@cookreport.com ------- Please forgive the lack of formating in the following but I think it is extremely important piece of reporting by ken cukier. My opinion should be no surprise to my subscribers. Hooray for RIPE and APNIC who are doing for the Internet what the Brian Kahin task force did not have the god given sense to do. Indeed that task force is still causing problems - something i will at least raise hell about when i get back to the US if it does not change its ways. Finally I would like to know who gave the orders for the task force to begin with and whose idea it was to have Mr. Kahin whom i understand is an intellectal property lawyer come to DC to head it. If anyone knows the answer to these questions I'd appreciate a heads up. From what i have been told the Kahin group was doing not a damned thing about the IANA authority problem desite being repeatedly warned of the danger. Thank god, for the first signs or really solid Internet leadership in some long while. Its evening in st petersburg, russia now. I have a chamber orchestra concert to attend at a local palace that is bt 15 minutes walk from my friends flat. So in order not to be late here is Kukier's piece bad formating and all. Communications Week International reports in the edition Monday, 2 June 1997, page one: Plan to Protect Net's Key Central Authority Underway Bottom-Up Structure to Make Net Less U.S.-Centric By Kenneth Neil Cukier DUBLIN -- Internet leaders around the world are quietly orchestrating a daring plan to assure the stability of the Net's fragile central authority, and make it less U.S.-centric. IP address registries in Asia and Europe have taken over the funding of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) from the United States Department of Defense's Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), which halted its funding on 1 April. California-based IANA oversees IP number allocations used for global routing and controls the Internet domain name system data. DARPA funded much of the Internet's early development. The heads of the regional IP registries in Europe and Asia, which allocate the Internet Protocol numbers under IANA's authority, signaled that funding is the first step towards a more ambitious goal of creating a bottom-up structure that will include regional registries in the U.S. and elsewhere in the world. Daniel Karrenberg, the managing director of the European IP number registry RIPE NCC in Amsterdam and David Conrad, the director of the Asia-Pacific Network Information Center (APNIC) in Tokyo, stunned senior Internet executives at the trimestrial meeting of RIPE in Dublin in late May, where they announced the move. But executives at the meeting were unanimously in favor of the move, and officially declared that IANA's stability must be ensured. Asian industry executives are expected to be briefed on the matter at a June meeting in Kuala Lumpur. CThe heads of the regional IP registries in Europe and Asia, which allocate the Internet Protocol numbers under IANA's authority, signaled that funding is the first step towards a more ambitious goal of creating a bottom-up structure that will include regional registries in the U.S. and elsewhere in the world. Daniel Karrenberg, the managing director of the European IP number registry RIPE NCC in Amsterdam and David Conrad, the director of the Asia-Pacific Network Information Center (APNIC) in Tokyo, stunned senior Internet executives at the trimestrial meeting of RIPE in Dublin in late May, where they announced the move. But executives at the meeting were unanimously in favor of the move, and officially declared that IANA's stability must be ensured. Asian industry executives are expected to be briefed on the matter at a June meeting in Kuala Lumpur. IANA issued an emergency request for funds in late March, and APNIC contributed $50,000 for a full year's operation, combined with RIPE NCC's contribution of $25,000 for an initial six months. IANA currently lacks formal authority because it developed during the early days of the Internet, when such legal foundations were ignored. Yet now that the Internet has become the world's information infrastructure, this critical piece of the Internet, and Internet governance, must be stabilized, said Christopher Wilkinson, an official at the European Commission Directorate General XIII, which is responsible for telecommunication matters, who learned of IANA's situation at the RIPE meeting. Wilkinson warned with "any change [to the Internet] from the point of view of public policy, [the Internet] has got to work, it's got to be stable, it's got to be really global and international," and concluded that "disputes in the U.S. could jeopardize the Internet in Europe." Jon Postel, the head of IANA, said: "The regional IP registries have been supportive both with funding and with input on possible organizational structures." IANA and the registries are currently "considering several options and timelines," he added. If the project is successful, IANA will be insulated from U.S. domestic political intrusion that has shaken up the Internet recently (CWI, 10 March and 7 April). This has severely thwarted Internet self-governance and generated mistrust of government among influential members of the Internet community. Indeed, RIPE NCC's Karrenberg described the cut in funding as offering "a unique opportunity" to build a lasting structure for IANA and gave the international registries "influence." Conrad emphasized that "the people who depend on the existence of IANA are funding IANA." Both highlighted that the plan would wean IANA away from its U.S. nature and create a truly international body. The plan will likely make IANA more effective and responsible to the Internet community because -- like the Net itself -- power is distributed. And for users and ISPs, especially those outside the United States, an IANA founded on regional representation may be easier to hold to account. But if the bid fails, and IANA's authority is lost, say Internet experts, the Net may become fragmented, new sites unable to be created and coordinated, accurate routing jeopardized, and certain standards such as "port numbers" thrown into doubt. "We're at a juncture here," said Karrenberg. A DARPA offical said IANA's funding was stopped since the Internet is no longer a research project, and that IANA was well aware of the cut beforehand. "DARPA is watching with interest and providing advice when called upon as the U.S. and world Internet community works together to shape its [IANA's] future," the official said. High-level Internet leaders, who requested anonymity, contend the lack of funding represents tacit approval for IANA's plans from DARPA, which is aware of the body's crucial global importance and wants to protect it from national U.S. politics. A senior Clinton administration official, who also requested anonymity due to the controversial nature of the topic, was unaware of the changes taking place at IANA. "We're not dropping IANA," he stated, referring to the U.S. government. He said he expected "some other research agencies" would "step into the breach" and fund IANA. Although the plan is not held secret, the speed and hushed nature of the project suggests the Internet community is exploiting the chaos surrounding the most visible Internet controversy -- the creation of new top level domain names -- to push through IANA reforms while the attention of government bureaucrats is diverted. A RIPE official said it is hoped IANA1s new structure will be solidified before the end of the year. Indeed, the registries will likely act quickly this summer, when many government officials around the world take vacations. The Asian and European registries plan to work closely with people in the U.S. slated to operate an IP registry for the Americas, called American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN). Once ARIN is functioning, it too will partially fund IANA. And the model allows for the future creation of registries in Latin America and Africa to also buttress IANA. Yet the key obstacle facing the IANA's new structure is the U.S. government. ARIN, for example, missed its initial start date of 1 April due to hesitations by a White House taskforce studying the issues surrounding IP numbers (CWI, 19 May). And IANA's stability was called into question earlier this year when a law suit was filed against individuals working at IANA concerning the organization's authority to enter new domain name routing data into the "root" servers they maintain. The suit was dropped in May. The issues of IANA, ARIN and domain names (alongside a reform of the system by the International Ad Hoc Committee) are intertwined because the separate functions are all based on a convoluted series of cooperative agreements by the U.S. National Science Foundation with a private company, Network Solutions Inc. in Herndon, Virginia. IP addresses are the globally unique routing numbers that "map" to the user-friendly domain name system. IANA and the regional registries are imperative for the Net's operation because IP numbers are scarce, must be handed out sparingly, and could create havic if accidentally duplicated. Currently, IANA is based at the Information Sciences Institute at the University of Southern California in Marina del Rey. It is run by essentially one man, Jon Postel, who helped create the Internet and is widely trusted in the Internet community. He is expected to remain in his position after the new structure is in place. ### note Ken Kukier bears no responsibility for the formating... :-) ************************************************************************ The COOK Report on Internet For subsc. pricing & more than 431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 USA ten megabytes of free material (609) 882-2572 (phone & fax) visit http://cookreport.com/ Internet: cook@cookreport.com On line speech of critics under attack by Ewing NJ School Board, go to http://cookreport.com/sboard.shtml ************************************************************************ --------------E692ED728FB34F02784EBA85-- From owner-apple Tue Jun 3 05:59:35 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id FAA29720 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 05:59:35 +0900 (JST) Received: from mail.higgs.net (pine.higgs.net [204.80.125.130]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id FAA29714 for ; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 05:59:26 +0900 (JST) Received: from [206.149.202.78] by mail.higgs.net with ESMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 1.1.2); Mon, 2 Jun 1997 14:01:42 -0700 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <1346908148-25712684@mail.higgs.net> References: Message of Sun, 1 Jun 1997 16:38:24 -0700 from Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Authentication-Warning: Whirlpool: email spin cycle didn't use a protocol Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 14:01:07 -0700 To: Hank Nussbacher From: Simon Higgs Subject: Re: gTLD-MoU Web Site Cc: Robert Shaw , DOMAIN-POLICY@LISTS.INTERNIC.NET, gtld-discuss@gtld-mou.org, newdom@ar.com, apple@apnic.net, dns-wg , tld-admin@ripe.net Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk At 10:23 AM +0000 6/2/97, Hank Nussbacher wrote: Some people just have no sense of humour. I now have a mailbox full of proof. If you put broken stuff up, you should expect to get ribbed about it. Especially when you advertise the fact it's broken in ten foot tall letters. Most normal folks would just put a place holder up for a broken form, or just comment out the form so it couldn't be used. It's Human Interface Design 101 (maybe you need to hire Chris Ambler to build you a web site!). [And yes my own hack of a DNS Walker resolves 3 and 4LDs to the right name server.] Lighten up guys. > On Sun, 1 Jun 1997 16:38:24 -0700 you said: > >At 10:34 PM -0700 6/1/97, Robert Shaw wrote: > > When you go to dnswalk there is in big bold letters: > NOTE THAT THERE ARE PROBLEMS WITH THIS DNS WALK > TEST AND A NEW VERSION WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE > WHEN THE GTLD REGISTRAR APPLICATION PROCESS > STARTS. > > What is your point to do the test on a broken dnswalk and to post those > results to hundreds of people - when it clearly states it has "problems". > > -Hank > > > > >I thought the best part of the site was DNS Walk: > >http://www.gtld-mou.org/dnswalk.html > > > >dnswalk -F for www.iahc.org. > > > >warning: www.iahc.org. has NO authoritative nameservers! > >Cannot check www.iahc.org.: no available nameservers! > > > >dnswalk -F for www.gtld-mou.org. > > > >warning: www.gtld-mou.org. has NO authoritative nameservers! > >Cannot check www.gtld-mou.org.: no available nameservers! > > > >dnswalk -F for www.itu.int. > > > >warning: www.itu.int. has NO authoritative nameservers! > >Cannot check www.itu.int.: no available nameservers! > > > >I hope the new TLDs resolve better than the existing ones do... > > > >;-) > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> The gTLD-MoU web site is now officially available and > >> can be found at: > >> > >> http://www.gtld-mou.org > >> > >> Some important information is now available. > >> > >> 1. Draft application form for becoming a Registrar under > >> the aegis of the gTLD-MoU. Applications cannot yet be > >> made but there is a draft of the near finalized application > >> form with the probably final criteria. > >> > >> 2. Draft of the Council of Registrars (CORE) Memorandum > >> of Understanding. > >> > >> 3. Draft of the Council of Registars (CORE) Articles of > >> Association. > >> > >> Queries/comments concerning these and related documents > >> should be addressed to poc-submit@gtld-mou.org > >> > >> Robert > > > > > > From owner-apple Tue Jun 3 09:53:31 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id JAA04351 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 09:53:31 +0900 (JST) Received: from diablo.cisco.com (diablo.cisco.com [171.68.223.106]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id JAA04345; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 09:53:28 +0900 (JST) Received: from bgreene-pc.cisco.com ([171.68.85.153]) by diablo.cisco.com (8.8.5/CISCO.SERVER.1.2) with SMTP id RAA07247; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 17:55:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by bgreene-pc.cisco.com with Microsoft Mail id <01BC6FFA.F174C4C0@bgreene-pc.cisco.com>; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 08:48:44 +0800 Message-ID: <01BC6FFA.F174C4C0@bgreene-pc.cisco.com> From: Barry Raveendran Greene To: "'davidc@apnic.net'" , "'Kenneth Hart'" Cc: "'apple@apnic.net'" Subject: Re: [Fwd: Ripe and APNIC Rescue IANA - a quick heads up] Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 08:48:40 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Hello All, I have not seen the article in CWI, but I hope it's true. It would be a = very good thing for the Internet. Barry Kenneth Hart wrote: >David, > >Is this article right? >Just curious but how much money is APNIC planning to contribute to fund >IANA? > >- kh >--=20 >Kenneth Hart >Principal Consultant >Netscape Communications Corp. >Strategic Sales Group, Europe >CNIT BP 370-2, place de la D=E9fense >92053 Paris la D=E9fense, France >Tel: +33-1 41 97 55 65 ** Fax: +33-1 41 97 55 20 >mailto:khart@netscape.com ** http://home.netscape.com --=20 --=20 -- Barry Raveendran Greene | || || | Senior Consultant | || || | Consulting Engineering | |||| |||| | tel: +65 738-5535 ext 235 | ..:||||||:..:||||||:.. | e-mail: bgreene@cisco.com | c i s c o S y s t e m s | From owner-apple Tue Jun 3 10:13:31 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id KAA04675 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 10:13:31 +0900 (JST) Received: from apnic-ttc.apnic.net (firewall-user@apnic-ttc.apnic.net [203.178.142.242]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with SMTP id KAA04669; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 10:13:28 +0900 (JST) Received: by apnic-ttc.apnic.net; id JAA21122; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 09:58:59 +0900 Received: from unknown(10.0.10.4) by apnic-ttc.apnic.net via smap (g3.0.3) id xma021115; Tue, 3 Jun 97 09:58:33 +0900 Received: from apnic.net (davidc@localhost) by moonsky.jp.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id KAA01547; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 10:14:30 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <199706030114.KAA01547@moonsky.jp.apnic.net> X-Authentication-Warning: moonsky.jp.apnic.net: davidc owned process doing -bs To: khart@netscape.com cc: davidc@apnic.net, apple@apnic.net Subject: Re: [Fwd: Ripe and APNIC Rescue IANA - a quick heads up] In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 02 Jun 1997 17:07:04 +0200." <3392E198.946A72C6@netscape.com> Date: Tue, 03 Jun 1997 10:14:30 +0900 From: "David R. Conrad" Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Ken, >Is this article right? More or less. The IANA really is more than just Jon... >Just curious but how much money is APNIC planning to contribute to fund >IANA? APNIC obtains Internet registry services from the IANA for which we pay a yearly fee of US $50,000 -- a situation that is not coincidentally very similar to the way APNIC derives its funding. APNIC is working with RIPE and proto-ARIN to formalize this structure. It is possible this fee will increase or decrease depending on just how things get structured (e.g., the number of organizations that are paying for the IANA to continue operation), however as it is critical for just about everyone that the IANA continues to operate, APNIC, in conjunction with the other regional registries will do whatever is necessary to insure just that. Regards, -drc ------ Communications Week International reports in the edition Monday, 2 June 1997, page one: Plan to Protect Net's Key Central Authority Underway Bottom-Up Structure to Make Net Less U.S.-Centric By Kenneth Neil Cukier DUBLIN -- Internet leaders around the world are quietly orchestrating a daring plan to assure the stability of the Net's fragile central authority, and make it less U.S.-centric. IP address registries in Asia and Europe have taken over the funding of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) from the United States Department of Defense's Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), which halted its funding on 1 April. California-based IANA oversees IP number allocations used for global routing and controls the Internet domain name system data. DARPA funded much of the Internet's early development. The heads of the regional IP registries in Europe and Asia, which allocate the Internet Protocol numbers under IANA's authority, signaled that funding is the first step towards a more ambitious goal of creating a bottom-up structure that will include regional registries in the U.S. and elsewhere in the world. Daniel Karrenberg, the managing director of the European IP number registry RIPE NCC in Amsterdam and David Conrad, the director of the Asia-Pacific Network Information Center (APNIC) in Tokyo, stunned senior Internet executives at the trimestrial meeting of RIPE in Dublin in late May, where they announced the move. But executives at the meeting were unanimously in favor of the move, and officially declared that IANA's stability must be ensured. Asian industry executives are expected to be briefed on the matter at a June meeting in Kuala Lumpur. CThe heads of the regional IP registries in Europe and Asia, which allocate the Internet Protocol numbers under IANA's authority, signaled that funding is the first step towards a more ambitious goal of creating a bottom-up structure that will include regional registries in the U.S. and elsewhere in the world. Daniel Karrenberg, the managing director of the European IP number registry RIPE NCC in Amsterdam and David Conrad, the director of the Asia-Pacific Network Information Center (APNIC) in Tokyo, stunned senior Internet executives at the trimestrial meeting of RIPE in Dublin in late May, where they announced the move. But executives at the meeting were unanimously in favor of the move, and officially declared that IANA's stability must be ensured. Asian industry executives are expected to be briefed on the matter at a June meeting in Kuala Lumpur. IANA issued an emergency request for funds in late March, and APNIC contributed $50,000 for a full year's operation, combined with RIPE NCC's contribution of $25,000 for an initial six months. IANA currently lacks formal authority because it developed during the early days of the Internet, when such legal foundations were ignored. Yet now that the Internet has become the world's information infrastructure, this critical piece of the Internet, and Internet governance, must be stabilized, said Christopher Wilkinson, an official at the European Commission Directorate General XIII, which is responsible for telecommunication matters, who learned of IANA's situation at the RIPE meeting. Wilkinson warned with "any change [to the Internet] from the point of view of public policy, [the Internet] has got to work, it's got to be stable, it's got to be really global and international," and concluded that "disputes in the U.S. could jeopardize the Internet in Europe." Jon Postel, the head of IANA, said: "The regional IP registries have been supportive both with funding and with input on possible organizational structures." IANA and the registries are currently "considering several options and timelines," he added. If the project is successful, IANA will be insulated from U.S. domestic political intrusion that has shaken up the Internet recently (CWI, 10 March and 7 April). This has severely thwarted Internet self-governance and generated mistrust of government among influential members of the Internet community. Indeed, RIPE NCC's Karrenberg described the cut in funding as offering "a unique opportunity" to build a lasting structure for IANA and gave the international registries "influence." Conrad emphasized that "the people who depend on the existence of IANA are funding IANA." Both highlighted that the plan would wean IANA away from its U.S. nature and create a truly international body. The plan will likely make IANA more effective and responsible to the Internet community because -- like the Net itself -- power is distributed. And for users and ISPs, especially those outside the United States, an IANA founded on regional representation may be easier to hold to account. But if the bid fails, and IANA's authority is lost, say Internet experts, the Net may become fragmented, new sites unable to be created and coordinated, accurate routing jeopardized, and certain standards such as "port numbers" thrown into doubt. "We're at a juncture here," said Karrenberg. A DARPA offical said IANA's funding was stopped since the Internet is no longer a research project, and that IANA was well aware of the cut beforehand. "DARPA is watching with interest and providing advice when called upon as the U.S. and world Internet community works together to shape its [IANA's] future," the official said. High-level Internet leaders, who requested anonymity, contend the lack of funding represents tacit approval for IANA's plans from DARPA, which is aware of the body's crucial global importance and wants to protect it from national U.S. politics. A senior Clinton administration official, who also requested anonymity due to the controversial nature of the topic, was unaware of the changes taking place at IANA. "We're not dropping IANA," he stated, referring to the U.S. government. He said he expected "some other research agencies" would "step into the breach" and fund IANA. Although the plan is not held secret, the speed and hushed nature of the project suggests the Internet community is exploiting the chaos surrounding the most visible Internet controversy -- the creation of new top level domain names -- to push through IANA reforms while the attention of government bureaucrats is diverted. A RIPE official said it is hoped IANA1s new structure will be solidified before the end of the year. Indeed, the registries will likely act quickly this summer, when many government officials around the world take vacations. The Asian and European registries plan to work closely with people in the U.S. slated to operate an IP registry for the Americas, called American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN). Once ARIN is functioning, it too will partially fund IANA. And the model allows for the future creation of registries in Latin America and Africa to also buttress IANA. Yet the key obstacle facing the IANA's new structure is the U.S. government. ARIN, for example, missed its initial start date of 1 April due to hesitations by a White House taskforce studying the issues surrounding IP numbers (CWI, 19 May). And IANA's stability was called into question earlier this year when a law suit was filed against individuals working at IANA concerning the organization's authority to enter new domain name routing data into the "root" servers they maintain. The suit was dropped in May. The issues of IANA, ARIN and domain names (alongside a reform of the system by the International Ad Hoc Committee) are intertwined because the separate functions are all based on a convoluted series of cooperative agreements by the U.S. National Science Foundation with a private company, Network Solutions Inc. in Herndon, Virginia. IP addresses are the globally unique routing numbers that "map" to the user-friendly domain name system. IANA and the regional registries are imperative for the Net's operation because IP numbers are scarce, must be handed out sparingly, and could create havic if accidentally duplicated. Currently, IANA is based at the Information Sciences Institute at the University of Southern California in Marina del Rey. It is run by essentially one man, Jon Postel, who helped create the Internet and is widely trusted in the Internet community. He is expected to remain in his position after the new structure is in place. ### From owner-apple Tue Jun 3 11:30:15 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id LAA06032 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:30:15 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id LAA06025; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:30:10 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA14316; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 21:21:58 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC6F9B.FA3DCF20@webster.unety.net>; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 21:28:56 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC6F9B.FA3DCF20@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "'Barry Raveendran Greene'" , "'davidc@apnic.net'" , "'Kenneth Hart'" Cc: "'apple@apnic.net'" Subject: RE: [Fwd: Ripe and APNIC Rescue IANA - a quick heads up] Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 21:28:55 -0500 Encoding: 26 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk On Monday, June 02, 1997 7:48 PM, Barry Raveendran Greene[SMTP:bgreene@cisco.com] wrote: @ Hello All, @ @ I have not seen the article in CWI, but I hope it's true. It would be a very good thing for the Internet. @ @ Barry @ @ @ Kenneth Hart wrote: @ @ >David, @ > @ >Is this article right? @ >Just curious but how much money is APNIC planning to contribute to fund @ >IANA? @ > Will this help to advance the development/deployment of some Root Name Servers in the Asia/Pacific region ? -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation http://www.Unir.Corp From owner-apple Tue Jun 3 11:33:59 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id LAA06100 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:33:59 +0900 (JST) Received: from apnic-ttc.apnic.net (firewall-user@apnic-ttc.apnic.net [203.178.142.242]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with SMTP id LAA06094; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:33:57 +0900 (JST) Received: by apnic-ttc.apnic.net; id LAA21481; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:18:59 +0900 Received: from unknown(10.0.10.5) by apnic-ttc.apnic.net via smap (g3.0.3) id xma021477; Tue, 3 Jun 97 11:18:51 +0900 Received: from apnic.net (davidc@localhost) by palmtree.jp.apnic.net (8.8.2/8.8.2) with ESMTP id LAA01903; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:34:41 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <199706030234.LAA01903@palmtree.jp.apnic.net> X-Authentication-Warning: palmtree.jp.apnic.net: davidc owned process doing -bs To: Jim Fleming cc: "'Barry Raveendran Greene'" , "'davidc@apnic.net'" , "'Kenneth Hart'" , "'apple@apnic.net'" Subject: Re: [Fwd: Ripe and APNIC Rescue IANA - a quick heads up] In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 02 Jun 1997 21:28:55 EST." <01BC6F9B.FA3DCF20@webster.unety.net> Date: Tue, 03 Jun 1997 11:34:41 +0900 From: "David R. Conrad" Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk >@ >Just curious but how much money is APNIC planning to contribute to fund >@ >IANA? >Will this help to advance the development/deployment >of some Root Name Servers in the Asia/Pacific region ? No, that issue is unrelated to APNIC providing funding to the IANA and has been progressing independently of the IANA funding situation. Regards, -drc From owner-apple Tue Jun 3 11:38:10 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id LAA06199 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:38:10 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id LAA06193; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:38:06 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA14342; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 21:29:56 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC6F9D.17531240@webster.unety.net>; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 21:36:55 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC6F9D.17531240@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "'David R. Conrad'" Cc: "'apple@apnic.net'" , "'Barry Raveendran Greene'" , "'Kenneth Hart'" Subject: RE: [Fwd: Ripe and APNIC Rescue IANA - a quick heads up] Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 21:36:53 -0500 Encoding: 18 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk On Monday, June 02, 1997 9:34 PM, David R. Conrad[SMTP:davidc@apnic.net] wrote: @ >@ >Just curious but how much money is APNIC planning to contribute to fund @ >@ >IANA? @ >Will this help to advance the development/deployment @ >of some Root Name Servers in the Asia/Pacific region ? @ @ No, that issue is unrelated to APNIC providing funding to the IANA and @ has been progressing independently of the IANA funding situation. @ What is the status of Root Name Servers for the Asia/Pacific region ? -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation http://www.Unir.Corp From owner-apple Tue Jun 3 11:53:10 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id LAA06520 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:53:10 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id LAA06512; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:53:06 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA14413; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 21:44:55 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC6F9F.2E5D9760@webster.unety.net>; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 21:51:52 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC6F9F.2E5D9760@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "'David R. Conrad'" , "khart@netscape.com" Cc: "apple@apnic.net" , "'naipr@arin.net'" Subject: RE: [Fwd: Ripe and APNIC Rescue IANA - a quick heads up] Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 21:51:51 -0500 Encoding: 203 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk What is "proto-ARIN" ? On Monday, June 02, 1997 8:14 PM, David R. Conrad[SMTP:davidc@apnic.net] wrote: @ Ken, @ @ >Is this article right? @ @ More or less. The IANA really is more than just Jon... @ @ >Just curious but how much money is APNIC planning to contribute to fund @ >IANA? @ @ APNIC obtains Internet registry services from the IANA for which we @ pay a yearly fee of US $50,000 -- a situation that is not @ coincidentally very similar to the way APNIC derives its @ funding. @ @ APNIC is working with RIPE and proto-ARIN to formalize this structure. @ It is possible this fee will increase or decrease depending on just @ how things get structured (e.g., the number of organizations that are @ paying for the IANA to continue operation), however as it is critical @ for just about everyone that the IANA continues to operate, APNIC, in @ conjunction with the other regional registries will do whatever is @ necessary to insure just that. @ @ Regards, @ -drc @ ------ @ Communications Week International reports in the edition Monday, 2 @ June 1997, page one: @ @ Plan to Protect Net's Key Central Authority Underway @ @ Bottom-Up Structure to Make Net Less U.S.-Centric @ @ By Kenneth Neil Cukier @ @ DUBLIN -- Internet leaders around the world are quietly orchestrating @ a daring plan to assure the stability of the Net's fragile central @ authority, and make it less U.S.-centric. @ @ IP address registries in Asia and Europe have taken over the funding @ of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) from the United @ States Department of Defense's Advanced Research Projects Agency @ (DARPA), which halted its funding on 1 April. California-based IANA @ oversees IP number allocations used for global routing and controls @ the Internet domain name system data. DARPA funded much of the @ Internet's early development. @ @ The heads of the regional IP registries in Europe and Asia, which @ allocate the Internet Protocol numbers under IANA's authority, @ signaled that funding is the first step towards a more ambitious goal @ of creating a bottom-up structure that will include regional @ registries in the U.S. and elsewhere in the world. @ @ Daniel Karrenberg, the managing director of the European IP number @ registry RIPE NCC in Amsterdam and David Conrad, the director of the @ Asia-Pacific Network Information Center (APNIC) in Tokyo, stunned @ senior Internet executives at the trimestrial meeting of RIPE in @ Dublin in late May, where they announced the move. @ @ But executives at the meeting were unanimously in favor of the move, @ and officially declared that IANA's stability must be ensured. Asian @ industry executives are expected to be briefed on the matter at a June @ meeting in Kuala Lumpur. CThe heads of the regional IP registries in @ Europe and Asia, which allocate the Internet Protocol numbers under @ IANA's authority, signaled that funding is the first step towards a @ more ambitious goal of creating a bottom-up structure that will @ include regional registries in the U.S. and elsewhere in the world. @ @ Daniel Karrenberg, the managing director of the European IP number @ registry RIPE NCC in Amsterdam and David Conrad, the director of the @ Asia-Pacific Network Information Center (APNIC) in Tokyo, stunned @ senior Internet executives at the trimestrial meeting of RIPE in @ Dublin in late May, where they announced the move. @ @ But executives at the meeting were unanimously in favor of the move, @ and officially declared that IANA's stability must be ensured. Asian @ industry executives are expected to be briefed on the matter at a June @ meeting in Kuala Lumpur. @ @ IANA issued an emergency request for funds in late March, and APNIC @ contributed $50,000 for a full year's operation, combined with RIPE @ NCC's contribution of $25,000 for an initial six months. @ @ IANA currently lacks formal authority because it developed during the @ early days of the Internet, when such legal foundations were @ ignored. Yet now that the Internet has become the world's information @ infrastructure, this critical piece of the Internet, and Internet @ governance, must be stabilized, said Christopher Wilkinson, an @ official at the European Commission Directorate General XIII, which is @ responsible for telecommunication matters, who learned of IANA's @ situation at the RIPE meeting. @ @ Wilkinson warned with "any change [to the Internet] from the point of @ view of public policy, [the Internet] has got to work, it's got to be @ stable, it's got to be really global and international," and concluded @ that "disputes in the U.S. could jeopardize the Internet in Europe." @ @ Jon Postel, the head of IANA, said: "The regional IP registries have @ been supportive both with funding and with input on possible @ organizational structures." IANA and the registries are currently @ "considering several options and timelines," he added. @ @ If the project is successful, IANA will be insulated from @ U.S. domestic political intrusion that has shaken up the Internet @ recently (CWI, 10 March and 7 April). This has severely thwarted @ Internet self-governance and generated mistrust of government among @ influential members of the Internet community. @ @ Indeed, RIPE NCC's Karrenberg described the cut in funding as offering @ "a unique opportunity" to build a lasting structure for IANA and gave @ the international registries "influence." Conrad emphasized that "the @ people who depend on the existence of IANA are funding IANA." Both @ highlighted that the plan would wean IANA away from its U.S. nature @ and create a truly international body. @ @ The plan will likely make IANA more effective and responsible to the @ Internet community because -- like the Net itself -- power is @ distributed. And for users and ISPs, especially those outside the @ United States, an IANA founded on regional representation may be @ easier to hold to account. @ @ But if the bid fails, and IANA's authority is lost, say Internet @ experts, the Net may become fragmented, new sites unable to be created @ and coordinated, accurate routing jeopardized, and certain standards @ such as "port numbers" thrown into doubt. @ @ "We're at a juncture here," said Karrenberg. @ @ A DARPA offical said IANA's funding was stopped since the Internet is @ no longer a research project, and that IANA was well aware of the cut @ beforehand. "DARPA is watching with interest and providing advice @ when called upon as the U.S. and world Internet community works @ together to shape its [IANA's] future," the official said. @ @ High-level Internet leaders, who requested anonymity, contend the lack @ of funding represents tacit approval for IANA's plans from DARPA, @ which is aware of the body's crucial global importance and wants to @ protect it from national U.S. politics. @ @ A senior Clinton administration official, who also requested anonymity @ due to the controversial nature of the topic, was unaware of the @ changes taking place at IANA. "We're not dropping IANA," he stated, @ referring to the U.S. government. He said he expected "some other @ research agencies" would "step into the breach" and fund IANA. @ @ Although the plan is not held secret, the speed and hushed nature of @ the project suggests the Internet community is exploiting the chaos @ surrounding the most visible Internet controversy -- the creation of @ new top level domain names -- to push through IANA reforms while the @ attention of government bureaucrats is diverted. A RIPE official said @ it is hoped IANA1s new structure will be solidified before the end of @ the year. Indeed, the registries will likely act quickly this summer, @ when many government officials around the world take vacations. @ @ The Asian and European registries plan to work closely with people in @ the U.S. slated to operate an IP registry for the Americas, called @ American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN). Once ARIN is @ functioning, it too will partially fund IANA. And the model allows for @ the future creation of registries in Latin America and Africa to also @ buttress IANA. @ @ Yet the key obstacle facing the IANA's new structure is the U.S. @ government. ARIN, for example, missed its initial start date of 1 @ April due to hesitations by a White House taskforce studying the @ issues surrounding IP numbers (CWI, 19 May). @ @ And IANA's stability was called into question earlier this year when a @ law suit was filed against individuals working at IANA concerning the @ organization's authority to enter new domain name routing data into @ the "root" servers they maintain. The suit was dropped in May. @ @ The issues of IANA, ARIN and domain names (alongside a reform of the @ system by the International Ad Hoc Committee) are intertwined because @ the separate functions are all based on a convoluted series of @ cooperative agreements by the U.S. National Science Foundation with a @ private company, Network Solutions Inc. in Herndon, Virginia. @ @ IP addresses are the globally unique routing numbers that "map" to the @ user-friendly domain name system. IANA and the regional registries are @ imperative for the Net's operation because IP numbers are scarce, must @ be handed out sparingly, and could create havic if accidentally @ duplicated. @ @ Currently, IANA is based at the Information Sciences Institute at the @ University of Southern California in Marina del Rey. It is run by @ essentially one man, Jon Postel, who helped create the Internet and is @ widely trusted in the Internet community. He is expected to remain in @ his position after the new structure is in place. @ @ ### @ @ @ -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation http://www.Unir.Corp From owner-apple Tue Jun 3 12:36:42 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id MAA07443 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 12:36:42 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id MAA07435; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 12:36:39 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA14493; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 22:28:27 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC6FA5.4446AA20@webster.unety.net>; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 22:35:26 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC6FA5.4446AA20@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "'David R. Conrad'" Cc: "'apple@apnic.net'" , "'Barry Raveendran Greene'" , "'Kenneth Hart'" , "'newdom@ar.com'" Subject: RE: [Fwd: Ripe and APNIC Rescue IANA - a quick heads up] Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 22:35:25 -0500 Encoding: 59 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk On Monday, June 02, 1997 9:34 PM, David R. Conrad[SMTP:davidc@apnic.net] wrote: @ >@ >Just curious but how much money is APNIC planning to contribute to fund @ >@ >IANA? @ >Will this help to advance the development/deployment @ >of some Root Name Servers in the Asia/Pacific region ? @ @ No, that issue is unrelated to APNIC providing funding to the IANA and @ has been progressing independently of the IANA funding situation. @ The market value for this allocation is easily several million dollars. Does your funding cover part of this allocation ? ================== Asia Pacific Network Information Center (NETBLK-APNIC2) Tokyo Central Post Office Box 351 Tokyo 100-91 JAPAN Netname: APNIC3 Netblock: 61.0.0.0 - 61.255.255.255 Maintainer: AP Coordinator: Conrad, David Randolph (DC396) davidc@APNIC.NET +81-3-5500-0480 (FAX) +81-3-5500-0481 Domain System inverse mapping provided by: JATZ.AARNET.EDU.AU 139.130.204.4 TECKLA.APNIC.NET 202.12.28.129 NS.KRNIC.NET 202.30.64.21 NS.RIPE.NET 193.0.0.193 MOZART.TECHNET.SG 192.169.33.107 RS0.INTERNIC.NET 198.41.0.5 *** please refer to whois.apnic.net for more information *** *** before contacting APNIC *** *** use whois -h whois.apnic.net *** Record last updated on 25-Apr-97. Database last updated on 2-Jun-97 04:51:00 EDT. The InterNIC Registration Services Host contains ONLY Internet Information (Networks, ASN's, Domains, and POC's). Please use the whois server at nic.ddn.mil for MILNET Information. ================= -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation http://www.Unir.Corp From owner-apple Tue Jun 3 13:57:24 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id NAA08733 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 13:57:24 +0900 (JST) Received: from apnic-ttc.apnic.net (firewall-user@apnic-ttc.apnic.net [203.178.142.242]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with SMTP id NAA08727; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 13:57:22 +0900 (JST) Received: by apnic-ttc.apnic.net; id NAA22216; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 13:42:29 +0900 Received: from unknown(10.0.10.5) by apnic-ttc.apnic.net via smap (g3.0.3) id xma022214; Tue, 3 Jun 97 13:42:23 +0900 Received: from apnic.net (davidc@localhost) by palmtree.jp.apnic.net (8.8.2/8.8.2) with ESMTP id NAA01946; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 13:58:14 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <199706030458.NAA01946@palmtree.jp.apnic.net> X-Authentication-Warning: palmtree.jp.apnic.net: davidc owned process doing -bs To: Jim Fleming cc: "'David R. Conrad'" , "'apple@apnic.net'" , "'Barry Raveendran Greene'" , "'Kenneth Hart'" Subject: Re: [Fwd: Ripe and APNIC Rescue IANA - a quick heads up] In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 02 Jun 1997 21:36:53 EST." <01BC6F9D.17531240@webster.unety.net> Date: Tue, 03 Jun 1997 13:58:14 +0900 From: "David R. Conrad" Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk >@ No, that issue is unrelated to APNIC providing funding to the IANA and >@ has been progressing independently of the IANA funding situation. >What is the status of Root Name Servers for the Asia/Pacific region ? It has been progressing independently of the IANA funding situation. The IANA is the appropriate person to ask. Regards, -drc From owner-apple Tue Jun 3 13:59:33 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id NAA08770 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 13:59:33 +0900 (JST) Received: from apnic-ttc.apnic.net (firewall-user@apnic-ttc.apnic.net [203.178.142.242]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with SMTP id NAA08764; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 13:59:31 +0900 (JST) Received: by apnic-ttc.apnic.net; id NAA22234; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 13:44:29 +0900 Received: from unknown(10.0.10.5) by apnic-ttc.apnic.net via smap (g3.0.3) id xma022232; Tue, 3 Jun 97 13:44:24 +0900 Received: from apnic.net (davidc@localhost) by palmtree.jp.apnic.net (8.8.2/8.8.2) with ESMTP id OAA01994; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 14:00:15 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <199706030500.OAA01994@palmtree.jp.apnic.net> X-Authentication-Warning: palmtree.jp.apnic.net: davidc owned process doing -bs To: Jim Fleming cc: "'David R. Conrad'" , "khart@netscape.com" , "apple@apnic.net" , "'naipr@arin.net'" Subject: Re: [Fwd: Ripe and APNIC Rescue IANA - a quick heads up] In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 02 Jun 1997 21:51:51 EST." <01BC6F9F.2E5D9760@webster.unety.net> Date: Tue, 03 Jun 1997 14:00:15 +0900 From: "David R. Conrad" Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk >What is "proto-ARIN" ? Guess. Regards, -drc From owner-apple Tue Jun 3 14:08:49 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id OAA08946 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 14:08:49 +0900 (JST) Received: from apnic-ttc.apnic.net (firewall-user@apnic-ttc.apnic.net [203.178.142.242]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with SMTP id OAA08939; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 14:08:47 +0900 (JST) Received: by apnic-ttc.apnic.net; id NAA22309; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 13:52:59 +0900 Received: from unknown(10.0.10.5) by apnic-ttc.apnic.net via smap (g3.0.3) id xma022307; Tue, 3 Jun 97 13:52:47 +0900 Received: from apnic.net (davidc@localhost) by palmtree.jp.apnic.net (8.8.2/8.8.2) with ESMTP id OAA02098; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 14:08:38 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <199706030508.OAA02098@palmtree.jp.apnic.net> X-Authentication-Warning: palmtree.jp.apnic.net: davidc owned process doing -bs To: Jim Fleming cc: "'David R. Conrad'" , "'apple@apnic.net'" , "'Barry Raveendran Greene'" , "'Kenneth Hart'" Subject: Re: [Fwd: Ripe and APNIC Rescue IANA - a quick heads up] In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 02 Jun 1997 22:35:25 EST." <01BC6FA5.4446AA20@webster.unety.net> Date: Tue, 03 Jun 1997 14:08:38 +0900 From: "David R. Conrad" Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk [newdom removed from cc's as it is *completely* irrelevant] >The market value for this allocation is easily Why couldn't you have said "net 61" instead of "this" thereby removing the need to include the FULL InterNIC whois record? Does someone pay you per byte for the mail you send? >several million dollars. Ah, I wasn't aware you could buy and sell /8s. Thanks for letting me know. >Does your funding cover part of this allocation ? Nope. Regards, -drc From owner-apple Tue Jun 3 14:30:18 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id OAA09348 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 14:30:18 +0900 (JST) Received: from sangam.ncst.ernet.in (sangam.ncst.ernet.in [202.41.110.33]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id OAA09339; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 14:30:03 +0900 (JST) Received: from iisc.ernet.in (iisc.ernet.in [144.16.64.3]) by sangam.ncst.ernet.in (8.7.5) with ESMTP id LAA15976; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 11:07:01 +0530 (GMT+05:30) Received: from ece.iisc.ernet.in (ece [144.16.64.2]) by iisc.ernet.in (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id KAA14137; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 10:56:36 +0530 (GMT+0530) Received: by ece.iisc.ernet.in (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA15534; Tue, 3 Jun 97 10:58:04+0530 From: gopi@ece.iisc.ernet.in (Gopi K Garge) Message-Id: <9706030528.AA15534@ece.iisc.ernet.in> Subject: Re: [Fwd: Ripe and APNIC Rescue IANA - a quick heads up] To: davidc@apnic.net (David R. Conrad) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 97 10:58:03 GMT+5:30 Cc: JimFleming@unety.net, davidc@apnic.net, khart@netscape.com, apple@apnic.net, naipr@arin.net In-Reply-To: <199706030500.OAA01994@palmtree.jp.apnic.net>; from "David R. Conrad" at Jun 3, 97 2:00 pm Phone: 91 80 334 0855 Request-Delivery-Notification: TRUE X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk David R. Conrad sez: > >What is "proto-ARIN" ? > Guess. A prototype American NIC on the lines of the proto-country NICs that we have here, except that I wouldn't know about its area of operation in addition to US. > Regards, > -drc --Gopi From owner-apple Tue Jun 3 17:38:23 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id RAA12763 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 17:38:23 +0900 (JST) Received: from mawar.singnet.com.sg (mawar.singnet.com.sg [165.21.1.19]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id RAA12757 for ; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 17:38:20 +0900 (JST) Received: from jhmk (ts900-6023.singnet.com.sg [165.21.162.107]) by mawar.singnet.com.sg (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id QAA15354; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 16:40:48 +0800 (SST) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19970603164413.0069e9bc@singnet.com.sg> X-Sender: camelot@singnet.com.sg X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 03 Jun 1997 16:44:13 +0800 To: apple@apnic.net, aim@apic.net From: Rajesh Sreenivasan Subject: First Domain name ruling in UK Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Hiya! Here's an article on the conclusion of a case on domain names in the UK which I have been following with some interest over the last few weeks. Interesting judicial interpretation of domain names allocation based on a deceptively simple first-come first-served basis. Regards Rajesh Sreenivasan http://www.singnet.com.sg/~camelot FIRST LEGAL RULING ON DOMAIN NAMES MADE IN THE UK http://www.gina.com/wire/tn/tn970342.shtml 05/30/97 -- LONDON, ENGLAND -- In the Royal Courts of Justice, the first UK legal precedent was created on the subject of Internet Domain Names. On 22nd May 1997 the vice-chancellor Justice Scott ruled on the 'first-come, first-served' nature of domains. The ruling means that the precedent has been set allowing anyone to obtain any domain name that has not already been registered by another party. The case was between Pitman Training Ltd and PTC Oxford Limited (the Planitiffs) and Pearson Professional Limited and Nominet UK (the Defendants) and centred around the use of the "pitman.co.uk" domain name. Both companies have the legal right to use the name "Pitman" in their respective fields of business. Pearson - trading as Pitman Publishing - registered the domain name "pitman.co.uk" successfully through NetNames on the 16th February 1996 while they worked on their website which was due to be launched later in the year. However PTC, through their agents I-way Ltd. managed to get the domain name accredited to their computer systems on the 31st March 1996, and began to use the name for email purposes. The reason this re-delegation was successful has not been established, although safeguards have since been put into effect to limit the possibility of this situation occurring again. Pearson realised that they no longer controlled the name when they attempted to transfer the name to their website. As they had already listed the site in their books and national press advertisements, Pearson Professional requested Nominet UK return the name to them under the 'first-come, first-served' rules. Nominet UK transferred the name, cutting off PTC's email. PTC then obtained a temporary order restoring their email and brought this case to regain ownership of the name. Justice Scott commented that domain names were a company's identity on the Internet and affirmed their 'first-come, first-served' nature. He commented that PTC had not shown the cause of action that would allow him to make a ruling in their favour. He also stated that there was no implied service guarantee between PTC and I-Way. He further stated that there was no unlawful act committed by Pearson in their letter requesting the re-delegation of the name by Nominet UK. Justice Scott awarded the defendants costs against the plaintiffs and refused PTC the right to appeal. "One of the UK's most senior Judges has underlined the importance of domain names on the Internet and shown that the 'first-come, first-served' nature of the names can be defended in the courts" said Mark Henderson-Thynne, NetNames Domain Name Manager. "This shows it is vital for companies to protect their trade and product names as domain names so they can use them in the future and/or prevent others using them and causing confusion to their clients" continued Henderson-Thynne who advised Pearson's lawyers on the history and operation of domain names and was an expert witness for the case. From owner-apple Wed Jun 4 18:22:50 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id SAA09596 for apple-outgoing; Wed, 4 Jun 1997 18:22:50 +0900 (JST) Received: from melati.singnet.com.sg (melati.singnet.com.sg [165.21.1.15]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id SAA09590; Wed, 4 Jun 1997 18:22:47 +0900 (JST) Received: from mkhoo (ts900-5816.singnet.com.sg [165.21.162.36]) by melati.singnet.com.sg (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA28212; Wed, 4 Jun 1997 17:25:10 +0800 (SST) Message-Id: <199706040925.RAA28212@melati.singnet.com.sg> From: "Melvin Khoo" To: "Jim Fleming" , "'David R. Conrad'" , Cc: , "'naipr@arin.net'" Subject: Re: [Fwd: Ripe and APNIC Rescue IANA - a quick heads up] Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 17:13:14 +0800 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Answer: proto-Americas Registry for Internet Numbers. Note the use of the word Americas Regards, -MK ---------- > From: Jim Fleming > To: 'David R. Conrad' ; khart@netscape.com > Cc: apple@apnic.net; 'naipr@arin.net' > Subject: RE: [Fwd: Ripe and APNIC Rescue IANA - a quick heads up] > Date: Tuesday, June 03, 1997 10:51 AM > > > What is "proto-ARIN" ? From owner-apple Wed Jun 4 20:15:39 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id UAA10279 for apple-outgoing; Wed, 4 Jun 1997 20:15:39 +0900 (JST) Received: from apnic-ttc.apnic.net (firewall-user@apnic-ttc.apnic.net [203.178.142.242]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with SMTP id UAA10274 for ; Wed, 4 Jun 1997 20:15:37 +0900 (JST) Received: by apnic-ttc.apnic.net; id UAA27980; Wed, 4 Jun 1997 20:01:00 +0900 Received: from unknown(10.0.10.4) by apnic-ttc.apnic.net via smap (g3.0.3) id xma027977; Wed, 4 Jun 97 20:00:57 +0900 Received: from apnic.net (davidc@localhost) by moonsky.jp.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id UAA10349 for ; Wed, 4 Jun 1997 20:16:59 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <199706041116.UAA10349@moonsky.jp.apnic.net> X-Authentication-Warning: moonsky.jp.apnic.net: davidc owned process doing -bs To: apple@apnic.net Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 20:16:59 +0900 From: "David R. Conrad" Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk ------- Forwarded Message Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 17:07:09 -0700 From: Chito Kintanar To: ph-isp@iphil.net cc: rp-internet@cyber.org.ph, Telecommunications Technology Forum , du1op@gabriela.ph.net Subject: [ph-isp] A Snapshot of Current Policy: Towards Philippine Telecomms De velopment A Snapshot of Current Policy: Towards Philippine Telecomms Development The Philippines is a country of over 70 million population. In 1992, the teledensity stood at 1.2 per 100 inhabitants, or about 800,000 main telephone lines nationwide, and one of the lowest in Asia. Ever since.... the "monopoly" was sustained by an out- moded Public Service Act of 1935. In 1995, there were about 60 telephone companies operating in the Philippines. Nonetheless, this was controlled virtually by PLDT (Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co.), where 94% of basic telephones were concentrated only in Metro Manila, ---serving less than 1/100th of the nation's population. The 59 other opera- tors served inadequately the other cities, provinces and munici- palities with analog POTS (plain old telephone service). In 1993, the Ramos administration knew it will need to revitalize the sector, and encourage investors in a capital extensive indus- try. More significantly, it also meant toppling an old monopoly to improve the country's economy. Against all odds, the Ramos administration gambled with two executive orders 109 & 59... one to open up the industry to boost access to telecommunications, and the other to "interconnect" all of the new services. Of course, the new operators, like the businessmen they are, expressed willingness to participate --only if they were allowed to operate the more lucrative CMTS (cellular mobile telephone service) and IGF (international gateway facility) services. The other half of the deal was that the new CMTS and IGF players shall be permitted to operate their services provided that they fulfill their USOs (universal service obligations) by installing 400,000 and 300,000 main telephone lines each, respectively. This was in both underserved and unserved areas, nationwide. The ratio was for every 10 telephones installed in lucrative cities, one(1) should be installed in the less fortunate countryside. And so, the Ramos government had to exercise its organization and management skills to awaken the sleepy incumbents also. The most obvious solution was to offer the incumbents --competition in their areas. The policy manifested a natural solution to the equitable deployment of telephones in the countryside too. More- over, it further offered a smooth way for players to go through the quasi-judicial process at the NTC (National Telecommunica- tions Commission) without much litigation re: their individual roll-out plans & programs in 11 service areas. So today, we have the so-called "service area scheme" (SAS). In the meantime, while the new operators were busy and excited to operate in their new and `commonly agreed' assignments, a new telecomms bill was brewing in congress. This is now known as RA7925, the new Telecommunications Policy Act of 1995. Some sectors say, the dominant player after all was not sleeping, but lobbying for the passage of this bill. Undoubtedly, the incumbent was not about to surrender its turf to the new entrants. Today, there are still problems... where many say the new law is still lopsided in favor of the incumbent. We venture to say: nothing is really perfect in this world, and there will always be flaws. However, the Philippines have come a long way since 1935, and at the very least, new policy has awaken the dominant carrier to take away its excess fat, and relatively become a more respon- sive company. Furthermore, the new policy has doubled the compa- ny's delivery in just two years, which took the other half 65 years to build. Overall the Philippine teledensity has quadrupled since 1992. The Ramos government expects a teledensity of 8 to 100 inhabitants by the end of its six-year term in 1998. Today, the Philippines is nurturing a multi-billion US dollar telecommunications industry. Internet and other value-added- services are surviving, as these constantly probe the absorptive capacity of the Philippine market. The Philippines is also looking forward to some amendments to our new Telecoms Policy Act of 1995 ---basically to address the more pressing policy issues re: "teleconvergence", in these new emerg- ing telecomms, broadcast, CATV and broadband wireless technolo- gies. Thank you for your time and bandwidth, Chito Kintanar Director for Special Projects & External Affairs Center for Telecommunication Studies, Philippines A joint project with the Jesuit Communications Foundation, Inc. http://www.sequel.net/~ck + >> PH-ISP List. To quit, mail "unsubscribe ph-isp" to majordomo@iphil.net << ------- End of Forwarded Message From owner-apple Thu Jun 5 06:18:13 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id GAA13120 for apple-outgoing; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 06:18:13 +0900 (JST) Received: from kaukau.mcs.vuw.ac.nz (kaukau.mcs.vuw.ac.nz [130.195.5.20]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id GAA13115 for ; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 06:18:09 +0900 (JST) Received: from circa.mcs.vuw.ac.nz (circa.mcs.vuw.ac.nz [130.195.5.12]) by kaukau.mcs.vuw.ac.nz (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA20201 for ; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 09:20:37 +1200 (NZST) From: John Hine Received: from localhost (hine@localhost) by circa.mcs.vuw.ac.nz (8.8.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA14136 for ; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 09:20:37 +1200 (NZST) Message-Id: <199706042120.JAA14136@circa.mcs.vuw.ac.nz> To: apple@apnic.net Subject: To ANG Peng Hwa Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 09:20:37 +1200 Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk My apologies for using this list to do this but ANG's email, tphang@ntu.edu.sg, is bouncing, I know he reads the list, and I need to get a hold of him re INET'97. Ang, please reply to me not the list with a working email address. John Hine Program Chair, INET'97 From owner-apple Thu Jun 5 20:01:04 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id UAA19093 for apple-outgoing; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 20:01:04 +0900 (JST) Received: from diablo.cisco.com (diablo.cisco.com [171.68.223.106]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id UAA19088 for ; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 20:01:01 +0900 (JST) Received: from singapore-dhcp-170.cisco.com ([171.68.85.151]) by diablo.cisco.com (8.8.5/CISCO.SERVER.1.2) with SMTP id EAA00686 for ; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 04:02:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by singapore-dhcp-170.cisco.com with Microsoft Mail id <01BC71E2.1E6F75E0@singapore-dhcp-170.cisco.com>; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 18:56:04 +0800 Message-ID: <01BC71E2.1E6F75E0@singapore-dhcp-170.cisco.com> From: Barry Raveendran Greene To: "'APPLe'" Subject: Internet Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 18:55:57 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Internet Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings Internet = Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings June 4, 1997 4:49 PM EDT WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--June 4, 1997--=20 -- Association for Interactive Media announces a new representative=20 coalition to examine management and operations of the Internet --=20 With significant implications for the future of the Internet and = attempts to control it, a coalition of key Internet companies, = organizations, and consumer groups has called for a halt to the = International Ad Hoc Committee (IAHC) proposal to govern the Internet. = As a result, the newly-formed Open Internet Congress (OIC) has called = for an "Internet Constitutional Convention" to examine Internet = administration and governance. An organizational meeting will be held = July 9, 1997, in Washington, D.C. and will be coordinated under the = auspices of the Association for Interactive Media (AIM) with = participation by the supporters of the OIC.=20 Serious concerns have arisen that groups that are not representative of, = or responsive to, the concerns of the Internet community as a whole are = attempting to take over control of the Internet. The purpose of the Open = Internet Congress is to create an open forum to discuss how and by whom = decisions about the Internet should be made, and to guarantee that all = stakeholders in the future of the Internet have a voice in the process.=20 A self-appointed group known as the IAHC, comprised of the Internet = Society, the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, and a few similar = groups have been holding exclusive meetings in Geneva to discuss vital = issues such as domain name registration. Little effort has been made to = inform consumers, governments or the Internet industry about the = proceedings, or their potential impact on the Internet.=20 Most people who make their living from the Internet have only heard = about decisions made by IAHC after critical issues have been decided. By = holding invitation-only meetings in Geneva, often with less than a 30 = day notice, rightful stakeholders have been disenfranchised from the = decision-making process.=20 AIM and its members have the greatest respect for the contributions that = some of IAHC's supporters have made in the creation and growth of the = Internet, and they readily acknowledge that it would not exist if it = were not for the Internet Society, the World Wide Web Consortium, and = the other participants.=20 "The reality, however, is that the composition of the Internet community = has changed with its explosive growth. The original leadership has now = become the tenured 'Ivory Tower of the Internet.' They have lost touch = with the pulse of mainstream Internet users - probably because they have = failed to include everyone in the process," said Andrew Sernovitz, AIM's = president.=20 IAHC recently announced that it had dissolved itself and created a new = successor organization, the Policy Oversight Committee. The members of = this committee were chosen by IAHC at a private IAHC meeting. An = attorney from Chicago heads the organization.=20 "The final straw was when IAHC announced that they had created their own = replacement, elected its board and chosen its President - all in a = secret meeting with no public input. There was no possibility that we, = or our members, could have possibly participated," said Sernovitz. = "Since its inception, the 'Net has been the ultimate participatory = democracy. It seems that the original crew has decided to rig the = elections to stay in office."=20 AIM and its supporters believe that it is time to re-examine how = decisions are made regarding the structure and management of the = Internet. With fifty-five million new people online, IAHC's narrow, = pre-commercial view no longer speaks to the needs of the Internet = community.=20 "Developing a process to maintain a just and lasting framework for the = Internet requires input from all stakeholders - academia, governments, = businesses, content providers, and, most important, consumers. That is = why we have formed the Open Internet Congress and are calling for the = first Internet Constitutional Convention," said AIM Senior Vice = President Wayne Thevenot.=20 Founded in 1993, the Association for Interactive Media is the most = diverse coalition of organizational users of the Internet. AIM's mission = is to support the efforts of leaders from for-profit and non-profit = organizations seeking to serve the public through interactive media. = With the ability to form partnerships and friendships among a wide = variety of organizations, AIM bridges the gaps between groups working in = dozens of different fields to ensure the successful future of new media. = AIM has over 300 members including NBC, Infoseek, American Express, = CNET, National School Boards Association, Bay Networks, BellSouth and = Time Warner.=20 =20 =20 We are committed to making this an open and democratic conversation with = input from all. To join the email list, send the message "subscribe oic" = to buddy@lists.interactivehq.org=20 =A9 Business Wire. All rights reserved.=20 Additional sources of information Tell Me More - From Infoseek Market Statistics - From Quote.Com =20 --=20 --=20 -- Barry Raveendran Greene | || || | Senior Consultant | || || | Consulting Engineering | |||| |||| | tel: +65 738-5535 ext 235 | ..:||||||:..:||||||:.. | e-mail: bgreene@cisco.com | c i s c o S y s t e m s | From owner-apple Fri Jun 6 00:48:43 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id AAA20890 for apple-outgoing; Fri, 6 Jun 1997 00:48:43 +0900 (JST) Received: from sigma.itu.ch (sigma.itu.ch [156.106.128.30]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id AAA20885 for ; Fri, 6 Jun 1997 00:48:36 +0900 (JST) Received: from ties.itu.ch (ties.itu.ch) by ITU.CH (PMDF V5.0-6 #16074) id <01IJQ0BSZTI2B3JZ4M@ITU.CH>; Thu, 05 Jun 1997 17:49:50 +0200 Received: from none.itu.ch (slip139-92-62-94.lau.ch.ibm.net [139.92.62.94]) by ties.itu.ch (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA22094; Thu, 05 Jun 1997 17:49:57 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 17:52:36 -0700 From: Robert Shaw Subject: Re: Internet Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings To: Barry Raveendran Greene Cc: "'APPLe'" Message-id: <33975F54.63B7FD1B@itu.int> Organization: ITU MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.0b5 [en] (Win95; I) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) References: <01BC71E2.1E6F75E0@singapore-dhcp-170.cisco.com> Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Barry Raveendran Greene wrote: > > Internet Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings Internet Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings June 4, 1997 4:49 PM EDT > > WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--June 4, 1997-- > > -- Association for Interactive Media announces a new representative > > coalition to examine management and operations of the Internet -- > Yeah...go to their web site and read their white paper (oh yeah, by the way, written by NSI). What an incredible coincidence! :-) http://www.interactivehq.org/oic/html/oic_paper__1.html Bob -- Robert Shaw (shaw@itu.int) Advisor, Global Information Infrastructure International Telecommunication Union (http://www.itu.int) Place des Nations, 1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland From owner-apple Fri Jun 6 03:53:10 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id DAA21841 for apple-outgoing; Fri, 6 Jun 1997 03:53:10 +0900 (JST) Received: from ng.netgate.net (root@ng.netgate.net [204.145.147.10]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id DAA21836 for ; Fri, 6 Jun 1997 03:53:07 +0900 (JST) Received: from [205.214.160.119] (d48.netgate.net [205.214.160.82]) by ng.netgate.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA29506; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 11:54:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <01BC71E2.1E6F75E0@singapore-dhcp-170.cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 11:53:16 -0700 To: Barry Raveendran Greene From: Dave Crocker Subject: Re: Internet Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings Cc: "'APPLe'" Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Test for the reader: How many false and misleading statements can you find in this press release. I'll give you one, for free: Apparently AIM is now admitting that they have NO companies yet lined up in support of their effort. d/ ---------------------------- Dave Crocker, Director +1 408 246 8253 Internet Mail Consortium (f) +1 408 249 6205 675 Spruce Dr. dcrocker@imc.org Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA http://www.imc.org Also: iPOC member, expressing personal opinions http://www.gtld-mou.org From owner-apple Fri Jun 6 09:09:36 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id JAA23231 for apple-outgoing; Fri, 6 Jun 1997 09:09:36 +0900 (JST) Received: from diablo.cisco.com (diablo.cisco.com [171.68.223.106]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id JAA2322From owner-apple Mon Jun 9 20:25:53 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id UAA20038 for apple-outgoing; Mon, 9 Jun 1997 20:25:53 +0900 (JST) Received: from uxmail.ust.hk (root@uxmail.ust.hk [143.89.14.30]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id UAA20032; Mon, 9 Jun 1997 20:25:37 +0900 (JST) Received: from mmueller.ust.hk ([143.89.231.91]) by uxmail.ust.hk with SMTP id <102219-11893>; Mon, 9 Jun 1997 19:29:04 +0800 Message-ID: <339BDBBA.2F3F@usthk.ust.hk> Date: Mon, 09 Jun 1997 19:32:26 +0900 From: Milton Mueller Reply-To: milton@usthk.ust.hk X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David R Conrad CC: apple@apnic.net Subject: Re: Internet Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings References: <199706062204.HAA00310@nostromo.apnic.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk C'mon, David You're being a zealot, so the religion analogy is quite appropriate. So the TLD name doesn't resolve? This is bad. About as bad as not being able to send files or exchange disks with my friends who used Apple Computers (until recently). About as bad as not being able to use a CDMA handset in a GSM territory. New technologies always come with the price of discoordination, but this also brings the benefits of greater innovation. As in the Apple-IBM competition and the GSM-other competition, greater compatibility may evolve in time. Or, the competing systems may imposed prices on users that are just not worth the benefits. This is the issue. And it's a long way from being a simple call. --Milton Mueller David R Conrad wrote: > > Hi, > > >>And you will tell this to the 99.95% of the Internet who can't reach > >>the bogus tlds? Sounds like a *real* productive use of time... > > ^^^^^ > >Err ... how if I tell you that my religion is *REAL* and yours > >is *BOGUS*? > > Umm. I'm not talking about religion. I'm talking about whether or not > 99.95% of the Internet can resolve a multi-character string at the end of a > domain name. It is a technical reality that the DNS assumes a single > coherent namespace. You can argue that it shouldn't be that way (as you can > argue pi should equal 4), but pretending (as Jim Fleming does) that it > doesn't matter and that you can have an indeterminate number of root name > server views doesn't mean people who don't happen to point to your particular > set of root name servers can resolve your name. > > >Anyway, for the last 500 years, there exists 20% of entities > >who think have more privileges than the rest 80% ones. > > Well, actually, they had reason to think that -- they *did/do* have more > privileges. Whether or not that was/is appropriate depends on the context > and circumstances. > > >Those 20%-s usually use awful terms like: "invent", "discovery", > >"first-come-first-served", "international law", "patent", "copy-right", > >"property", etc. > > "awful" terms? Inventors, authors, and artists should not expect to receive > payment for their work, eh? > > >Who cares the 80%-s ? Nevertheless, once those 80%-s understand their > >real right, they will tell the rest about which one is the bogus one :-). > > People, regardless of their numbers, do not have a right to steal. > > Regards, > -drc From owner-apple Mon Jun 9 22:17:10 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id WAA20396 for apple-outgoing; Mon, 9 Jun 1997 22:17:10 +0900 (JST) Received: from malvar.ph.net ([202.47.12.253]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id WAA20389; Mon, 9 Jun 1997 22:17:05 +0900 (JST) Received: (from hcadiz@localhost) by malvar.ph.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) id VAA13256; Mon, 9 Jun 1997 21:11:12 +0800 (HKT) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 21:11:12 +0800 (HKT) Message-Id: <199706091311.VAA13256@malvar.ph.net> From: "Horacio T. Cadiz" To: milton@usthk.ust.hk CC: davidc@apnic.net, apple@apnic.net In-reply-to: <339BDBBA.2F3F@usthk.ust.hk> (message from Milton Mueller on Mon, 09 Jun 1997 19:32:26 +0900) Subject: Re: Internet Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk >So the TLD name doesn't resolve? This is >bad. About as bad as not being able to send files or >exchange disks with my friends who used Apple Computers >(until recently). About as bad as not being able to >use a CDMA handset in a GSM territory. New technologies >always come with the price of discoordination, but this >also brings the benefits of greater innovation. I think it is worse than that. It is as bad as dialing +63 2 6718046 outside the Philippines and expecting that +63 will be resolved to the Philippines, 2 to Manila, and 6718046 to a telephone number in my office. However, because the local telco does not "resolve" the +63 at all or it "resolves" it to a different country, I will not receive the call. Bombim **************************************************************** * Horacio T. Cadiz hcadiz@ph.net www.ph.net/~hcadiz * * Philippine Network Foundation, Inc (PFI) * * finger hcadiz@gabriela.ph.net for PGP key * *--------------------------------------------------------------* * "Carpe per diem!" "Seize the paycheck!" * **************************************************************** From owner-apple Tue Jun 10 05:18:08 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id FAA24210 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 05:18:08 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id FAA24203 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 05:18:05 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA02361 for ; Mon, 9 Jun 1997 15:09:29 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC74E8.29E46580@webster.unety.net>; Mon, 9 Jun 1997 15:16:54 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC74E8.29E46580@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "'apple@apnic.net'" Subject: FW: Iperdome Announcement Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 15:16:52 -0500 Encoding: 61 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk ---------- From: Jay@Iperdome.com[SMTP:Jay@Iperdome.com] Sent: Monday, June 09, 1997 12:59 AM To: edns-discuss@MCS.Net Cc: newdom@ar.com Subject: Iperdome Announcement FYI . . . FOR RELEASE JUNE 9, 1997 -- 9:00 a.m. EST Iperdome, Inc. and ANS Internet Solutions Join Hands to Offer Personal Domain Names in India ATLANTA, NEW DELHI -- June 9, 1997: Iperdome, Inc. of USA and ANS Internet Solutions of India have teamed up to offer Personal Domain Names under the ".per" Top Level Domain (TLD). The initial target for these services are the highly mobile software professionals of India who take short term assignments at assorted locations throughout the World. According to Mr. Alok Kumar, Chief Executive Officer of ANS Internet Solutions, this large group of clients will benefit from the substantial increase in flexibility that Personal Domain Names offer. Of particular interest are the IperSpace (tm) eMail and WWW services. IperSpace (tm) gives Internet users an easy way to use their Personal Domain Name in simplified WWW and email addressing. Best of all, these simplified addresses remain the same, regardless of how many times an Internet user changes Internet Service Providers (ISPs), jobs, or email addresses. It is expected that these services will provide significant relief in the business and corporate environments where email addresses are getting complex and difficult to recall. To resolve these new domain names, Iperdome uses the private root servers of eDNS and other root server confederations. In addition, Iperdome is seeking inclusion in the public root servers, and is an active participant in the political debate regarding Internet governance. ANS Internet Solutions is a leading edge, entrepreneurial company that develops home pages and provides registration services for Indian corporations and clients. It is a part of ANS Software (P) Ltd. Group, an Indian software development company having diversified business interests in India and Worldwide. Iperdome, Inc. is a new company formed specifically to offer Personal Domain Names under the ".per" TLD. Iperdome was the host for the eDNS Charter meeting in Atlanta, and has recently aligned with companies like Network Solutions, Inc. and PSINet, Inc. to oppose the IAHC proposal. Iperdome strongly supports an open discussion about Internet governance, and is a leading supporter of free-market based solutions for the Internet. Iperdome can be found at http://www.iperdome.com. Regards, Jay Fenello President, Iperdome, Inc. 404-250-3242 http://www.iperdome.com From owner-apple Tue Jun 10 06:19:02 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id GAA24498 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 06:19:02 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id GAA24493 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 06:18:59 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA02478; Mon, 9 Jun 1997 16:10:23 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC74F0.AC065340@webster.unety.net>; Mon, 9 Jun 1997 16:17:48 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC74F0.AC065340@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "'milton@usthk.ust.hk'" Cc: "apple@apnic.net" Subject: RE: Internet Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 16:17:47 -0500 Encoding: 20 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk On Monday, June 09, 1997 5:32 AM, Milton Mueller[SMTP:milton@usthk.ust.hk] wrote: @ C'mon, David @ You're being a zealot, so the religion analogy is @ quite appropriate. @ David makes his living allocating Internet resources to people. If Internet resources become more fairly and easily available, then David is out of business. It is human nature that David Conrad would protect his "gravy train". -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation http://www.Unir.Corp From owner-apple Tue Jun 10 10:26:38 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id KAA26326 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 10:26:38 +0900 (JST) Received: from malvar.ph.net ([202.47.12.253]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id KAA26321 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 10:26:34 +0900 (JST) Received: (from hcadiz@localhost) by malvar.ph.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA03511; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 09:26:34 +0800 (HKT) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 09:26:34 +0800 (HKT) Message-Id: <199706100126.JAA03511@malvar.ph.net> From: "Horacio T. Cadiz" To: JimFleming@unety.net CC: apple@apnic.net In-reply-to: <01BC74E8.29E46580@webster.unety.net> (message from Jim Fleming on Mon, 9 Jun 1997 15:16:52 -0500) Subject: Re: FW: Iperdome Announcement Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk > ATLANTA, NEW DELHI -- June 9, 1997: Iperdome, Inc. of USA and ANS >Internet Solutions of India have teamed up to offer Personal Domain Names >under the ".per" Top Level Domain (TLD). The initial target for these >services are the highly mobile software professionals of India who take >short term assignments at assorted locations throughout the World. I hope they are told that ".per" is not standard. **************************************************************** * Horacio T. Cadiz hcadiz@ph.net www.ph.net/~hcadiz * * Philippine Network Foundation, Inc (PFI) * * finger hcadiz@gabriela.ph.net for PGP key * *--------------------------------------------------------------* * "Carpe per diem!" "Seize the paycheck!" * **************************************************************** From owner-apple Tue Jun 10 10:31:38 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id KAA26357 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 10:31:38 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id KAA26352 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 10:31:35 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA02874; Mon, 9 Jun 1997 20:22:58 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC7513.F53BD9E0@webster.unety.net>; Mon, 9 Jun 1997 20:30:23 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC7513.F53BD9E0@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "'Horacio T. Cadiz'" Cc: "apple@apnic.net" , "'Jay@Iperdome.com'" Subject: RE: FW: Iperdome Announcement Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 20:30:22 -0500 Encoding: 33 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk On Tuesday, June 10, 1997 4:26 AM, Horacio T. Cadiz[SMTP:hcadiz@ph.net] wrote: @ @ @ > ATLANTA, NEW DELHI -- June 9, 1997: Iperdome, Inc. of USA and ANS @ >Internet Solutions of India have teamed up to offer Personal Domain Names @ >under the ".per" Top Level Domain (TLD). The initial target for these @ >services are the highly mobile software professionals of India who take @ >short term assignments at assorted locations throughout the World. @ @ I hope they are told that ".per" is not standard. @ @ **************************************************************** @ * Horacio T. Cadiz hcadiz@ph.net www.ph.net/~hcadiz * @ * Philippine Network Foundation, Inc (PFI) * @ * finger hcadiz@gabriela.ph.net for PGP key * @ *--------------------------------------------------------------* @ * "Carpe per diem!" "Seize the paycheck!" * @ **************************************************************** @ @ Standard or wide-spread ? Can you point to the "standards" ? I notice you mention PGP, is that a standard ? -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation http://www.Unir.Corp From owner-apple Tue Jun 10 13:02:39 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id NAA26984 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 13:02:39 +0900 (JST) Received: from ng.netgate.net (root@ng.netgate.net [204.145.147.10]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id NAA26979 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 13:02:35 +0900 (JST) Received: from [205.214.160.83] (d94.netgate.net [205.214.160.132]) by ng.netgate.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA10030 for ; Mon, 9 Jun 1997 21:04:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199706100126.JAA03511@malvar.ph.net> References: <01BC74E8.29E46580@webster.unety.net> (message from Jim Fleming on Mon, 9 Jun 1997 15:16:52 -0500) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 21:05:14 -0700 To: apple@apnic.net From: Dave Crocker Subject: Re: FW: Iperdome Announcement Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk At 6:26 PM -0700 6/9/97, Horacio T. Cadiz wrote: > >under the ".per" Top Level Domain (TLD). The initial target for these > > I hope they are told that ".per" is not standard. I hope they are told that 99.5% of the Internet won't even SEE .per. This means that they won't be able to connect to .per web sites and won't be able to send mail to people with .per email addresses. d/ ---------------------------- Dave Crocker, Director +1 408 246 8253 Internet Mail Consortium (f) +1 408 249 6205 675 Spruce Dr. dcrocker@imc.org Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA http://www.imc.org Also: iPOC member, expressing personal opinions http://www.gtld-mou.org From owner-apple Tue Jun 10 14:18:10 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id OAA27607 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 14:18:10 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id OAA27602 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 14:18:08 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA03156; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 00:09:30 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC7533.9B129740@webster.unety.net>; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 00:16:56 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC7533.9B129740@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "apple@apnic.net" , "'Dave Crocker'" Cc: "'newdom@ar.com'" Subject: RE: FW: Iperdome Announcement Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 00:16:55 -0500 Encoding: 37 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk On Monday, June 09, 1997 11:05 PM, Dave Crocker[SMTP:dcrocker@imc.org] wrote: @ At 6:26 PM -0700 6/9/97, Horacio T. Cadiz wrote: @ > >under the ".per" Top Level Domain (TLD). The initial target for these @ > @ > I hope they are told that ".per" is not standard. @ @ I hope they are told that 99.5% of the Internet won't even SEE .per. This @ means that they won't be able to connect to .per web sites and won't be @ able to send mail to people with .per email addresses. @ @ d/ @ @ @ ---------------------------- @ Dave Crocker, Director +1 408 246 8253 @ Internet Mail Consortium (f) +1 408 249 6205 @ 675 Spruce Dr. dcrocker@imc.org @ Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA http://www.imc.org @ @ Also: iPOC member, expressing personal opinions http://www.gtld-mou.org @ This is only because the U.S. Government has not yet added the new Top Level Domains to the legacy Root Name Server Confederation that they control. Also, there is a group developing a Root Name Server Confederation for Australia. As soon as major areas of the world realize that they can be a peer of the U.S. things will change. -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation http://www.Unir.Corp From owner-apple Tue Jun 10 16:14:18 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id QAA28342 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 16:14:18 +0900 (JST) Received: from uxmail.ust.hk (root@uxmail.ust.hk [143.89.14.30]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id QAA28334 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 16:13:45 +0900 (JST) Received: from BMZ049 ([143.89.57.74]) by uxmail.ust.hk with SMTP id <102290-17029>; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 15:16:31 +0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.16.19970610071625.235f6482@pop.ust.hk> X-Sender: milton@pop.ust.hk X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 15:16:25 +0800 To: "Horacio T. Cadiz" From: Milton Mueller Subject: Re: Internet Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings Cc: apple@apnic.net Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk It is neither worse nor better. It is exactly the same. The USA experienced this kind of competition among telephone companies for 25 years. Inconvenient? Yep. About 1918 people started getting tired of it. But the competition during that period (1894-1920) is one reason why the USA had a telephone system that covered the entire country, achieving by 1920 levels of telephone penetration and geographic coverage the rest of the world didn't attain until the 1970s (or later). At 09:11 PM 06/9/97 +0800, you wrote: > I think it is worse than that. It is as bad as >dialing +63 2 6718046 outside the Philippines and expecting that >+63 will be resolved to the Philippines, 2 to Manila, and 6718046 to >a telephone number in my office. However, because >the local telco does not "resolve" the +63 at all or it >"resolves" it to a different country, I will not receive the call. > > >Bombim >**************************************************************** >* Horacio T. Cadiz hcadiz@ph.net www.ph.net/~hcadiz * >* Philippine Network Foundation, Inc (PFI) * >* finger hcadiz@gabriela.ph.net for PGP key * >*--------------------------------------------------------------* >* "Carpe per diem!" "Seize the paycheck!" * >**************************************************************** > > M I L T O N M U E L L E R ------------------------------------------------------ m i l t o n @ u s t h k . u s t . h k From owner-apple Tue Jun 10 16:22:13 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id QAA28464 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 16:22:13 +0900 (JST) Received: from nostromo.apnic.net (root@[202.131.3.130]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id QAA28436; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 16:21:34 +0900 (JST) Received: from nostromo.apnic.net (davidc@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nostromo.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA00230; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 21:46:02 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <199706101246.VAA00230@nostromo.apnic.net> To: milton@usthk.ust.hk cc: apple@apnic.net Subject: Re: Internet Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 09 Jun 1997 19:32:26 +0900." <339BDBBA.2F3F@usthk.ust.hk> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 21:46:01 +0900 From: David R Conrad Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk George, >You're being a zealot, so the religion analogy is quite appropriate. A "zealot"? Actually not, however if it makes you happy to consider me that way, feel free. Of course, I'd prefer to avoid name calling, but since we're talking about names... >So the TLD name doesn't resolve? This is >bad. About as bad as not being able to send files or >exchange disks with my friends who used Apple Computers >(until recently). We seem to have different views of the value of domain names on the Internet. I'm not quite sure how you view domain names, but I see them as an organization's identity on the Internet. When I connect to IBM.COM, I would much prefer to be connected to the rather large company based in Armonk, New York instead of somebody's PC in her basement running a web server. You see, Larry, the Internet has no other way of identifying sites. IP addresses change. URLs use domain names. People put domain names on their business cards, letter head, bill board advertisements, etc. People also seem to have a strange attachment to their identities on the Internet -- people have even sued each other for particular names and for some reason, people assume certain domain names are associated with certain sites. >About as bad as not being able to use a CDMA handset in a GSM territory. Interesting analogy, however it would seem a bit specious since there exist different cellular technologies today, whereas there is exactly one naming technology on the Internet. A more appropriate analogy would be for a tiny minority of the telephone using community to decide telephone country code 1 now means Tuvalu instead of the US. >New technologies always come with the price of discoordination, but this >also brings the benefits of greater innovation. I suppose innovation would indeed result as software developers desparately try to make the Internet usable for the general user again. Also, I imagine there would be tremendous innovation in the legal field as people figure out how to sue others in various countries to try to get their names back. Seems a bit counter-productive to me. >As in the Apple-IBM competition and the GSM-other competition, greater >compatibility may evolve in time. No doubt. Of course, but Fred, wouldn't you agree there are all sorts of ugly implications in the interim? For example, assuming incoherent trees, when you send mail to apple@apnic.net, wouldn't it be embarrassing for your mail to actually end up in the people-who-molest-fruit-trees@unety.net which just happened to obtain the TLD apnic.net in a "root name server confederation" that your provider was harrased into pointing to? Wouldn't it be annoying to point your web browser at www.sg and get www.playboy.com? Wouldn't it be strange to have your love letter to your SO end up going to the personal ads of a newspaper in Truth or Consequences, New Mexico? Yes, solutions would likely evolve over time to deal with the incoherency of the name trees -- most likely by throwing out the DNS name space and replacing it with a numeric strings or licence plate type labels. Seems a bit counter-productive, or more accurately, silly, to propose this, wouldn't you agree, Henry? >Or, the competing systems may imposed prices on users >that are just not worth the benefits. This is the issue. Exactly. >And it's a long way from being a simple call. On the contrary, Joe, the technology the Internet uses TODAY was designed with the assumption that there is a SINGLE COHERENT name space root. Fleming and company's silliness breaks this fundamental assumption and provides absolutely no way to resolve the (international) conflicts that would result. If you want to replace that technology to allow for multiple personality disorder, feel free. However, I suspect people would expect you to come up with a migration plan a little more elaborate than "break it and people will innovate and come up with fixes". Regards, David (or is that Randy?) From owner-apple Tue Jun 10 16:37:46 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id QAA28702 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 16:37:46 +0900 (JST) Received: from nostromo.apnic.net (root@[202.131.3.130]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id QAA28677; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 16:36:16 +0900 (JST) Received: from nostromo.apnic.net (davidc@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nostromo.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id BAA00432; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 01:37:00 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <199706101637.BAA00432@nostromo.apnic.net> To: Jim Fleming cc: "'milton@usthk.ust.hk'" , "apple@apnic.net" Subject: Re: Internet Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 09 Jun 1997 16:17:47 EST." <01BC74F0.AC065340@webster.unety.net> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 01:36:57 +0900 From: David R Conrad Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Jim, Please at least pretend to be constructive. Regards, -drc P.S. APNIC doesn't allocate domains -- we would gain or lose nothing regardless of any decision on DNS issues (other than our life getting more difficult like the rest of the planet if your "root server confederations" were anything more than a bad joke). P.P.S. I notice you've never answered my question on what would happen if one registrar allocates a TLD under one "root name server confederation" and other registrar allocates the same TLD under another "root name server confederation". Don't suppose you'd care to anwer now... --------- >On Monday, June 09, 1997 5:32 AM, Milton Mueller[SMTP:milton@usthk.ust.hk] wro te: >@ C'mon, David >@ You're being a zealot, so the religion analogy is >@ quite appropriate. >@ > > >David makes his living allocating Internet resources >to people. If Internet resources become more fairly >and easily available, then David is out of business. > >It is human nature that David Conrad would protect >his "gravy train". > >-- >Jim Fleming >Unir Corporation >http://www.Unir.Corp > > > From owner-apple Tue Jun 10 17:07:14 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id RAA29179 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 17:07:14 +0900 (JST) Received: from uxmail.ust.hk (root@uxmail.ust.hk [143.89.14.30]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id RAA29171 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 17:06:55 +0900 (JST) Received: from BMZ049 ([143.89.57.74]) by uxmail.ust.hk with SMTP id <102729-17029>; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 16:09:09 +0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.16.19970610080910.235f4d94@pop.ust.hk> X-Sender: milton@pop.ust.hk X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 16:09:10 +0800 To: apple@apnic.net From: Milton Mueller Subject: RE: Internet Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk David's a smart guy and I respect his opinion. He's making the same point (although much more heatedly) that I asked you about after your first message, which is: *how does a completely open and competitive system ensure connectivity?* Your answer--"we're working on it"--confirms both of our perceptions that what is being proposed is a form of "systems competition" which will result in some discoordination and fragmentation. Where David and I differ, I think, is that to him this prospect is self-evidently evil and must be exorcised with the most powerful spells available. To me, it's a routine part of the early stages of a network technology's evolution, and in those stages the benefits of decentralization and competition *may* outweigh the costs. Notice the conditional language. I also think there may be some as yet undiscovered middle ground between the ITU-IAHC "centralists" and the total anarcho-capitalist decentralists such as yourself. I don't think it is persuasive to portray David personally or APNIC institutionally as grasping monopolists, especially when the "opposition" in this case consists of commercially motivated nameservers. Both sides of this dispute have some interest in gravy, I'm sure (although in David's case it's more likely to be sushi and wasabe) but (not being a total cynic), both sides must make some cogent appeal to the general interest of the users and suppliers involved in the industry. At 04:17 PM 06/9/97 -0500, Fleming wrote: >David makes his living allocating Internet resources >to people. >If Internet resources become more fairly >and easily available, then David is out of business. > Is APNIC's service so bad that it will immediately collapse if competing nameservers are allowed? >It is human nature that David Conrad would protect >his "gravy train". > >-- >Jim Fleming >Unir Corporation >http://www.Unir.Corp > > M I L T O N M U E L L E R ------------------------------------------------------ m i l t o n @ u s t h k . u s t . h k From owner-apple Tue Jun 10 19:19:33 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id TAA00397 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 19:19:33 +0900 (JST) Received: from malvar.ph.net ([202.47.12.253]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id TAA00392 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 19:19:28 +0900 (JST) Received: (from hcadiz@localhost) by malvar.ph.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) id SAA18236; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 18:19:24 +0800 (HKT) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 18:19:24 +0800 (HKT) Message-Id: <199706101019.SAA18236@malvar.ph.net> From: "Horacio T. Cadiz" To: milton@uxmail.ust.hk CC: apple@apnic.net In-reply-to: <1.5.4.16.19970610071625.235f6482@pop.ust.hk> (message from Milton Mueller on Tue, 10 Jun 1997 15:16:25 +0800) Subject: Re: Internet Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk >It is neither worse nor better. It is exactly the same. >The USA experienced this kind of competition among >telephone companies for 25 years. Inconvenient? Yep. 25 years! What is that equivalent in Internet dog years? B-) It is worse than the example you gave of IBM PC users not being able to read Mac disks. Bombim **************************************************************** * Horacio T. Cadiz hcadiz@ph.net www.ph.net/~hcadiz * * Philippine Network Foundation, Inc (PFI) * * finger hcadiz@gabriela.ph.net for PGP key * *--------------------------------------------------------------* * "Carpe per diem!" "Seize the paycheck!" * **************************************************************** From owner-apple Tue Jun 10 19:34:21 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id TAA00492 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 19:34:21 +0900 (JST) Received: from malvar.ph.net ([202.47.12.253]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id TAA00487 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 19:34:17 +0900 (JST) Received: (from hcadiz@localhost) by malvar.ph.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) id SAA18648; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 18:33:38 +0800 (HKT) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 18:33:38 +0800 (HKT) Message-Id: <199706101033.SAA18648@malvar.ph.net> From: "Horacio T. Cadiz" To: JimFleming@unety.net CC: apple@apnic.net, Jay@Iperdome.com In-reply-to: <01BC7513.F53BD9E0@webster.unety.net> (message from Jim Fleming on Mon, 9 Jun 1997 20:30:22 -0500) Subject: Re: FW: Iperdome Announcement Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk >@ I hope they are told that ".per" is not standard. >Standard or wide-spread ? Both. ".per" is neither standard nor widespread. >Can you point to the "standards" ? How many resolvers will see it? >I notice you mention PGP, is that a standard ? PGP itself is a standard. I haven't heard of anyone peddling their own incompatible PGP. It is also widespread (not as widespread as what PGP-zealots wish). How about TCP/IP, is that a standard? Bombim **************************************************************** * Horacio T. Cadiz hcadiz@ph.net www.ph.net/~hcadiz * * Philippine Network Foundation, Inc (PFI) * * finger hcadiz@gabriela.ph.net for PGP key * *--------------------------------------------------------------* * "Carpe per diem!" "Seize the paycheck!" * **************************************************************** From owner-apple Tue Jun 10 19:36:40 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id TAA00516 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 19:36:40 +0900 (JST) Received: from malvar.ph.net ([202.47.12.253]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id TAA00510 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 19:36:36 +0900 (JST) Received: (from hcadiz@localhost) by malvar.ph.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) id SAA18785; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 18:36:35 +0800 (HKT) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 18:36:35 +0800 (HKT) Message-Id: <199706101036.SAA18785@malvar.ph.net> From: "Horacio T. Cadiz" To: JimFleming@unety.net CC: apple@apnic.net, dcrocker@imc.org, newdom@ar.com In-reply-to: <01BC7533.9B129740@webster.unety.net> (message from Jim Fleming on Tue, 10 Jun 1997 00:16:55 -0500) Subject: Re: FW: Iperdome Announcement Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk >This is only because the U.S. Government has not >yet added the new Top Level Domains to the legacy >Root Name Server Confederation that they control. What are the chances that they would? Bombim **************************************************************** * Horacio T. Cadiz hcadiz@ph.net www.ph.net/~hcadiz * * Philippine Network Foundation, Inc (PFI) * * finger hcadiz@gabriela.ph.net for PGP key * *--------------------------------------------------------------* * "Carpe per diem!" "Seize the paycheck!" * **************************************************************** From owner-apple Tue Jun 10 20:22:43 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id UAA00865 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 20:22:43 +0900 (JST) Received: from mawar.singnet.com.sg (mawar.singnet.com.sg [165.21.1.19]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id UAA00859; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 20:22:41 +0900 (JST) Received: from melvin (ts900-4314.singnet.com.sg [165.21.154.66]) by mawar.singnet.com.sg (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA00570; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 19:22:52 +0800 (SST) Message-Id: <199706101122.TAA00570@mawar.singnet.com.sg> From: "Melvin Khoo" To: "Horacio T. Cadiz" , Cc: , Subject: Re: Internet Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 19:10:39 +0800 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk > >So the TLD name doesn't resolve? This is > >bad. About as bad as not being able to send files or > >exchange disks with my friends who used Apple Computers > >(until recently). About as bad as not being able to > >use a CDMA handset in a GSM territory. New technologies > >always come with the price of discoordination, but this > >also brings the benefits of greater innovation. > But the Internet IS the INTER-net. Apple isnt't IBM, CDMA isn't GSM. Interconnectivity is key here, and creating new (466 and growing) TLDs that 99.95% of networks can't resolve, nay, aren't interested in resolving, isn't helping to solve things. > > I think it is worse than that. It is as bad as > dialing +63 2 6718046 outside the Philippines and expecting that > +63 will be resolved to the Philippines, 2 to Manila, and 6718046 to > a telephone number in my office. However, because > the local telco does not "resolve" the +63 at all or it > "resolves" it to a different country, I will not receive the call. I agree. The analogy is apt: if INTER-connecting phone circuits don't shake hands, there isn't going to be IDD. -MK From owner-apple Tue Jun 10 21:30:07 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id VAA01287 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 21:30:07 +0900 (JST) Received: from jakarta.regex.com (jakarta.regex.com [207.106.122.2]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with SMTP id VAA01281 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 21:29:57 +0900 (JST) Received: (qmail 16077 invoked from network); 10 Jun 1997 12:22:39 -0000 Received: from yapcs-r2.iscs.nus.sg (HELO yapcs-r2) (137.132.85.230) by tjt.or.id with SMTP; 10 Jun 1997 12:22:39 -0000 Message-ID: <339D48FE.BE623C1@tjt.or.id> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 20:30:54 +0800 From: "Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim" Organization: VLSM-TJT X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (X11; I; Linux 2.0.27 i586) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: apple@apnic.net Subject: Boeing-777 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Break ... let's change topic, lah! I'd like to share my first experience on Boeing-777 :-). - Each passenger has its own display and phone set. Besides "standard" entertainment programs and airplane possition map, it also displays a "cockpit view". As an experienced MS FlightSimulator Boeing-737 pilot, it is quite amusing to watch on how a real pilot descents and lands. - Yes, three "recharging" stations for AC 110/220 Volts. Looking forward for AC outlet on each seat! - Nope, no mouse (yet). - Nope, neither RJ-45 nor RJ-11 connectors on the phone set. Looking forward for either RJ-45 ethernet connector or a web browser on each seat. However, not for US$ 8 per minute! Problems: - should each seat has its own IP address, or one IP address for the whole airplane? - how is the current "routing and DNS" roaming technology? Should the IP addresses be static with dynamic routing ? Or, should the IP addresses dynamic with fix domain names ? wrong mailing list, huh? -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - CEO VLSM-TJT - http://www.tjt.or.id/rms46 ISO-9000:Write down what you do, do what you write down, verify it! From owner-apple Tue Jun 10 23:37:58 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id XAA01854 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 23:37:58 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id XAA01849 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 23:37:51 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA05070; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 09:29:09 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC7581.CA7C3560@webster.unety.net>; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 09:36:36 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC7581.CA7C3560@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "'Horacio T. Cadiz'" Cc: "apple@apnic.net" , "Jay@Iperdome.com" Subject: RE: FW: Iperdome Announcement Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 09:36:35 -0500 Encoding: 45 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk On Tuesday, June 10, 1997 1:33 PM, Horacio T. Cadiz[SMTP:hcadiz@ph.net] wrote: @ How about TCP/IP, is that @ a standard? In my opinion, TCP/IP is not a standard, it is a widely used, ad hoc combination of documentation and software. DOS is in the same category. Standards are typcially labeled such because there is some body actively working on bringing the documentation and implementations to a point where they are bullet-proof AND there is a regular schedule for iterations in the standards process. If you read the "IP" documentation you will see that there are many holes, there are many features which are not used because they are not "standardized". There are also subtle aspects, such as IP options termination, which are left to implementation to discover the "standard". The best way to discover the ad hoc IP "standard" is to read the code. This is not bad when the same code is used by all of the people. The code defines the standard. If you like, maybe we can agree that TCP/IP is a "defacto" standard. It would be nice if it were a real standard, but having developed an ANSI Standard (X3.110), I can tell you it would take a lot of work. I sense that the people involved are not interested in that level of scrutiny. P.S. As you read more about IPv8 next year, you might notice that in extending IP, I have tried to clean up the specifications of the "defacto" standard. It was an interesting exercise and it was surprising to see how many holes there are in something as simple as IP. TCP is another story. -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation http://www.Unir.Corp From owner-apple Tue Jun 10 23:46:36 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id XAA01917 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 23:46:36 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id XAA01912 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 23:46:28 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA05088; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 09:37:42 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC7582.FC21C0C0@webster.unety.net>; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 09:45:09 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC7582.FC21C0C0@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "'Horacio T. Cadiz'" Cc: "apple@apnic.net" , "dcrocker@imc.org" , "newdom@ar.com" Subject: RE: FW: Iperdome Announcement Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 09:45:08 -0500 Encoding: 51 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk On Tuesday, June 10, 1997 1:36 PM, Horacio T. Cadiz[SMTP:hcadiz@ph.net] wrote: @ @ >This is only because the U.S. Government has not @ >yet added the new Top Level Domains to the legacy @ >Root Name Server Confederation that they control. @ @ What are the chances that they would? @ In my opinion, the chances are very high. The U.S. Government is interested in expanding the Internet to help create jobs, improve commerce, and to help more people communicate. Why would they want to continue to allow a few people to restrain trade, especially when the U.S. Government finances much of the infrastructure. @@@@ http://ksgwww.harvard.edu/iip/cai/bradner.html "In whose domain: name service in adolescence" Don Mitchell (NSF) Scott Bradner (Harvard) K Claffy (NLANR) ... "Historically, U.S. federal government support of the intellectual infrastructure has effectively separated operational from governance or policy activities in Internet community mindset. Much of the community, for instance, has now accepted the need to pay for Internet connectivity, but fails to understand that the U.S. government also supported development of the protocols and policies that frame the provision of that connectivity, and that their continued evolution will be necessary to facilitate sustained scalability. Thus, as the U.S. government withdraws support from the provision of visible operational services (e.g., NSFNET or domain name registration services) there is little appreciation of the fact that they still finance a majority of the invisible (to the end) infrastructure underlying Internet services." @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation http://www.Unir.Corp From owner-apple Tue Jun 10 23:53:49 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id XAA01991 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 23:53:49 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id XAA01986 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 23:53:43 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA05101; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 09:44:35 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC7583.F26B11C0@webster.unety.net>; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 09:52:02 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC7583.F26B11C0@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "apple@apnic.net" , "'Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim'" Subject: RE: Boeing-777 Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 09:52:01 -0500 Encoding: 52 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk On Tuesday, June 10, 1997 7:30 AM, Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim[SMTP:ibrahim@tjt.or.id] wrote: @ Break ... let's change topic, lah! @ I'd like to share my first experience on Boeing-777 :-). @ @ - Each passenger has its own display and phone set. Besides "standard" @ entertainment programs and airplane possition map, it also displays @ a "cockpit view". As an experienced MS FlightSimulator Boeing-737 @ pilot, @ it is quite amusing to watch on how a real pilot descents and lands. @ - Yes, three "recharging" stations for AC 110/220 Volts. @ Looking forward for AC outlet on each seat! @ - Nope, no mouse (yet). @ - Nope, neither RJ-45 nor RJ-11 connectors on the phone set. @ Looking forward for either RJ-45 ethernet connector or a web browser @ on each seat. However, not for US$ 8 per minute! @ @ Problems: @ - should each seat has its own IP address, or one IP address for the @ whole airplane? @ - how is the current "routing and DNS" roaming technology? @ Should the IP addresses be static with dynamic routing ? @ Or, should the IP addresses dynamic with fix domain names ? @ @ wrong mailing list, huh? @ @ -- @ Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - CEO VLSM-TJT - http://www.tjt.or.id/rms46 @ ISO-9000:Write down what you do, do what you write down, verify it! @ @ You make some good points. In my opinion, the above developments will be based on "market-driven" decisions. In order to have market-driven decisions, we have to have a market. In order to have a market we have to make sure that certain individuals are not trying to control the market to their advantage. In some cases, governments are required to make sure that the playing field is level and fair. -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation http://www.Unir.Corp From owner-apple Wed Jun 11 00:06:26 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id AAA02222 for apple-outgoing; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 00:06:26 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id AAA02217 for ; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 00:06:23 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA05118; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 09:57:21 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC7585.BB0CA700@webster.unety.net>; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 10:04:48 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC7585.BB0CA700@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "milton@usthk.ust.hk" Cc: "apple@apnic.net" , "'newdom@ar.com'" Subject: RE: Internet Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 10:04:47 -0500 Encoding: 45 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk On Tuesday, June 10, 1997 7:46 AM, David R Conrad[SMTP:davidc@apnic.net] wrote: @ @ Seems a bit counter-productive, or more accurately, silly, to propose this, @ wouldn't you agree, Henry? @ Yes, this sort of F.U.D. (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) is silly and not very productive. People that are deploying new Root Name Server Confederations work hard every day to make sure that domain names do not collide. All of that happens behind the scenes at no charge to the Internet community. When the Australia Root Name Server Confederation comes on line, they will be part of the global "synchronization" that keeps the various TLDs in order. No one wants the collisions that Mr. Conrad is proposing, except for maybe the ISOC and the IAHC. For people not familiar with all of the background, the IAHC was launched by the IANA for legal protection. The IAHC has made suggestions. One of the suggestions is the selection of 7 Top Level Domains they would like to develop. Guess what, the IAHC apparently intentionally selected Top Level Domains that collide with EXISTING registries. They are the ones that are creating the potential for collisions that Mr. Conrad claim would be bad for the Internet. The rest of the Internet community is avoiding collisions and via discussions like these, collisions around the world can be avoided. A world-wide round table of Root Name Server Confederation owner/operators ultimately have to work the collisions out, but each person on the Internet gets to help work to prevent collisions. -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation http://www.Unir.Corp From owner-apple Wed Jun 11 00:10:36 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id AAA02297 for apple-outgoing; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 00:10:36 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id AAA02290 for ; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 00:10:30 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA05142 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 10:01:49 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC7586.5A7C6320@webster.unety.net>; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 10:09:16 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC7586.5A7C6320@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "'apple@apnic.net'" Subject: FW: New Root Servers and DN Registry to go live in AU Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 10:09:15 -0500 Encoding: 82 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk ---------- From: Adam Todd[SMTP:at@AH.NET] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 1997 4:12 AM To: DOMAIN-POLICY@LISTS.INTERNIC.NET Subject: New Root Servers and DN Registry to go live in AU June 10, 1997 - Sydney, Australia New Root Servers for AU and a DN Registry to work for the ISP's were the words of the day spoken by Internet and Public Communications Pioneer, Adam Todd in Sydney today. Mr. Todd has agreed to presure and requests from over 50 ISP's in Australia to help with the Domain Name regsitration and delegation process. Initially as a commercial product the AhNet DN Registry was being designed for the primary purpose of marketing and identity, but with registration issues in Australia taking anywhere from 5 to 30 days to become active a new solution was needed. With much discussion, Internationally and in Australia, about Domain Name Registration, Fees and acceptable time frames, Mr. Todd announced today that the AhNet Registry would be made available to all users of the Internet world wide, for cost of service, offering registrations to delegation under existingly managed Name Space within 4 hours (or less). At the same time, backed by a number of AU ISP's, was the agreement to operate Root Servers on the AU backbones to provide AU ISP's with local Domain Name space as well as provide cached international data from one source. Mr. Todd was firm about Internet Spritied progress to create a reciprical agreement between other DN Root Servers and Registries to avoid Name Space splitting and clashes. These would include InterNIC, eDNS and AlterNIC and by qualification any other suitably ept organisation. Public access to Internet - a way of sharing information and resources - is a key concern expressed by Mr. Todd. "It appears that commercial companies feel they own Internet. What many do not realising is that should ISP's and Network providers become disconnected, the Internet reduces in size," claims Mr. Todd. "It's a co-operative effort that requires the resources, content, services, marketing, support and development of everyone. Without everyone who is involved it would not exist." Mr. Todd clearly indicated that Internet itself is like a book and that you should not judge the content by it's cover. The AhNet web access site is still being cosmetically developed, although functionality of the database interaction with the HTTP server itself is complete. Some advantages of the AhNet DN Applicaitons are the User interface is usable from any host in the world, even portable between systems, as long as the server the code is executed on is connected to Internet and can communicate with the AhNet Host Site. Basic Service Information and current fee structures are available online, and more information and processes are being released as Beta Testing is complete. For further information about AhNet please see http://www.ah.net, or write to Mr. Todd via email mailto:at@ah.net [Released with permission of AhNet] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Adam Todd (1216 6833) Technology and Business Redevelopment Mobile +61 411 466 112 Domain Registration and Network Advisory Phone +61 2 9729 0565 PO BOX 174, Roseville NSW 2069 Pager +61 2 9963 2791 http://203.21.205.2 (NO-DNS Supporters) mailto:atodd@optah.com http://www.optah.com/~at AH.NET Domain Administrator http://www.ah.net mailto:at@ah.net Sending 2 Megs down a 9600 bps line isn't productive. From owner-apple Wed Jun 11 03:14:02 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id DAA03634 for apple-outgoing; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 03:14:02 +0900 (JST) Received: from ng.netgate.net (root@ng.netgate.net [204.145.147.10]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id DAA03629 for ; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 03:13:59 +0900 (JST) Received: from [205.214.160.57] (d23.netgate.net [205.214.160.55]) by ng.netgate.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA13775; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 11:15:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.16.19970610080910.235f4d94@pop.ust.hk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 11:14:26 -0700 To: Milton Mueller From: Dave Crocker Subject: RE: Internet Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings Cc: apple@apnic.net Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk At 1:09 AM -0700 6/10/97, Milton Mueller wrote: >Where David and I differ, I think, is that to him this >prospect is self-evidently evil and must be exorcised >with the most powerful spells available. To me, it's a routine part >of the early stages of a network technology's evolution, and in >those stages the benefits of decentralization and competition *may* >outweigh the costs. Notice the conditional language. I also think Where you and David (and, by the way, THIS David, too, though I'm hard pressed that we all think alike and so well) probably also differ is that this isn't early stages of this network technology, or rather service. The Internet has been functioning for 25 years. The DNS has been functioning quite nicely for more than 10 years. This is not early stages. The anarchy of which you wish to be tolerant would represent a major LOSS of a basic capability for the net, rather than the "simple" confusion that, as you say, is often present when standards are being hashed out. d/ ---------------------------- Dave Crocker, Director +1 408 246 8253 Internet Mail Consortium (f) +1 408 249 6205 675 Spruce Dr. dcrocker@imc.org Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA http://www.imc.org Also: iPOC member, expressing personal opinions http://www.gtld-mou.org From owner-apple Wed Jun 11 04:15:40 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id EAA03993 for apple-outgoing; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 04:15:40 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id EAA03988 for ; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 04:15:37 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA05534; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 14:06:52 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC75A8.965C05E0@webster.unety.net>; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 14:14:19 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC75A8.965C05E0@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "'Dave Crocker'" , Milton Mueller Cc: "apple@apnic.net" Subject: RE: Internet Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 14:14:18 -0500 Encoding: 56 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk On Tuesday, June 10, 1997 1:14 PM, Dave Crocker[SMTP:dcrocker@imc.org] wrote: @ At 1:09 AM -0700 6/10/97, Milton Mueller wrote: @ >Where David and I differ, I think, is that to him this @ >prospect is self-evidently evil and must be exorcised @ >with the most powerful spells available. To me, it's a routine part @ >of the early stages of a network technology's evolution, and in @ >those stages the benefits of decentralization and competition *may* @ >outweigh the costs. Notice the conditional language. I also think @ @ Where you and David (and, by the way, THIS David, too, though I'm @ hard pressed that we all think alike and so well) probably also differ is @ that this isn't early stages of this network technology, or rather service. @ @ The Internet has been functioning for 25 years. The DNS has been @ functioning quite nicely for more than 10 years. This is not early stages. @ @ The anarchy of which you wish to be tolerant would represent a @ major LOSS of a basic capability for the net, rather than the "simple" @ confusion that, as you say, is often present when standards are being @ hashed out. @ @ d/ @ @ @ ---------------------------- @ Dave Crocker, Director +1 408 246 8253 @ Internet Mail Consortium (f) +1 408 249 6205 @ 675 Spruce Dr. dcrocker@imc.org @ Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA http://www.imc.org @ @ Also: iPOC member, expressing personal opinions http://www.gtld-mou.org @ @ @ @ Maybe it is time for the people that have been controlling things for 25 years to give other people a chance to participate. Why is the IANA now trying to move Root Name Servers out of the U.S. ? Is there a technical reason ? Why haven't people helped countries establish their own Root Name Server Confederations to allow them to participate as peers ? Why haven't people encouraged InterNIC-like agencies to be formed in other areas of the world to support generic Top Level Domains ? -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation http://www.Unir.Corp From owner-apple Wed Jun 11 05:37:32 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id FAA04390 for apple-outgoing; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 05:37:32 +0900 (JST) Received: from simon.pacific.net.sg (simon.pacific.net.sg [203.120.90.72]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id FAA04385 for ; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 05:37:30 +0900 (JST) Received: from po.pacific.net.sg (po3.pacific.net.sg [203.120.90.73]) by simon.pacific.net.sg with ESMTP id EAA05413 for ; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 04:39:57 +0800 (SGT) Received: from [210.24.120.77] by po.pacific.net.sg (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-11140) with SMTP id AAA12427 for ; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 04:39:55 +0800 From: "Lau Joon-Nie" To: Subject: Re: Iperdome Announcement Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 04:38:06 +0800 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <19970610203954.AAA12427@[210.24.120.77]> Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Hello all, as a (non-techie, non-practising lawyer) spectator watching these discussions unfold, here's my few cents/dollars' worth from an Asian perspective, given that this *is* after all, an Asia-Pacific list. People often tend to forget that the internet, is, as Melvin pointed out earlier, an INTER-net, interconnected and interoperable, and if I may add, an INTERNATIONAL-net. While we all aknowledge the central role that's been played by the US in creating the internet, Jim Fleming's comments below belie his US assumptions and US-centric view of the net, his confederation efforts notwithstanding. > In my opinion, the chances are very high. The > U.S. Government is interested in expanding the > Internet to help create jobs, improve commerce, > and to help more people communicate. > > Why would they want to continue to allow a > few people to restrain trade, especially when the > U.S. Government finances much of the infrastructure. IMHO, industry players involved in standard-setting or widespread practice adoption have an obligation not just to themselves and their immediate customers but also the rest of the world at large. And this requires an understanding of how different countries and their governments and industries operate. Many Asian govts are more comfortable and familiar with the traditional telecoms "top-down" model of running an infrastructure, and dealing with governmental or international body type authorities when it comes to compliance or formation of global standards, etc. The "bottom up" evolution of the internet however presents to them a new situation where industry players who network with one another often become the defacto "standard/widespread practice" setters. This of course calls to mind questions of who has the *authority and legitimacy* to make for the rest of the global community decisions that affect the way the net operates in over 100 countries around the world - should there be a grouping of industry players, governmental organisations, endusers, etc. - how should it be set up? But leaving that discussion aside for a rainy day, let's focus on the situation that's evolved to where it is today. What we see today IMHO is the result of traditional American mistrust of (government) regulation and monopolistic practices, something which Asians don't have as much of a problem dealing with, given the common existence of state-run monopolies in many areas of essential (e.g. telecoms), and even less-essential services in many Asian countries. But lest we get sidetracked into a discussion abt the pros and cons of such an approach and the historical reasons behind them, let's just accept the situation as a reality for now - it's how these govts best know how or want to do things. In telecoms for instance, they are only slowly now liberalising their markets because of their WTO commitments - a course of action that's taken decades to evolve. > The rest of the Internet community is avoiding collisions > and via discussions like these, collisions around the > world can be avoided. A world-wide round table of Root > Name Server Confederation owner/operators ultimately > have to work the collisions out, but each person on the > Internet gets to help work to prevent collisions. Don't forget that as borderless as the net may be, one ultimately has to face up to and work with the economic, political and to some extent, social, realities that exist in each country - countries with information infrastructures at varying stages of development, some of which are still grappling with the basic issues of telecoms infrastructure, system security, delivery and for some, content control. Once they get these sorted out, will they then have the luxury of turning their attention to other *bigger* issues like domain name and root server administration (some have not even addressed their minds to them. Again, who should act as authority?). While innovative ideas and creative solutions are surely welcomed, they have to be widely accepted and practised for them to be of any use. Most importantly, to me the consumer, they must be practical and cost-effective in the long run. rgds, Joon-Nie ***************** Lau Joon-Nie joonlau@pacific.net.sg "Contrary to what some may think, Singapore *didn't* invent the proxy server" - Professor Bernard Tan Chairman, National Internet Advisory Committee From owner-apple Wed Jun 11 07:08:27 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id HAA04823 for apple-outgoing; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 07:08:27 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id HAA04818 for ; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 07:08:25 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA05801 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 16:59:44 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC75C0.BCD3D0A0@webster.unety.net>; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 17:07:12 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC75C0.BCD3D0A0@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "'apple@apnic.net'" Subject: FW: Domain Issues in Washington Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 17:07:10 -0500 Encoding: 106 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk For those people that prefer a more "top down" approach to settling issues, here is more information on what the U.S. Government is doing. I hope this is not viewed as U.S.-centric. Since the U.S. Government controls one of the most popular Root Name Server Confederations in the world, it is hard not to take note of their activities to resolve how they will have new Top Level Domain names added to that Confederation of servers. As other countries or groups of people develop Root Name Server Confederations, they will likely develop their own "style" of governance over those Root Name Servers. In my opinion, the sum total of "styles" and "cultures" from each of the Root Name Server Confederations will eventually help to shape the "State of the Internet". At the present time, since some countries and regions do not have Root Name Server Confederations, the state of the Internet is the state of the United States. Hopefully, this will change to reflect the growing Internet community outside of the U.S. This change will not occur unless groups of people in various regions step forward and deploy the needed infrastructure. If the infrastructure is not deployed then everything defaults to the U.S.-centric view, and the Southern California view. That view does not reflect the cultural diversity of the International Internet. The future of the Internet is in your hands. It is easy to assume that someone else in your region will make all of the decisions. If you take this position, then you might find that U.S. citizens may come to your region to make those decisions for you. The decisions made by those people may not be in your best interest. If you want to be part of the decision making process, I recommend that you build your Root Name Server Confederations to give you a voice in the future of the DNS. It is hard to have a voice, if you do not have the infrastructure. The infrastructure is within your reach and many people will help you build it. It will only be built if you organize and make it happen. As you can see below, the U.S. will focus on its infrastructure. ======================= ---------- From: Richard J. Sexton[SMTP:richard@sexton.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 1997 12:36 PM To: newdom@ar.com; edns-discuss@MCS.Net Subject: Domain Issues in Washington Forwarded mail: >Richard, > >As one of the dozens of industry attendees at >yesterday's meeting, I prepared a short summary >to describe the essential features, since there >appear to be some misunderstandings passed around. > >cheers, > >----------------------------------------------------- >Yesterday afternoon, an ensemble of US government >agencies collectively announced that a DNS Notice of >Inquiry will be issued in 1-2 weeks that will be >determinative as to how the DNS evolves. This is >a major formal proceeding involving the publication >of a Notice that portrays the developments and issues, >followed by a several week period within which parties >can file comments, followed by a period for "reply >comments" by parties, then followed by a formal >action consisting of findings, policy determinations, >and orders. They expect to do this quickly - within >4-6 months. > >The NOI is the collective action of all the Federal >Government agencies, FCC, NTIA, State, White House, >OMB, Intelligence Community, DOD, DOE, NSF, etc., etc. >The solidarity here is fairly unusual. It will also >be done in coordination with foreign governments >and organizations like the EU, and will consider >general national models for registration applicable >worldwide. > >It should also be noted that many major companies and >industry organizations were present. Many questions >were asked over the two hour period. Nearly everyone >commented favourably. No one opposed the move. They >also emphasized they were beginning with a clean slate, >and would look not only at all possibilities, but >at the concurrent existence of multiple approaches. >----------------------------------------------------- -- richard@sexton.org The right to revolt has sources deep in our history. -- Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas From owner-apple Wed Jun 11 11:49:47 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id LAA05690 for apple-outgoing; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 11:49:47 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id LAA05684; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 11:49:44 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA06078; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 21:41:03 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC75E8.09F14300@webster.unety.net>; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 21:48:31 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC75E8.09F14300@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "'David R Conrad'" , "Horacio T. Cadiz" Cc: "apple@apnic.net" , "dcrocker@imc.org" , "newdom@ar.com" Subject: RE: FW: Iperdome Announcement Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 21:48:30 -0500 Encoding: 49 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk On Wednesday, June 11, 1997 6:43 AM, David R Conrad[SMTP:davidc@apnic.net] wrote: @ Bombim, @ @ > >This is only because the U.S. Government has not @ > >yet added the new Top Level Domains to the legacy @ > >Root Name Server Confederation that they control. @ > @ > What are the chances that they would? @ @ None, for the simple reason that the U.S. Government doesn't add *any* names @ to the root name servers. The IANA does. Calling the IANA the U.S. @ Goverment is a bit of a stretch, even for the Flemster. @ @ Will the IANA add new TLDs? Undoubtedly. After all, the IANA has already @ publicly stated that the IAHC proposed procedures will be how new TLDs will @ be defined. @ @ Regards, @ -drc @ @ Here is a sample clipping from Network Solutions, Inc. the people that are currently contracted to help operate the InterNIC by the U.S. Government. @@@@ http://www.netsol.com/announcements/quotes.html What They Are Saying About the IAHC Plan "I was hoping that Jon Postel [of IANA] and Vint Cerf [of MCI] and a lot of other very knowledgeable and intelligent people would have done what's in the long-term best interests of the [Internet] community . . . . They were motivated by interests of power and timing." -- William Schrader, chairman, president, CEO and founder of PSINet, Network World <...> @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation http://www.Unir.Corp From owner-apple Wed Jun 11 11:50:18 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id LAA05698 for apple-outgoing; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 11:50:18 +0900 (JST) Received: from nostromo.apnic.net (root@[202.131.3.130]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id LAA05652; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 11:44:14 +0900 (JST) Received: from nostromo.apnic.net (davidc@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nostromo.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id UAA00968; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 20:44:29 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <199706111144.UAA00968@nostromo.apnic.net> To: "Horacio T. Cadiz" cc: JimFleming@unety.net, apple@apnic.net, dcrocker@imc.org, newdom@ar.com Subject: Re: FW: Iperdome Announcement In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 10 Jun 1997 18:36:35 +0800." <199706101036.SAA18785@malvar.ph.net> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 20:43:56 +0900 From: David R Conrad Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Bombim, > >This is only because the U.S. Government has not > >yet added the new Top Level Domains to the legacy > >Root Name Server Confederation that they control. > > What are the chances that they would? None, for the simple reason that the U.S. Government doesn't add *any* names to the root name servers. The IANA does. Calling the IANA the U.S. Goverment is a bit of a stretch, even for the Flemster. Will the IANA add new TLDs? Undoubtedly. After all, the IANA has already publicly stated that the IAHC proposed procedures will be how new TLDs will be defined. Regards, -drc From owner-apple Wed Jun 11 12:39:52 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id MAA06056 for apple-outgoing; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 12:39:52 +0900 (JST) Received: from nostromo.apnic.net (root@[202.131.3.130]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id MAA06013; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 12:38:16 +0900 (JST) Received: from nostromo.apnic.net (davidc@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nostromo.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA02096; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 21:38:22 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <199706111238.VAA02096@nostromo.apnic.net> To: Jim Fleming cc: "milton@usthk.ust.hk" , "apple@apnic.net" , "'newdom@ar.com'" Subject: Re: Internet Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 10 Jun 1997 10:04:47 EST." <01BC7585.BB0CA700@webster.unety.net> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 21:38:19 +0900 From: David R Conrad Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk [Sigh, like eating just one potato chip...] >People that are deploying new Root Name Server Confederations work hard >every day to make sure that domain names do not collide. No, they work very hard to get more people to join their "confederations" either for money or ego-enhancement. They might prefer not to collide with other TLD names in other "name server confederations", however they have a bottom line and/or philosophy to watch out for. [To engage in a bit of Fleming "scatterquestion"] Are you saying that no collisions have occured? Are you saying no collisons will occur? Don't you consider the IAHC to be one of your "root name server confederations"? Don't you claim the "registry industry" is the last industry created this millenia? Won't this "industry" be profit driven like every other industry in history? Won't this drive for profits tend to reduce the likelihood of "working hard to make sure domain names don't collide" since players in this "industry" will be turning away customers? [And to add a typical Flemingesque non-sequitor] Can you remind us of your plan to allocate /8s to each state in the US? >A world-wide round table of Root Name Server Confederation owner/operators >ultimately have to work the collisions out, but each person on the Internet >gets to help work to prevent collisions. Right, Jim. It will be an interesting round-table where Karl Denninger and eDNS crowd sits down with Eugene Kashpureff (AlterNIC) -- after all, they were exchanging threats of suits and counter-suits at each other on public lists a couple of weeks ago. Oh, and lets suppose two confederations simply refuse to cooperate, what legal system will this "world-wide round table" operate under? Regards, -drc From owner-apple Wed Jun 11 12:46:32 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id MAA06124 for apple-outgoing; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 12:46:32 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id MAA06117; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 12:46:28 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA06173; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 22:37:45 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC75EF.F5A50F00@webster.unety.net>; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 22:45:13 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC75EF.F5A50F00@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "'David R Conrad'" Cc: "apple@apnic.net" , "milton@usthk.ust.hk" , "'newdom@ar.com'" Subject: RE: Internet Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 22:45:12 -0500 Encoding: 33 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk On Wednesday, June 11, 1997 7:38 AM, David R Conrad[SMTP:davidc@apnic.net] wrote: @ @ Are you saying that no collisions have occured? @ As long as humans are involved collisions will occur. The goal is to minimize these collisions and the impact. @ Are you saying no collisons will occur? @ No. @ Don't you consider the IAHC to be one of your "root name server @ confederations"? @ The IAHC has no Root Name Servers. They have not even deployed any TLD Name Servers. The IAHC was recognized as a Registration Authority (RA) by eDNS and uDNS. An RA acts as a liason between the Root Name Server owner/operators and the Registries. The RAs collectively help to provide stability and continuity. -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation http://www.Unir.Corp From owner-apple Wed Jun 11 12:52:23 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id MAA06202 for apple-outgoing; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 12:52:23 +0900 (JST) Received: from melati.singnet.com.sg (melati.singnet.com.sg [165.21.1.15]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id MAA06196 for ; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 12:52:21 +0900 (JST) Received: from melvin (ts900-2303.singnet.com.sg [165.21.157.55]) by melati.singnet.com.sg (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA19652; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 11:54:49 +0800 (SST) Message-Id: <199706110354.LAA19652@melati.singnet.com.sg> From: "Melvin Khoo" To: , Subject: .COM to come under IAHC proposals Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 11:43:25 +0800 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk While I was at the WIPO Meeting on Trademarks and Internet Domain Names between 26th to 30th May, the WIPO panel mentioned that there were efforts underway for the .COM TLD to be placed under the IAHC's proposed gTLD framework within one year after it is slated to come online on 15th October this year. Is anybody aware of such efforts, and if so, who's involved, and how this is going to be done? Melvin Khoo From owner-apple Wed Jun 11 13:04:05 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id NAA06319 for apple-outgoing; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 13:04:05 +0900 (JST) Received: from melati.singnet.com.sg (melati.singnet.com.sg [165.21.1.15]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id NAA06314 for ; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 13:04:02 +0900 (JST) Received: from melvin (ts900-6806.singnet.com.sg [165.21.164.90]) by melati.singnet.com.sg (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id MAA03614; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 12:06:30 +0800 (SST) Message-Id: <199706110406.MAA03614@melati.singnet.com.sg> From: "Melvin Khoo" To: , Subject: Should not the IAHC have issued an RFC? Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 11:54:50 +0800 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Pardon my ignorance if I do not understand how the technical community of the Internet operates, but should not the IAHC or others attempting to solve the "problem" have issued an RFC instead of coming up with the gTLD-MOU? Would not an RFC be the traditional mode of seeking consensus and coming up with solutions regarding the Internet? Melvin Khoo From owner-apple Wed Jun 11 13:04:14 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id NAA06328 for apple-outgoing; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 13:04:14 +0900 (JST) Received: from milan.doe.ernet.in ([202.41.99.2]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with SMTP id NAA06322 for ; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 13:04:08 +0900 (JST) Received: from iisc.ernet.in by milan.doe.ernet.in (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA26823; Wed, 11 Jun 97 09:39:29+050 Received: from ece.iisc.ernet.in by iisc.ernet.in (ERNET-IISc/SMI-4.1) id JAA04597; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 09:30:39 +0530 Received: by ece.iisc.ernet.in (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA24125; Wed, 11 Jun 97 09:35:17+0530 From: gopi@ece.iisc.ernet.in (Gopi K Garge) Message-Id: <9706110405.AA24125@ece.iisc.ernet.in> Subject: Re: Boeing-777 To: ibrahim@tjt.or.id (Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 97 9:35:16 GMT+5:30 Cc: apple@apnic.net In-Reply-To: <339D48FE.BE623C1@tjt.or.id>; from "Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim" at Jun 10, 97 8:30 pm Phone: 91 80 334 0855 Request-Delivery-Notification: TRUE X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim sez: > Break ... let's change topic, lah! ^^^ RSI, you caught the Singapore bug, huh ? > I'd like to share my first experience on Boeing-777 :-). > - Each passenger has its own display and phone set. Besides "standard" > entertainment programs and airplane possition map, it also displays > a "cockpit view". As an experienced MS FlightSimulator Boeing-737 > pilot, > it is quite amusing to watch on how a real pilot descents and lands. > - Yes, three "recharging" stations for AC 110/220 Volts. > Looking forward for AC outlet on each seat! > - Nope, no mouse (yet). Hmmm.. not quite. The telephone handset has a set of navigation keys for the games, but you are right - no mouse. > - Nope, neither RJ-45 nor RJ-11 connectors on the phone set. > Looking forward for either RJ-45 ethernet connector or a web browser Am not so sure that the RJ-45 will be on their agenda - connectivity yes, but not an RJ-45, perhaps. Some spacesaving and robust connector to connect your laptop. YOU buy that adaptor, of course. > on each seat. However, not for US$ 8 per minute! Charge it on the ticket. > Problems: > - should each seat has its own IP address, or one IP address for the > whole airplane? > - how is the current "routing and DNS" roaming technology? Not ready, to be short. > Should the IP addresses be static with dynamic routing ? > Or, should the IP addresses dynamic with fix domain names ? IMHO, Cisco 25* or 45* with NAT and DHCP - 1 IP address per plane. All traffic routed via the airline's hub - connected via satellite. Node names sounding like 18A.business.777-816374-LH417.lufthansa.de How about a something new like a) A personal TLD ".flyer" OR maybe ".frequentflyer" b) A new TLD for an elite business traveller ".airsurf" .... in tune with the times .. ;-) > wrong mailing list, huh? Yes, but couldn't resist a reply ... ;-) .. Apologies.... --Gopi > -- > Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - CEO VLSM-TJT - http://www.tjt.or.id/rms46 > ISO-9000:Write down what you do, do what you write down, verify it! -- From owner-apple Wed Jun 11 13:43:07 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id NAA06707 for apple-outgoing; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 13:43:07 +0900 (JST) Received: from nostromo.apnic.net (root@[202.131.3.130]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id NAA06685; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 13:42:02 +0900 (JST) Received: from nostromo.apnic.net (davidc@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nostromo.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id WAA02329; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 22:41:48 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <199706111341.WAA02329@nostromo.apnic.net> To: Jim Fleming cc: "apple@apnic.net" , "milton@usthk.ust.hk" , "'newdom@ar.com'" Subject: The Name Wars Visit APPLe (my last message) In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 10 Jun 1997 22:45:12 EST." <01BC75EF.F5A50F00@webster.unety.net> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 22:41:45 +0900 From: David R Conrad Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk [APPLe folk: My last message on this topic (don't applaud too loudly :-))] >@ Are you saying that no collisions have occured? >As long as humans are involved collisions will occur. >The goal is to minimize these collisions and the impact. Very laudable. The problem is the system you are so intent on establishing encourages such collisions and the result of those collisions do not directly or immediately affect those who cause the collisions, thus there is little to discourage collisions other than "for the good of the Internet" and we've seen how well that works when profits get in the way. For the record, I'm not particularly excited about the IAHC proposal. However, I vastly prefer that proposal to the NSI proposal which I see as the only other viable alternative. The system you and your cohorts are promoting is fundamentally unstable given the name collision problem and as such is not a viable alternative. My ideal solution to this problem is a very lightweight mechanism will will allow for the creation of SHARED top level domains in a controlled fashion. I feel this is the only way the namespace can both grow to meet demands and remain stable. I firmly believe domain names should be the property of the people/ organization to which they are registered and that registrars should merely be service organizations -- if an organization wishes to change their registrar they should not be penalized by having to reprint their business cards, their letter head, their advertisements, etc. Further, the creation of shared domains would likely remove the "gold rush" mentality that has infected the entire discussion since the chances of monopolistic pricing would be eliminated. However, this issue has become so polarized by needless demagoguery and pointless flamewars (to which I admit complicity to the latter and apologize to the APPLe community) that I figure it is unlikely a viable alternative will derive from the bottom up -- I suspect the only solution that will be top down, that is, will necessarily involve governments in cooperation with major industry and that means don't hold your breath... Back to real work... Cheers, -drc From owner-apple Wed Jun 11 18:46:42 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id SAA08795 for apple-outgoing; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 18:46:42 +0900 (JST) Received: from paris.ics.uci.edu (mmdf@paris.ics.uci.edu [128.195.1.50]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with SMTP id SAA08790 for ; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 18:46:38 +0900 (JST) Received: from nma.com by paris.ics.uci.edu id ae24344; 11 Jun 97 1:46 PDT Received: from paris.ics.uci.edu by norn.nma.com id aa08814; 11 Jun 97 1:27 PDT To: apple@apnic.net, newdom@ar.com Subject: Re: The Name Wars Visit APPLe (my last message) In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 11 Jun 1997 22:41:45 +0900." <199706111341.WAA02329@nostromo.apnic.net> Reply-to: newdom@ar.com From: Einar Stefferud MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <8810.866017670.1@nma.com> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 01:27:51 -0700 Message-ID: <8812.866017671@nma.com> Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Atually, a cooperative solution is not likely to arise until after centralized authority has been tried and found to fail, so we have to go through this crazy uncivil open process along with an attempt among authority lovers to impose whatever authority they can get to step into the maw, before everyone comes to realize that cooperation is actually the best mode of solution after all;-)... We are getting closer. Central authority is showing clear signs of having failed to create broad acceptance, so we now have another chance to apply civil discourse to achive cooperation. And simple chaotic fighting is also showing signs of failing, so... Cross your fingers;-).,..\Stef >From David R Conrad's message Wed, 11 Jun 1997 22:41:45 +0900: } [SNIP]... } }However, this issue has become so polarized by needless demagoguery and }pointless flamewars (to which I admit complicity to the latter and apologize }to the APPLe community) that I figure it is unlikely a viable alternative }will derive from the bottom up -- I suspect the only solution that will be }top down, that is, will necessarily involve governments in cooperation with }major industry and that means don't hold your breath... } }Back to real work... } }Cheers, }-drc From owner-apple Wed Jun 11 20:10:35 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id UAA09510 for apple-outgoing; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 20:10:35 +0900 (JST) Received: from excaliber.digitalink.com (excaliber.digitalink.com [206.137.160.2]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with SMTP id UAA09505 for ; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 20:10:33 +0900 (JST) Received: from mjolnir.digitalink.com by excaliber.digitalink.com; (5.65v3.0/1.1.8.2/15Jan96-0459PM) id AA01388; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 07:12:24 -0400 Received: from didclanroverport2 by mjolnir.digitalink.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/10Jan96-0415PM) id AA19990; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 07:12:22 -0400 Message-Id: <339E8814.7781@digitalink.com> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 07:12:20 -0400 From: Vince Wolodkin Organization: Digital Ink -- A Washingtonpost Company X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: oic@lists.interactivehq.org Cc: apple@apnic.net Subject: Re: Should not the IAHC have issued an RFC? References: <199706110406.MAA03614@melati.singnet.com.sg> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk There actually was a draft RFC last June I guess was the last anyone saw of that. The RFC process was hijacked--the IAHC formed--and the process became a closed on. The IAHC did accept comments and hold discussions, but it was very obvious that they didn't what they wanted to regardless of consensus. Only recently when they needed signatures did they remove the lottery. Vince Wolodkin Melvin Khoo wrote: > > =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ > Open Internet Congress List -- reply to oic@lists.interactivehq.org > =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ > Pardon my ignorance if I do not understand how the technical community of > the Internet operates, but should not the IAHC or others attempting to > solve the "problem" have issued an RFC instead of coming up with the > gTLD-MOU? > > Would not an RFC be the traditional mode of seeking consensus and coming up > with solutions regarding the Internet? > > Melvin Khoo > > =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ > Maintained by Assn. for Interactive Media, http://www.interactivehq.org -- 202-408-0008 > To (un)join, email "subscribe oic" or "unsubscribe oic" to buddy@lists.interactivehq.org From owner-apple Wed Jun 11 23:07:00 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id XAA10201 for apple-outgoing; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 23:07:00 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id XAA10195; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 23:06:46 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA08162; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 08:58:00 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC7646.9AC94040@webster.unety.net>; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 09:05:27 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC7646.9AC94040@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "'David R Conrad'" Cc: "apple@apnic.net" , "milton@usthk.ust.hk" Subject: RE: The Name Wars Visit APPLe (my last message) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 09:05:26 -0500 Encoding: 301 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk On Wednesday, June 11, 1997 8:41 AM, David R Conrad[SMTP:davidc@apnic.net] wrote: @ [APPLe folk: My last message on this topic (don't applaud too loudly :-))] @ @ >@ Are you saying that no collisions have occured? @ >As long as humans are involved collisions will occur. @ >The goal is to minimize these collisions and the impact. @ @ Very laudable. The problem is the system you are so intent on establishing @ encourages such collisions and the result of those collisions do not @ directly or immediately affect those who cause the collisions, thus there is @ little to discourage collisions other than "for the good of the Internet" @ and we've seen how well that works when profits get in the way. @ I am intent on developing and establishing systems that are open, fair, inclusive and free of procedures that rely on single individuals who make arbitrary decisions with no input or consensus from the community. As a loyal subject of King Jon, you might be interested in this note. ---------- From: Jim Fleming[SMTP:JimFleming@unety.net] Sent: Thursday, June 05, 1997 3:29 PM To: 'postel@iana.org' Subject: July 4, 1997 King Jon, This is not an RFC, but it is a document that you might want to study. It pre-dates your tenure in the United States and at the University of Southern California, ISI. If you recall, July 4, 1996 was the date when people finally realized that the future of domain names would be in their hands. July 4, 1997 will be the date when people will finally realize that IP addresses and the IP protocol are in their hands. By July 4, 1998 the Internet will be free and a resource enjoyed by more than your loyal subjects. Jim Fleming @@@@@@@@@@@@ The Declaration of Independence of the Thirteen Colonies In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776 The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America, When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world. He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained, and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them. He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only. He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures. He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people. He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within. He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands. He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers. He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries. He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance. He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies, without the consent of our legislatures. He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power. He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation: .For protecting them by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States: .For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world: .For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent: .For depriving us in many cases of the benefits of Trial by Jury: .For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences: .For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies: .For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments: .For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever. He has abdicated Government here by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us. He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people. He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation. He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands. He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions. In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms. Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people. Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. .We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. .We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. .We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends. We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare. That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor. The signers of the Declaration represented the new States as follows: New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton Massachusetts: John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross Delaware: Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton Georgia: Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation http://www.Unir.Corp -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation http://www.Unir.Corp From owner-apple Thu Jun 12 01:08:39 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id BAA11682 for apple-outgoing; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 01:08:39 +0900 (JST) Received: from BPAVMS.BPA.ARIZONA.EDU (BPAVMS.BPA.Arizona.EDU [128.196.190.11]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with SMTP id BAA11677 for ; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 01:08:35 +0900 (JST) Received: from [128.196.253.22] by 128.196.253.22 with SMTP; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 9:11:02 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 09:12:01 -0700 To: apple@apnic.net From: wfoster@bpa.arizona.edu (Will Foster) Subject: Microsoft's Asian Cable Modem Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk >SINGAPORE, 1997 JUN 9 (NB) -- By Robert Clark. Microsoft [NASDAQ:MSFT] >will work with Singapore partners in developing cable modem and online >applications, Chairman Bill Gates today announced. > >Gates said Microsoft would work with CableVision on cable modem and Windows >NT projects and with Commerce Asia on electronic commerce applications. > >Cable Vision is Singapore's sole cable TV company, and is one of two >infrastructure providers in the SingaporeONE plan to provide broadband >access to the island's three million citizens by 2000. > >CommerceAsia is a local Web hosting and online information provider. > >The software giant is also involved in Asian partnerships in electronic >commerce and in building content for its new entertainment and culture >service Sidewalk, Gates said. > >He announced the partnerships in a keynote address to the Asia Telecom >conference, held once every four years by the International >Telecommunications Union (ITU). > >Gates said although Microsoft was not directly involved in the >communications industry, it was building software and "some interactive" >content which would run over high-speed networks. > >Urging phone and cable executives to accelerate the construction of new >infrastructure, he said they should not underestimate the ability of >consumers and businesses to find ways of using the new capacity. > >"I really believe that people are underestimating demand," he said. Just as >people found "amazing ways" to use computers as the PC industry grew, there >was a huge range of uses that would be found for the "rich networks" run by >telecom and cable companies. > >Gates says Microsoft believes ADSL (asymmetrical digital subscriber loop) >and satellite technologies would be important for delivering higher >bandwidth. > >Microsoft has tested ADSL technology - which provides high speeds across >traditional copper telephone lines - with a number of staff around company >headquarters in Seattle, offering data speeds of 6Mbps to the customer and >640kbps on the return path. > >Gates said for both PCs and the Internet, Asia is the biggest growth >opportunity and is already the biggest growth market, with 12 million PCs >sold last year. > >He said the critical mass has been reached in development of the Internet, >pointing out the Internet capacity between Japan and the US now outstripped >the voice capacity. > >(19970609/Reported by Newsbytes News Network http://www.newsbytes.com) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Will Foster + wfoster@bpa.arizona.edu Research Assistant + office phone: 520 621-4124 Management Information Systems + facsimile: 520-621-2433 University of Arizona + residence: 520-751-6799 http://www.u.arizona.edu/~wfoster ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ From owner-apple Thu Jun 12 02:47:18 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id CAA12724 for apple-outgoing; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 02:47:18 +0900 (JST) Received: from ns.apeleon.net (ns.apeleon.net [206.29.222.3]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with SMTP id CAA12719 for ; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 02:47:11 +0900 (JST) Received: from webvantage (ppp-206-170-117-149.sndg02.pacbell.net [206.170.117.149]) by ns.apeleon.net (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id RAA04994; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 17:49:02 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19970611104815.006a23e8@mail.web-vantage.com> X-Sender: dhusum@mail.web-vantage.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 10:48:15 -0700 To: oic@lists.interactivehq.org From: Dianna Husum Subject: Re: Should not the IAHC have issued an RFC? Cc: oic@lists.interactivehq.org, apple@apnic.net In-Reply-To: <339E8814.7781@digitalink.com> References: <199706110406.MAA03614@melati.singnet.com.sg> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk If you go to http://www.iahc.org/iahc-docs.html you will see texts of the documents released by IAHC and the dates that they were made available to the public. Final Report of the International Ad Hoc Committee: Recommendations for Administration and Management of gTLDs was made available to the public Feb. 4, 1997. http://www.iahc.org/press.html shows the press releases issued by IAHC and the dates they were released. Since the dissolution of the IAHC, the process of publication of papers, drafts and information is handled by the Interim gTLD-MoU Policy Oversight Committee http://www.gtld-mou.org/ Dianna Husum At 07:12 AM 6/11/97 -0400, Vince Wolodkin wrote: >=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ >Open Internet Congress List -- reply to oic@lists.interactivehq.org >=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ >There actually was a draft RFC last June I guess was the last anyone saw >of that. The RFC process was hijacked--the IAHC formed--and the process >became a closed on. The IAHC did accept comments and hold discussions, >but it was very obvious that they didn't what they wanted to regardless >of consensus. Only recently when they needed signatures did they remove >the lottery. > >Vince Wolodkin > >Melvin Khoo wrote: >> >> =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ >> Open Internet Congress List -- reply to oic@lists.interactivehq.org >> =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ >> Pardon my ignorance if I do not understand how the technical community of >> the Internet operates, but should not the IAHC or others attempting to >> solve the "problem" have issued an RFC instead of coming up with the >> gTLD-MOU? >> >> Would not an RFC be the traditional mode of seeking consensus and coming up >> with solutions regarding the Internet? >> >> Melvin Khoo >> >> =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ >> Maintained by Assn. for Interactive Media, http://www.interactivehq.org -- 202-408-0008 >> To (un)join, email "subscribe oic" or "unsubscribe oic" to buddy@lists.interactivehq.org > >=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ >Maintained by Assn. for Interactive Media, http://www.interactivehq.org -- 202-408-0008 >To (un)join, email "subscribe oic" or "unsubscribe oic" to buddy@lists.interactivehq.org > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dianna Husum 4162 First Ave editor/publisher San Diego, CA 92103 dhusum@web-vantage.com PH (619) 297-9666 http://www.web-vantage.com FAX (619) 297-9667 WEB-VANTAGE The site builder's guide to the Web --------------------------------------------------------- For a free trial membership, visit http://www.web-vantage.com/trial.html ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From owner-apple Thu Jun 12 03:52:06 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id DAA13096 for apple-outgoing; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 03:52:06 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id DAA13091 for ; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 03:52:04 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA08646; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 13:43:19 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC766E.77E35AC0@webster.unety.net>; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 13:50:48 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC766E.77E35AC0@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "'newdom@ar.com'" Cc: "'apple@apnic.net'" , "'Multiple recipients of list DOMAIN-POLICY'" Subject: Where the U.S. Government Fits in the Picture Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 13:50:47 -0500 Encoding: 60 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk For some reason people think that the U.S. Government's entry into the Domain Name debates will create a Top Down Structure. This is not the case in a Round Table model. As shown below, the U.S. Government gets a seat at the Round Table along with the other Root Name Server Confederations. Some of the key people are shown. The U.S. Government needs to develop policies which allow new Top Level Domains to be entered into the 9 Root Name Servers they control. The NSF could have developed these policies but they failed to take action. They were unable to stand up to the academics they fund. Now other agencies and private companies need to help them develop the policies. ===================================== AlterNIC - (?? servers) - http://www.alternic.net ........Eugene Kashpureff ........iPOC Member ? Australian - (?? servers) - http://www.ah.net ........Adam Todd ........??? eDNS - (5 servers) - http://www.edns.net ........Karl Denninger ........Chris Ambler **** U.S. Government **** InterNIC (9 servers) - http://www.internic.net ........Dr. Joseph Bordogna (NSF) ........William Schrader (PSI) **** U.S. Government **** name.space - (12 servers) - http://www.pgpmedia.com ........Paul Garrin ........??? NSI/ISI/RIPE - (4 servers) - http://www.netsol.com ........Gabe Battista (NSI) ........Jon Postel (ISI) ===================================== Some people are asking how their "country" can get involved. In my opinion, people should be asking how their "confederation" can get involved. If their country develops a Root Name Server Confederation then they will have a seat at the above Round Table which is growing. -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation http://www.Unir.Corp From owner-apple Thu Jun 12 04:03:09 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id EAA13225 for apple-outgoing; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 04:03:09 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id EAA13219 for ; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 04:03:06 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA08668 for ; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 13:54:23 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC7670.03882500@webster.unety.net>; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 14:01:52 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC7670.03882500@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "'apple@apnic.net'" Subject: FW: STOP THE INTERNET COUP -- OIC Press Release 6/11/97 Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 14:01:51 -0500 Encoding: 163 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk ---------- From: Andy Sernovitz[SMTP:andy@interactivehq.org] Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 1997 1:32 PM To: 'oic@lists.interactivehq.org' Subject: STOP THE INTERNET COUP -- OIC Press Release 6/11/97 =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ Open Internet Congress List -- reply to oic@lists.interactivehq.org =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ For Immediate Release Contact: Andy Sernovitz, President, Association for Interactive Media andy@interactivehq.org 202-408-0008 www.interactivehq.org/oic ______________ STOP THE INTERNET COUP Association For Interactive Media Demands An End To The Hostile Takeover Of The Internet By The International Ad Hoc Committee Asks Organizations To Oppose the gTLD-MoU, the Internet Society, and IANA Washington, D.C. (June 11, 1997) -- The stability of the Internet is being threatened by an attempted takeover by a Geneva-based group formerly known as the International Ad Hoc Committee (IAHC). Internet businesses and users are being blindsided by a power grab orchestrated by this technical group which holds no legal authority. The Association for Interactive Media and the Open Internet Congress (OIC) have called for everyone in the Internet community to oppose this move. Takeover plans are detailed in a recent memorandum by IAHC regarding issues related to assigning "domain names" to Internet users. The IAHC was organized to discuss the possibility of making more domain names available. When they released their final report, called the "Generic Top Level Domain Memorandum of Understanding (gTLD-MoU), it actually contained the structure for a world government over the Internet. The leaders of IAHC, including the Internet Society and the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, have installed themselves as leaders of this government. This document is disguised as an innocent standards agreement regarding domain names. It is actually a complex scheme to assign permanent control over the Internet to the six tightly controlled, non- representative organizations that control the IAHC. There are no provisions for elections, representation, or input from consumers, businesses, and governments. "Make no mistake. If you sign the gTLD-MoU, you will give up all of your rights to have any say on the structure and management of the Internet forever," said Andy Sernovitz, president of the Association for Interactive Media. "These self-appointed autocrats have declared themselves rulers of the Internet, without regard to international law, the stability of the Internet, or the rights of you and your organization." The Open Internet Congress (OIC) was founded to fight for an open process which will guarantee that all Internet stakeholders have a fair and representative voice in its management and operations. OIC has called for an Internet Constitutional Convention to develop the representative process. An organizational meeting will be held July 9, 1997, in Washington, D.C., and is open to all. Founded in 1993, the Association for Interactive Media is the most div?yy ?e@erse coalition of organizational users of the Internet. With more than 325 members, AIM's mission is to support the efforts of leaders from for-profit and non-profit organizations seeking to serve the public through interactive media. With the ability to form partnerships and friendships among a wide variety of organizations, AIM bridges the gaps between groups working in dozens of different fields to ensure the successful future of new media. ### IMPORTANT FACTS Who is staging this coup? ?e@, and how do they plan on pulling it off? The gTLD-MoU gives permanent control of the Internet to: Internet Society, Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, Internet Architecture Board, International Telecommunications Union, World Intellectual Property Organization, and International Trademark Association. They have already declared control. They have created an organization to take control, appointed themselves leaders of it, and begun issuing technical orders to Internet server operators. They have publicly declared that they do not need the support of governments, consumers, and businesses because "the committee says it has direct control of the computers that run the Net's addressing system." (CNET, 5/2/97) What happens to the Internet if they succeed? The Internet is likely to break apart on October 15, 1997. That is the date that the coup leaders intend to re-route the Internet to be under their control - against the advice of those who keep things running smoothly today. When they rip the essential root servers off the Internet backbone, the entire system may begin to fragment. Your email will be returned and your Web site visitors will be turned away. These organizations have refused to recognize the validity of the registries that ensure that traffic is successfully delivered to ".com", ".org", and ".net" addresses. Serious concern has arisen over the possibility of malicious viruses and "Trojan Horses" being hidden in the software that runs the Internet. What happens to Internet users if they succeed? Businesses are likely to lose access to reliable Internet communications. Control of individual trademarks on the Internet will be given up. Companies will be forced to submit to binding decisions made by a "challenge panel" in Geneva created and run by this group. If you lose, you will not be able to use your trademark in your domain name -- someone else will. Companies and organizations will never have a voice in the governance of the Internet, will not be able to effectively defend themselves, and their rights against future moves by these aggressors. What should I do? Do not sign the gTLD-MoU! Sign up with the Open Internet Congress to secure your place in the decision-making process. Contact OIC immediately to get involved. Help us gather support from governments, consumers, and businesses. Distribute this document to all of your email lists as soon as possible. __________________________________ For More Information: Contact the Open Internet Congress: 202-408-0008 or oic@interactivehq.org Visit the web site: http://www.interactivehq.org/oic Subscribe to the news list: email the words "subscribe oic" in the body of a message to buddy@lists.interactivehq.org =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ Maintained by Assn. for Interactive Media, http://www.interactivehq.org -- 202-408-0008 To (un)join, email "subscribe oic" or "unsubscribe oic" to buddy@lists.interactivehq.org From owner-apple Thu Jun 12 04:12:59 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id EAA13279 for apple-outgoing; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 04:12:59 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id EAA13274 for ; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 04:12:55 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA08702; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 14:04:12 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC7671.62C6A9A0@webster.unety.net>; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 14:11:42 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC7671.62C6A9A0@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "'newdom@ar.com'" Cc: "'apple@apnic.net'" , "'Multiple recipients of list DOMAIN-POLICY'" Subject: Where the U.S. Government Fits in the Picture Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 14:11:40 -0500 Encoding: 77 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Sorry, I forgot uDNS... ---------- From: Jim Fleming[SMTP:JimFleming@unety.net] Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 1997 1:50 PM To: 'newdom@ar.com' Cc: 'apple@apnic.net'; 'Multiple recipients of list DOMAIN-POLICY' Subject: Where the U.S. Government Fits in the Picture For some reason people think that the U.S. Government's entry into the Domain Name debates will create a Top Down Structure. This is not the case in a Round Table model. As shown below, the U.S. Government gets a seat at the Round Table along with the other Root Name Server Confederations. Some of the key people are shown. The U.S. Government needs to develop policies which allow new Top Level Domains to be entered into the 9 Root Name Servers they control. The NSF could have developed these policies but they failed to take action. They were unable to stand up to the academics they fund. Now other agencies and private companies need to help them develop the policies. ===================================== AlterNIC - (?? servers) - http://www.alternic.net ........Eugene Kashpureff ........iPOC Member ? Australian - (?? servers) - http://www.ah.net ........Adam Todd ........??? eDNS - (5 servers) - http://www.edns.net ........Karl Denninger ........Chris Ambler **** U.S. Government **** InterNIC (9 servers) - http://www.internic.net ........Dr. Joseph Bordogna (NSF) ........William Schrader (PSI) **** U.S. Government **** name.space - (12 servers) - http://www.pgpmedia.com ........Paul Garrin ........??? NSI/ISI/RIPE - (4 servers) - http://www.netsol.com ........Gabe Battista (NSI) ........Jon Postel (ISI) uDNS - (3 servers) - http://www.udns.org ........Ron Kimball ........Richard Shu ===================================== Some people are asking how their "country" can get involved. In my opinion, people should be asking how their "confederation" can get involved. If their country develops a Root Name Server Confederation then they will have a seat at the above Round Table which is growing. -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation http://www.Unir.Corp From owner-apple Thu Jun 12 04:31:45 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id EAA13482 for apple-outgoing; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 04:31:45 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id EAA13476 for ; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 04:31:43 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA08740; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 14:22:59 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC7674.02E55880@webster.unety.net>; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 14:30:29 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC7674.02E55880@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "'newdom@ar.com'" Cc: "'apple@apnic.net'" , "'Multiple recipients of list DOMAIN-POLICY'" Subject: Correction Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 14:30:27 -0500 Encoding: 11 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Correction.... name.space is now at http://namespace.autono.net -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation http://www.Unir.Corp From owner-apple Thu Jun 12 09:04:53 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id JAA15720 for apple-outgoing; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 09:04:53 +0900 (JST) Received: from ng.netgate.net (root@ng.netgate.net [204.145.147.10]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id JAA15715 for ; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 09:04:50 +0900 (JST) Received: from [205.214.161.17] (d11.netgate.net [205.214.160.43]) by ng.netgate.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA01136; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 17:07:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <8812.866017671@nma.com> References: Your message of "Wed, 11 Jun 1997 22:41:45 +0900." <199706111341.WAA02329@nostromo.apnic.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 16:40:49 -0700 To: newdom@ar.com From: Dave Crocker Subject: Re: The Name Wars Visit APPLe (my last message) Cc: apple@apnic.net, newdom@ar.com Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk At 1:27 AM -0700 6/11/97, Einar Stefferud wrote: >Atually, a cooperative solution is not likely to arise until after >centralized authority has been tried and found to fail, so we have to DNS administration has been operating rather well under the same centralized authority since it's inception, more than 10 years ago. Since the data in question need to be shared among potential and actual competitors, the current state of the art requires an independent, third-party to mediate the sharing. This is, of course, just another way of saying centralized authority. >go through this crazy uncivil open process along with an attempt among >authority lovers to impose whatever authority they can get to step And thank you for such a civil characterization of the situation, albeit entirely off the mark with respect to facts. Alas. >into the maw, before everyone comes to realize that cooperation is >actually the best mode of solution after all;-)... I, too, would wish for world peace. Absent that, I find it necessary to design activities which deal with real world constraints, including the fact that competitors often have a tendency not to cooperate. >We are getting closer. Central authority is showing clear signs of >having failed to create broad acceptance, so we now have another Please show us an alternative plan which has documented greater support. d/ ---------------------------- Dave Crocker, Director +1 408 246 8253 Internet Mail Consortium (f) +1 408 249 6205 675 Spruce Dr. dcrocker@imc.org Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA http://www.imc.org Also: iPOC member, expressing personal opinions http://www.gtld-mou.org From owner-apple Thu Jun 12 13:59:06 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id NAA17051 for apple-outgoing; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 13:59:06 +0900 (JST) Received: from jakarta.regex.com (jakarta.regex.com [207.106.122.2]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with SMTP id NAA17045 for ; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 13:59:02 +0900 (JST) Received: (qmail 29950 invoked from network); 12 Jun 1997 04:51:28 -0000 Received: from yapcs-r2.iscs.nus.sg (HELO yapcs-r2) (137.132.85.230) by tjt.or.id with SMTP; 12 Jun 1997 04:51:28 -0000 Message-ID: <339F823E.99ABCAD@tjt.or.id> Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 12:59:42 +0800 From: "Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim" Organization: VLSM-TJT X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (X11; I; Linux 2.0.27 i586) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: apple@apnic.net Subject: Cliques around the Clock Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------70FE924613E725525F01A0AF" Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------70FE924613E725525F01A0AF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Greetings, I have just read a handbook on Social Network Analysis. For "practicing" I choose the current Internet grouping in Indonesia (IMHO). First, I identify the potential Internet groups/cliques in Indonesia (12). Most (not all) of those cliques are based on physical relation. For example, "TELKOM JKT" means ISPs that are located or related with TELKOM Jakarta. "SATELINDO" means ISP that are located or related with P.T. Satelindo, etc. Each group may consists of one or more ISPs. Each ISP may belong to one or more group. Second, I connect groups that may have relations in anyway. For example, UI (the University of Indonesia) has physical relation with IPTEKNET and TELKOM JKT, however UI has also cooperative relation with APJII (Indonesian Internet Service Providers Association), IDNIC, and PDTT-ID (Top Level Domain "ID" maintainer). However, my stress is more on how to draw a network of 12 points in a circle diagram. Therefore, the information itself maybe not so reliable! The circle diagram is based on a trial and error process, until it results in an aesthetics picture. Attached is the diagram. (Sorry, if your mailer can not display it directly). tabe, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - CEO VLSM-TJT - http://www.tjt.or.id/rms46 ISO-9000:Write down what you do, do what you write down, verify it! --------------70FE924613E725525F01A0AF Content-Type: image/gif; name="indo.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline; filename="indo.gif" R0lGODdhhwEgAfAAAAAAAP///ywAAAAAhwEgAQAC/oyPqcvtD6OctE4AAt4HG69lHWeV5omm 6sq27gvHlgfWoj1+osz3/g8MCoc+2u2YwYWIzKbzCY1KHUadLnm0TrfcrvcLXiqN2WX4jE6r 15KqmawFsef0ut3pHpffu7v/DxgYQSanh7DRN4QYQsK4sHPToXG4OCn5gZkgJ8jZ6bmSaJkp mlMjGdqXGpl0OPr5ChvLgNrakHeqkEqJyXop+wscW0kaumvKm1uLzJq4GfwMbUfr+zgZiaxJ eQ2XHO39nTY9StsLSeqq6zjuCt7uHjXcfLw8gmRODXmvdf7e799VDErAfwQLGjyI8AyigQkb OgS00NnDiRTnRGw0pVKj/ngc8uljWDFkHY4Sn6SzdC9dymsiW/7BqC6jMpYsUeaq6TKnRRr1 uCxaWahjJlO9dBpds7DnlpPb8K1DCfKoVJMRtfmcOdSpqG1Rp4YhkVQTln2BNl6EKVDsxytF N1LzurOMszxdFWIkFBau3h5VlJTaQwct0ap7C8voC1hMYjTDsrEzDJkHYsFjzTAumeNx5M0u zg6kaxfkprqcS1cIKhEx2Yxobzo2DZsF6mJgF+PBXO117N3/GkNI/Skv7+GzcNuiHZww8eUx T89KfpH5bt8UMJNGata49IPUi19/FFC7tLnit/cWrvb78/WvwF4xP/Gs2ha41bOp3Rw+99rc /mQztH/fbADqB8xdraUgWoGeDUigLPyVV12CwXjWYEJCKYeCeAwGVtWGFUJngz32deWhH/N8 6M+C5JXHYj/loEgQhZZpk1pdJb60FYwuMoLfjDd1x947NOnoTlHd+PjjgW8J+RSR0RiZ22pS UnejIDVV6SRjmulmmYbopahVlg5ueSQupwH5jT5kignRmmXm91t6WAb21pxswrPkA3tAKJqS wixp551NqHkBbRK2gWYnJ+UpqEXKFPpZeBn6iWOegTb6w6KDECoWl5NSSqelmIbKaJBS7sIP faCG42mqo37RTKG26HlpkrVK1qqrr15Vaqd6UqGrZKvKlOutu2aY/muyb/oCIQxfApSsscfO oOypwHra7GHDKrJsr5PywZY84qri0bZTiQOeCZqiCk+iQqDbrQqggWtFUPvAlO258SLpXLDW 3pbvC/BWWwIchnS5mBv/GoZclAiSFnCm7jq7r5szYFHZwXyMVtnCezXsKyjfRRzExKA4jPLD ism1J7lZcAybpOye7G+6l5lbnakVn7lyHC27Fp3HXsnsLc9F26yGyTnvXDOi9PqlMA72Ci0V 0fyeYGjBIyl9LdMlzosevj0i/IzGFK9H8qxqGz0eyVavnaXZAqN9dtds3/GszkdLOzTLhx1n p41Y8y2xhnqnjKLcsh0Xw3UMpg1rd5+1/hG333MX1zi137bn1uGIN6g4gt5lrrXKwqAJMZGh Y21z4MjKSzjAwFGuI0f0Rem66CKPWQ9PF0zLesi5y3s7LJE2aw/wcc7c9NL+PR/cr3n3jnOj qjDd7+W7e3IoW+BhqHyYBDtf9/ZW/uodId5PG4+1WBo7J+RLLU+r79VX2OHVFv+eqbOx/009 FQkQToKST/d0B4RARUyADGygA9+Wvv5gSiOUqhLhHojBDHKtCIP4jYxGlZ0D2kqDJFTRo7Tn KPpFcHpielAJh/W/8akrhsRTIbvAN8EQKelreBJWCtHHvMwca0E8OqG6WMMXGpaOfsaRn34M WC4PKRFujZsi/v/iZDgr6gVDHLtf87hVBC3aEHMdFOMWw3OlbZnRc51Z4+dKQTk3Vi1Y9fGT HN8osDuSaTRlDB+U5lO/WLGqZHfMmtf2Fzc6Uo1HeqQiB3n1r6jgBIR7DJkHvQhGQs5Pf96a 5AQr6Rogrg8MMXQi7AR3rUa2xJN0RCMVMIkrIpgyeFfEHfu2JEns9c4nNJxlhL6oSETCiFPN K8TgfPk6WV6QmHZ7jSorQkzHzXKD5VPEreaSvSM9kyKeVA8sv4cHqvgPj4dbF5s45U0hqgqZ HRSn+ciJOHO2EFDZXOTF2OlIWZqume3UzTYdQqiR5bON+JShDy9Gu3oS41UBJR/S/pJYUGBq S1YO7WedPim+MZIxgd/UZRhptUSHCrKAj0rdL605zaUYMqS1PMc/EcKUllJUmfKT49Romc2R ntMxJh0cVdxm05Rq7jEvLYggUVlDgVRvjQpLZvYGprpsIPWdSkVeD48myn5BtXZStaiqAAKq KZYEcgOaZFF7E8qs5jFy9VEmSI94RJA5CRW5lNhXBKNJpw2VWnKNKsH+F1H/GDOJBROoTz0q nb4itnjh8N04N+fVu2F1O3Tl57vOWsSvQk+jMhUmc2I1uXbFhawKrCtcF0sc0LLRrdgZ5aY+ OlC9GnQ5R4UnEwKLwsxutH+rlR5qeVPb2bJ2kEkKol1t/vscxYIOK0aEFVICqdTfZkW403Fm c0lZ1P8kb1DybOdW4bMoZtqFuMbV7WUna93rgrekngWrltT5StwC7bTfpexFMcu4r7R3lxw9 rUsTByj8vjVyIpPvUk8o4AnVKcGcFWf8Oppcx/kTwC5l8GulADP/IVO8y+oubZ1iYdneFoIE lWJ5saXeDy9UouMZbm8LjFOPgSzE7WkSjU8K2wZrOJ1p7RaHU5sj9JalVvnqJQzzWywhb6Yt 1C3LY/dK0/8MGJdKjsyLmjzkzfpXdtgbbG5uzIkTVTnMj7tRUL0M0tCC2UQXevEvAsbORm6w ifuFS/7crCARd+auq6LzmjmE/sMUp0m7OYakeaUqqT8HSIexLRKek2po/jJrpZwLoYgubQyl ubDRRbpeJjcJOCitSL4j9tm9Ktspv8SXF21tCDUZS6xNkSeAyTE12SxZL9v8iNWhtRCEt5wW /pEkaGS29U3hqxiquWeHvj7xI2M9Rgq9ms9TO/aUMkaiD0r3dLt9F6h13CEvrShcGDv2wcKm alsjKUTJ5iSNEqXofXIagFcF92Te2sUbotrYlkt2jU7d41zbM9CCLhvEegltyyoFY1P+ixD/ nZmOWG42tgriv1mo8IK/eUSlxHBCwYkE6Gb64baLONh+ljQdb1zevDXJx0doMtvdFOKm7hHU MCvC/glZMHaknreb5EPRoFl7RlI7dz7uo9aVP7nlt43sCC98c4Bb0ugA7/niMl5rvnh7UE5H bcnpxcgAGl1sAs551o/L9K0nfduFkbKDjJzApqu8zpBxu/Gi+2y1+zzeJsI6m5Go9U/3lu99 f3Rr3RvLks2d8HjzeYAUEvi4r13j1UVuY5NGZL3Dk/GNt/xdOTTRtO+M851nu2jxdilpmX3M Sza8Sq2kwLyTk/TScP3pFTU8euOR9qWnPODvntvgp5j3tTd9XpUOa+H3ivgj8Tx3vbHhxFeM +aTyfanb4cvUx5b6zcdyoTt9deXrivvVp3vkY8RD8feawtZHO3eoCmn1/pL/h6xf60NM+b5y ztX4sBOJEy2of/vXfvbnEjUVfkkmgPUHWUZBVgfIKPNXfnB3RjEGbKkCgRFoTVZGgVCmGRdI fyw2Q6XhNgjUXB5If6pnghnIgQpVX/gzgDgGXDwGbC24XAqIZJ81MgAyMCmIdDYYcJRlWCzI f7HxY5JFIEEoUt6nYiD4UIkjYfWkU/Nkfi9IWz31clGYSEzobMM0VTaEhQJYZkNEIuTjYVyl gzwIe3MnPmhIJ97Ehoqihis2hZ8FTFaXWquXXnP4YTbyhm/ndzbGUDVjh08UKUBUhLVDaOGD UGy0FiDUGoOIiIw4XTnUGJCYhfvSFJSYFJZ4/k7KZRNaiIN4oYgHVYKTeCebNoqk2IHW4Ijk koqFRg6gGIqS9oqkqFp9iB2uWIstpwt/1EJEtIuwxWgMBUXBKIwE94saYU/GWFhAp4hHx4xV 5Ix+RIXRGF8Sh4tOhmzWeEy8VovywI2nxG7fOITMSBLBuG/hGCHa9oqUpo6vRG6cCFzd9o48 VW7yOBzrV49xEB/3SG7hwm8+40Lxc4PqiGauhm3qNGvVZhsRlYjcyEfclJBksZAeAXZb6FTO R4xK+CQTSXQUlG865Gm614SpSING5Y8KOS5HNzYYSYL0CDyzExJNpZKpxpLptowVWI7mMVYF 2DEzM2tP05B8k23s/kNi/cgvXUR1G5NhogeTleN4+2h5+FiAfwgp2GhtN6eLcHJy04Z9FeWE BWk+NCdwZRkTlNFu2xgfMIg/dkeAZNluDKk+NukjVNl7F3aEeLhPeTFqJOc9VFJuPziTK3iH cRiC1yYnUscTP5lrYnMUbmhfhnmY6waOUdczF8eYdlkpRmgaLZJjcGkI9iJxDqdqmrmZnFl3 XRh6YfePWokqgGFzI/mYG/gxViiVsseWdvaEt6l4h2VnCsWbuAmcPjmcwXl+hcWAOWicXMdy SFmcy+mUhLkfLAWd+tR/AKWT1al5vomS2amd28mdQlJW35lwLzloGUmeLqdZ0Lch2fgh/g/2 JPGXnh4nfrgnn/NJn23EbfeJn/mpn/Z5nf3pXIcWni12T2ImoF5AbPz5XM2IcQnaLsi4iDsx QwsKoWA1jFo2XhVaLhfKVlCRewT2Kadgmh5qFaxJgLwEY+NooirlMqUVaZ+ylS2KYflGoOZ5 fTJKdjTqohZ6o8j5fMf0ohLKoyiFcV7pkut5T6H2oEV6WXMGS6S2QH1GpE7aNjp4nJfknlZK i3ippNfIpT6JPGaWbVsapus4hgv4PWZ6pkIKjxNaXG0aMwcyalCFpHJ6LmjJSFlZonh6Hkrp jHfqp51JbNM4qD91aq5IGE26aKJ4pSYnIEqxpyjap/cXmhZJ/pG61jaO8GsqWHTqZpa3lqQ8 ORZB2TEZVqkjeqKgR5dTB42iqpbvWaojeaovyj3jtjUwU4k/8aqRmpM4mJb8aG6amquGOlqJ Cpu9+qqxCjqGOhg16W6AVqWXV5fJ6peICZXr0xdSB6qwx6gi+qkXGaxDl6ow1aHvARUq2alL ZhajVCPgCJD/eKjzSq/1aq/3iq/5qq/7yq/96q//Wp1hoZVRRD38tqOgCpItCbAGenIBWa0O i65gZ5m/urAqGpcJ02/voTF04ZGuWrF/d7GupQf8wZTXw244makfi3qxSSPx+rAsW5bcwKJN qbIU+pqoFjWVOXa8qg4zJ5s1e3gmHeew6baUoolywwq0rNqykma0MMuXN5mpNFuuE1EAADs= --------------70FE924613E725525F01A0AF-- From owner-apple Thu Jun 12 15:57:36 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id PAA17833 for apple-outgoing; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 15:57:36 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id PAA17828 for ; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 15:57:33 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA10031; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 01:48:39 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC76D3.CCD7C100@webster.unety.net>; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 01:56:10 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC76D3.CCD7C100@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "apple@apnic.net" , "'Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim'" Subject: RE: Cliques around the Clock Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 01:56:09 -0500 Encoding: 43 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk On Wednesday, June 11, 1997 11:59 PM, Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim[SMTP:ibrahim@tjt.or.id] wrote: @ Greetings, @ @ I have just read a handbook on Social Network Analysis. @ For "practicing" I choose the current Internet grouping @ in Indonesia (IMHO). @ @ Attached is the diagram. (Sorry, if your mailer can not @ display it directly). @ The diagram was clear. If you are interested, there is a standard Java applet that displays "graphs". It allows you to stretch the nodes and they randomly seek an equilibrium. I have built web pages that show all of the various Internet leaders and how they are connected. When the page first comes up it is a mass of confusion and then slowly in front of your eyes, the alignments begin to appear. It is fascinating how much information it shows in a small space. These Java demonstrations have been useful in showing people what a Round Table looks like. For some reason people think everything has to be a hierarchy. It is good to show how a group of people can form a circle and work together as peers. Hopefully, more of that will occur as the Internet grows around the world. Note the word "round" in around. :-) -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation http://www.Unir.Corp From owner-apple Fri Jun 13 15:28:51 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id PAA29673 for apple-outgoing; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 15:28:51 +0900 (JST) Received: from pradeshta.net (haque@[203.190.0.1]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id PAA29668 for ; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 15:28:44 +0900 (JST) Received: from localhost (haque@localhost) by pradeshta.net (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP id MAA09609; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 12:59:04 +0600 Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 12:59:03 +0600 (BGT) From: Samudra E Haque To: Dave Crocker cc: Milton Mueller , apple@apnic.net Subject: RE: Internet Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk > The Internet has been functioning for 25 years. The DNS has been > functioning quite nicely for more than 10 years. This is not early stages. > I would submit that the '25 years of internet' should not be taken as a true measure. 25 years ago, internet was simply just a test tube conception, 10+ years ago, it was mostly off-line telephone based UUCP/USENET, Do you remember DNS replacing the ubiquitous /etc/hosts file that we used to download from SRI-NIC (god, was it called that? must be showing my age..) and then something called the "WEB" was invented combining FTP, TELNET, RSH, TFTP, Anon-FTP, etc. etc. into a pot with a graphics browser on your local machine. Really people forget that the original thin network computer was our standard X-window Terminals and Sun workstations. Statement: The Internet really became a reality with the establishment of the DNS system in ___________ allowing the net to dynamically be re-configured at will; and with the establishment of a co-ordinated suite of protocols that can locate and use the resources installed around the net via DNS to serve the individual user. Question: At what point in time did the concept of Internet become practical. 25 years, 10 years, 3+ years?? Supplementary question: if the "age" of the Internet is less than 10 years, how can you compare it to established telecommunications networks (ala switched telephone network) of over 100 years R&D worth of work put in? I liked the questions pertaining to the Boeing 777 wish-that-we-had-rj45-telco-jacks-on-each-seat-rest exploratory mission, and I would recall your attention to my previous article that perhaps in the future we will have geographic division of the internet just because that type of division, nobody can easily change -compared to the on-again, off-again, TLDs of various parties IAHC/IANA/eDNS/AltDNS/etcDNS... If you were on a flight and telnetting to somewhere in 2000+ would you want to be: globallyuniqueid.flight777.airline or 1. when you check in you give your frequent flyer number and globally unique mobile internet roaming account 2. when you reach cruising altitude and have been served a light snack you boot up MS-Netscape and check the name and pop field that should be been pre-programmed for you by the airline before you boarded, with your PGP pass key. 3. When you start using your browser the global roaming system records that you are now seat57A.flight777.airline 4. which will remain valid until you sign off in mid-air or are thrown off or disembark or both. If there is a global DNS authority (like the guys who issue the ethernet MAC level 32-byte addresses 00-00-C0-C0-DF-DF which are supposedly not the same for any other adapter in the world) then this might work. Note there is one, and only one, ITU numbering plan without which we could not telephone dial into any region in the world FROM another region. TLD's need to go away from english names, people! Some of us don't consider english language mother or father or sister tongues, and by the laws of 'survival of the fittest' sooner or later some technical and financial wiz in Asia is going to notice this to take advantage of (a) ISO multi-byte character sets (b) foreign language representation or words as TLDs. I admit, the above reads much like science fiction, but discretely remind the reader that unless we had folk "tales" like machines that fly, stairs that moved, carts without horses and machines without moving parts - you wouldn't be using booking tickets on your computer, going down to the basement on the escalator, getting to your car and flying on that cool 777. -C-H-E-E-R-S- >From the desk of a person who has read White Noise, by Clarke, Arthur. C. and the story of the little train who said "I, Think I can, I Think I can". From owner-apple Fri Jun 13 17:12:12 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id RAA00740 for apple-outgoing; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 17:12:12 +0900 (JST) Received: from gogh.netizen.or.jp (gogh.netizen.or.jp [203.180.182.4]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id RAA00732 for ; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 17:12:09 +0900 (JST) Received: from [202.131.3.131] ([202.131.3.131]) by gogh.netizen.or.jp (8.7.5+2.6Wbeta6/3.4W3) with SMTP id RAA09807 for ; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 17:07:01 +0900 (JST) X-Sender: an.izumi@vpop.netizen.or.jp Message-Id: X-Mailer: Macintosh Eudora Pro Version 2.1.3-Jr2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-2022-JP" Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 16:16:03 +0900 To: apple@apnic.net From: izumi@anr.org (Izumi Aizu) Subject: Call for APNG meeting after INET June 27-28, in KL Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Invitation to the APNG meetings June 27 (Thu) - 28 (Fri), 1997 Putra World Trade Center (Site of INET'97) just after the INET'97 conference. You are invited to attend the APNG meeting. The program is as follows. There is no registration fee. It's all free. But please fill the application form and send it back to apng-sec@apng.org please. ------------------------------------------------------------ Friday, June 27 13:30 - 15:30 General meeting (Chair: Tohru Takahashi) Confirmation of the minutes of the last Hong Kong meeting Report on the chair election results and Confirmation of the new chair (Dr.Tan tin-Wee) of APNG WG/BoF status reports and meeting announcement WG on Developing countries (Yamaguchi) Education (Chen) Internationalization (Ohta) BoF on Disabilities (Tan) AIII (Yamaguchi) Cache (Narua) Hub-in-Asia (Cheng) APAN (Chon, Konishi, Goto)) Report on APIA (A&P Internet Association) (Hur, Takahashi) Coutry reports 15:30 - 16:00 Coffee break 16:00 - 18:00 WG/BoT meetings WG on Internationalization (Masataka Ohta) BoF on APAN (Chon) BoF on Disabilities 18:30 - Dinner (optional) Saturday, June 28, 1997 9:00 - 11:00 WG/BoT meetings WG on Developing countries/AIII (Suguru Yamaguchi) WG on Education (Nian-Shing Chen) BoT on Cache (Pornthep Narua or someone else) 11:00 - 11:30 Coffee break 11:30 - 13:00 General meeting (Chair: Tan tin-Wee) Reports from WG/BoT Discussion on future directions (to be moderated by the new chair) Place and time of the next APNG meeting --------------Please reply to apng-sec@apng.org ------ I will attend the following meetings. (my name) ______________________________________ (my email address) ___________________________________ (country) ________________________________ ( ) General meeting on June 27 ( ) General meeting on June 28 ( ) BoF on APAN ( ) BoF on Disabilities ( ) Dinner on 27th (you are expected to pay) ( ) WG on Internationalization ( ) WG on Developing countries/AIII ( ) WG on Education ( ) BoF on ADSL (high-speed use of telephone lines, newly proposed) ( ) BoF on Cache --------------Please reply to apng-sec@apng.org -------- * * * * Izumi Aizu * * * * Principal, ASIA NETWORK RESEARCH (ANR) Sdn. Bhd. Tel : +60-3-780-8738 Fax: +60-3-781-0590 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia also working for: Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita & Tokyo GLOCOM, Center for Global Communications, Tokyo Work: www.anr.org Home: http://az.glocom.ac.jp << now in Mongolia! >> * * * WRITING THE HISTORY OF THE FUTURE * * * From owner-apple Fri Jun 13 17:39:27 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id RAA01298 for apple-outgoing; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 17:39:27 +0900 (JST) Received: from uxmail.ust.hk (root@uxmail.ust.hk [143.89.14.30]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id RAA01291 for ; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 17:39:21 +0900 (JST) Received: from BMZ049 ([143.89.57.74]) by uxmail.ust.hk with SMTP id <102487-26833>; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 16:22:30 +0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.16.19970613082250.271ff2e2@pop.ust.hk> X-Sender: milton@pop.ust.hk X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 16:22:50 +0800 To: Samudra E Haque From: Milton Mueller Subject: RE: Internet Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings Cc: apple@apnic.net Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk At 12:59 PM 06/13/97 +0600, you wrote: >I would submit that the '25 years of internet' should not be taken as a >true measure. 25 years ago, internet was simply just a test tube > I agree. The Internet as a commercial mass medium is in VERY early stages. About three and a half years. I think this difference of perspective accounts for some of the political conflicts between the old guard IANA/ISOC people and others. >TLD's need to go away from english names, people! Some of us don't >consider english language mother or father or sister tongues, and by the >laws of 'survival of the fittest' sooner or later some technical and >financial wiz in Asia is going to notice this to take advantage of (a) ISO >multi-byte character sets (b) foreign language representation or words as >TLDs. Right. This is one reason why we need to keep the door open for technical flexibility. M I L T O N M U E L L E R ------------------------------------------------------ m i l t o n @ u s t h k . u s t . h k From owner-apple Fri Jun 13 18:38:43 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id SAA01872 for apple-outgoing; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 18:38:43 +0900 (JST) Received: from nashi.nc.u-tokyo.ac.jp (root@nashi.nc.u-tokyo.ac.jp [130.69.251.46]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id SAA01866 for ; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 18:38:41 +0900 (JST) Received: from nashi.nc.u-tokyo.ac.jp (nakayama@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nashi.nc.u-tokyo.ac.jp (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA12634; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 18:41:08 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <199706130941.SAA12634@nashi.nc.u-tokyo.ac.jp> To: izumi@anr.org Cc: apple@apnic.net Subject: Re: Call for APNG meeting after INET June 27-28, in KL From: nakayama@nc.u-tokyo.ac.jp In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 13 Jun 1997 16:16:03 +0900" References: X-Mailer: Mew version 1.69 on Emacs 19.28.2 / Mule 2.3 X-fingerprint: 63 3F 95 1E 20 B1 93 FD 2C F4 6A AC FE 80 39 4D Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 18:41:08 +0900 Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk > It's all free. But please fill the application form and send it > back to apng-sec@apng.org please. You can also use on-line registraion. See http://www.apng.org/ -- Masaya Nakayama, University of Tokyo/APNG secretariat From owner-apple Fri Jun 13 22:52:41 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id WAA03542 for apple-outgoing; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 22:52:41 +0900 (JST) Received: from ng.netgate.net (root@ng.netgate.net [204.145.147.10]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id WAA03537 for ; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 22:52:28 +0900 (JST) Received: from [205.214.160.42] (d10.netgate.net [205.214.160.42]) by ng.netgate.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id GAA00491; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 06:54:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 06:48:56 -0700 To: Samudra E Haque From: Dave Crocker Subject: RE: Internet Industry Objects to IAHC Proceedings Cc: Milton Mueller , apple@apnic.net Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk At 11:59 PM -0700 6/12/97, Samudra E Haque wrote: >true measure. 25 years ago, internet was simply just a test tube >conception, 10+ years ago, it was mostly off-line telephone based >UUCP/USENET, Do you remember DNS replacing the ubiquitous /etc/hosts file That is, in fact, my point. there has been a continuous operation which has successfully replaced each and every component of Internet technology and it has done it while (mostly) maintaining service. that sort of history carries with it a learning curve. we got to today by learning a heck of a lot from yesterday. deciding to throw out that experience, as embodied by the current operation, makes sense only if there is a very, very, VERY strong basis for declaring it entirely inadequate. That basis does not exist. The emphasis on the Web is a mistake. Yes, the Web has fueled the latest growth but the growth curve for the Internet has been pretty consistent for most of that 25 years and certainly the last 10. Yes, it's been doubling every 13 months for a long, long time. It's easy to get distracted by the current, large numbers -- they ARE impressive -- but the RATE of growth has been impressive for quite awhile. More importantly, the Web pertains to some wonderful user services and not to the infrastructure that supports it. That infrastructure is the point behind this current exchange. Running a global infrastructure isn't easy. >If you were on a flight and telnetting to somewhere in 2000+ would you >want to be: .. >If there is a global DNS authority (like the guys who issue the ethernet You have confused the invention of technology with the administration of operation. The technology that you are seeking is going through the standards process now, albeit slowly. For what it's worth, I would guess that the particularly demanding -- and entirely interesting and reasonable -- scenario you put forward will not be ready for prime-time use by 2000 but perhaps not all that much later. d/ ---------------------------- Dave Crocker, Director +1 408 246 8253 Internet Mail Consortium (f) +1 408 249 6205 675 Spruce Dr. dcrocker@imc.org Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA http://www.imc.org Also: iPOC member, expressing personal opinions http://www.gtld-mou.org From owner-apple Tue Jun 17 07:19:39 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id HAA25213 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 17 Jun 1997 07:19:39 +0900 (JST) Received: from BPAVMS.BPA.ARIZONA.EDU (BPAVMS.BPA.Arizona.EDU [128.196.190.11]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with SMTP id HAA25208 for ; Tue, 17 Jun 1997 07:19:35 +0900 (JST) Received: from [128.196.253.46] ([128.196.253.70]) by MISVMS.BPA.ARIZONA.EDU with SMTP; Mon, 16 Jun 1997 15:21:46 -0700 X-Sender: wfoster@bpa.arizona.edu Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 15:22:45 -0700 To: ibrahim@tjt.or.id From: wfoster@cix.org (Will Foster) Subject: Indonesia and Copyright Treaty Cc: apple@apnic.net Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Rahmat: >Let's use email, lah! I will be speaking at INET97 on the rights and responsibilities of ISPs in regards to copyrighted material that pass through their networks. I noted that Indonesia was one of 26 countries to sign the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Copyright Treaty which attempts to revise copyright laws to meet the needs of the digital era. The treaty originally gave authors rights to authorize all temporary copies and all communicaions to the public, creating grave potential liabilities for ISPs. ISPs with the help of the telecom industry suceeded in modifying the treaty and the agreed upon statement to make it potentially less onerous. (see http://www.u.arizona.edu/~wfoster/copy.htm) Do you know if the Indonesia legislature has ratified the WIPO Treaty? Or when and if it is going to? Would you happen to know who in government is responsible for copyright. Are ISPs in Indonesia concerned about the new laws that may be passed to implement the treaty? Are they organized to insure favorable implementation laws? I hope you don't mind a legal question. Some people believe that if content providers get their way, the Internet would be drastically changed. Thank you for your attention, Will Foster ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Will Foster + wfoster@bpa.arizona.edu Mosaic Group + office phone: 520 621-4124 Management Information Systems + facsimile: 520-621-2433 University of Arizona + residence: 520-319-9011 http://www.u.arizona.edu/~wfoster ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ From owner-apple Tue Jun 17 19:23:55 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id TAA00673 for apple-outgoing; Tue, 17 Jun 1997 19:23:55 +0900 (JST) Received: from mallow.singnet.com.sg (mallow.singnet.com.sg [165.21.1.11]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id TAA00616; Tue, 17 Jun 1997 19:20:34 +0900 (JST) From: laina@singnet.com.sg Received: from laina.singnet.com.sg (ts900-5625.singnet.com.sg [165.21.161.109]) by mallow.singnet.com.sg (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id SAA26605; Tue, 17 Jun 1997 18:16:51 +0800 (SST) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 97 16:47:41 Subject: APIA Membership and KL meeting X-PRIORITY: 3 (Normal) X-Mailer: Chameleon 5.0, TCP/IP for Windows, NetManage Inc. Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Apologies if you receive several posting of this mesage. This is to invite you to join the Asia & Pacific Internet Association, which was formed on the 1st May 1997. APIA is an industry trade association for Internet-related service providers. APIA was formed to discuss regional issues that other Internet bodies do not cover, such as bilateral agreements and settlements, the regional backbone, roaming, quality of service, electronic commerce standards, certification authority and regulatory matters i.e. many of the industry issues that a single provider cannot handle. It will also collect useful industry statistics for its members and make regulatory and other industry databases available to members. Since its founding, APIA has forged ties with the APNIC, CIX, ISOC, ITU, WTO, PECC and APEC. APIA hopes to be a channel for a voice for the industry in this region. For more information regarding APIA and APIA membership, please check the APIA website at http://www.apia.org. Interested and want an application form, please send e-mail to apia-inquiry@apia.org or laina@getit.org PLEASE NOTE that founding member applications will close on the 28th June 1997. PLEASE ALSO NOTE THAT there will be a lunch reception at the Legend Hotel on the 24th June at 12noon on the 9th floor of the Legend Hotel followed by an open general meeting at 2-3.30pm. After the coffee break at 4.15 there will be a members only meeting to discuss the strategic plan and adminsitrative matters. Please support this effort to give the Internet industry in this region a voice and a provide a useful resource for industry. ------------------------------------- Name: Laina Raveendran Greene E-mail: laina@getit.org Date: 6/17/97 Time: 4:47:41 PM This message was sent by Chameleon ------------------------------------- From owner-apple Thu Jun 19 20:12:34 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id UAA22951 for apple-outgoing; Thu, 19 Jun 1997 20:12:34 +0900 (JST) Received: from gatekeeper2.mcimail.com (gatekeeper2.mcimail.com [192.147.45.10]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with SMTP id UAA22946 for ; Thu, 19 Jun 1997 20:12:31 +0900 (JST) Received: from mcimail.com ([166.40.135.61]) by gatekeeper2.mcimail.com (8.6.12/8.6.10) with ESMTP id LAA18229; Thu, 19 Jun 1997 11:20:56 GMT Received: from mcimail.com by dgi0ig.mcimail.com (PMDF V5.0-8 #16895) id <01IK96P561TG96VQ97@dgi0ig.mcimail.com> for apple@apnic.net; Thu, 19 Jun 1997 11:17:26 +0000 (GMT) Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 07:16:13 -0400 (EDT) From: Albert Tramposch <0002082489@mcimail.com> Subject: Open Letter from WIPO to the Internet Community To: apple Message-id: <97061911161378/0002082489NA1EM@mcimail.com> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Priority: normal Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Dear Internet Friends: There has been some discussion in the press and on the public lists concerning the dispute resolution procedures contemplated under the Memorandum of Understanding on the Generic Top Level Domain Name Space of the Internet Domain Name System (gTLD-MoU), and the role of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Arbitration and Mediation Center in administering those procedures. It is clear that the dispute resolution procedures involving trademarks and domain names are of critical interest to domain name holders that are not intellectual property right owners. Concerns about these procedures warrant a direct communication to the Internet community to explain the contemplated dispute resolution procedures and the proposed involvement of WIPO. Accordingly, WIPO has posted an OPEN LETTER to the Internet Community concerning the domain name dispute resolution procedures under the gTLD-MoU. The OPEN LETTER can be found on the WIPO web site, at http://www.wipo.int/eng/internet/domains/openlet.htm. The gTLD-MoU, draft CORE-MoU, Proposed Substantive Guidelines Concerning Administrative Challenge Panels, and WIPO meeting documents may all be accessed through the WIPO web site (http://www.wipo.int/eng/internet/domains/index.htm). WIPO welcomes this opportunity to explain the contemplated dispute resolution procedures, and the role of the WIPO Center. Constructive comments concerning the Open Letter and the above-mentioned documents are encouraged, and may be sent to albert.tramposch@wipo.int. Thank you. From owner-apple Mon Jun 23 09:20:24 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id JAA14675 for apple-outgoing; Mon, 23 Jun 1997 09:20:24 +0900 (JST) Received: from jakarta.regex.com (jakarta.regex.com [207.106.122.2]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with SMTP id JAA14670 for ; Mon, 23 Jun 1997 09:20:18 +0900 (JST) Received: (qmail 9414 invoked from network); 23 Jun 1997 00:12:44 -0000 Received: from yapcs-r2.iscs.nus.sg (HELO yapcs-r2) (137.132.85.230) by tjt.or.id with SMTP; 23 Jun 1997 00:12:44 -0000 Message-ID: <33ADC18F.5589CEF5@tjt.or.id> Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 08:21:35 +0800 From: "Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim" Organization: VLSM-TJT X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (X11; I; Linux 2.0.27 i586) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: apple@apnic.net Subject: Starwars '97 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk I have a mixed feeling of what will happen this week in KL. Had it been in Europe, (i guess that) there will be more anti-gTLD-MoU ones. Had it been in the US, it may be even. ---- Enclosed is Hein's "Majority Rule" (1966): His party was the Brotherhood of Brothers, and there were more of them than of the others, That is, they constituted that minority. Within the party, he was of the faction that was supported by the greater fraction. And in each group, within each group, he sought the group that could command the most support. The final group had finally elected a triumvirate whom they all respected. Now of these three, two had the final word, because the two could overrule the third. One of these two was relatively weak, so one alone stood at the final peak. He was THE GREATER NUMBER of the pair which formed the most part of the three that were elected by the most of those whose boast it was to represent the most of most of most of most of the entire state - or if the most of it at any rate. He never gave himself a moment's slumber but sought the welfare of the greatest number. And all the people, everywhere they went knew to their cost exactly what it meant to be dictated to by the majority. But, that meant nothing - they were the minority. ============= Weick's (1979) comment: The important point is not that one person rules; the important point is the fact that this control is made possible by the pattern of alliances that exists in the group. It is the pattern of relationship, not the fact the a "great man" sits on top of the heap, that makes it possible for influence to be concentrated. vivaiana! -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - CEO VLSM-TJT - http://www.tjt.or.id/rms46 ISO-9000:Write down what you do, do what you write down, verify it! From owner-apple Mon Jun 23 13:37:50 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id NAA15400 for apple-outgoing; Mon, 23 Jun 1997 13:37:50 +0900 (JST) Received: from simon.pacific.net.sg (simon.pacific.net.sg [203.120.90.72]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id NAA15395 for ; Mon, 23 Jun 1997 13:37:48 +0900 (JST) Received: from po.pacific.net.sg (po3.pacific.net.sg [203.120.90.73]) by simon.pacific.net.sg with ESMTP id MAA20131; Mon, 23 Jun 1997 12:40:14 +0800 (SGT) Received: from [210.24.99.41] by po.pacific.net.sg (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-11140) with SMTP id AAA12194; Mon, 23 Jun 1997 12:40:13 +0800 From: "Lau Joon-Nie" To: , Subject: New Company for SG Domain Names Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 12:38:23 +0800 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <19970623044011.AAA12194@[210.24.99.41]> Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Hi folks, in light of INET in KL this week and all the talk about domain name administration, you might be interested to know that Singapore's National Computer Board has just formed a private company to administer the allocation of .sg domain names. The Board of Directors will comprise representatives from the 3 ISPs, Telecommunication Authority of S'pore and NCB. Some of the changes: - no more need to justify registration of the name or show some prior connection with it, e.g. a business registration or trade/servicemark registration - registrants can register more than one name without justifying for subsequent names - generic names like "computers", "cars", etc. and words of 2-3 characters will be allowed - a fee structure where the first domain name will cost S$75 (US$50) a year to register and maintain and $150 registration fee for subsequent ones (S$75 yearly maintenance). Previously, name registration was free. In keeping with the consultative spirit of the Net(!), kudos to NCB for organising a public forum for those wishing to give their feedback on the proposed scheme on Thurs 8 July 1997 at its auditorium! So far, feeling seems to be mixed over the new rules - some welcoming the substantial liberalisation whereas others fear this will lead to increased (and often expensive) litigation as third parties go round trying to obtain court orders to prevent unrelated registrants from using their registrated business/trade/servicemark names. It'll be interesting to see what other views are thrown up come July 8th. NCB's 2-page press release can be found at: http://www.nic.net.sg/press.html Cheers. ***************** Lau Joon-Nie joonlau@pacific.net.sg "Contrary to what some may think, Singapore *didn't* invent the proxy server" - Professor Bernard Tan Chairman, National Internet Advisory Committee From owner-apple Mon Jun 23 13:44:23 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id NAA15438 for apple-outgoing; Mon, 23 Jun 1997 13:44:23 +0900 (JST) Received: from simon.pacific.net.sg (simon.pacific.net.sg [203.120.90.72]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id NAA15432 for ; Mon, 23 Jun 1997 13:44:20 +0900 (JST) Received: from po.pacific.net.sg (po3.pacific.net.sg [203.120.90.73]) by simon.pacific.net.sg with ESMTP id MAA21066; Mon, 23 Jun 1997 12:46:48 +0800 (SGT) Received: from [210.24.99.41] by po.pacific.net.sg (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-11140) with SMTP id AAA16622; Mon, 23 Jun 1997 12:46:47 +0800 From: "Lau Joon-Nie" To: , Subject: Latest re New Company for SG Domain Names Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 12:44:55 +0800 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <19970623044644.AAA16622@[210.24.99.41]> Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk I've just checked the site -there's been a change of date for the SGNIC public forum - now 9 July, 9:30am, NCB Auditorium. Interested folks can sign up at forum@nic.net.sg ***************** Lau Joon-Nie joonlau@pacific.net.sg "Contrary to what some may think, Singapore *didn't* invent the proxy server" - Professor Bernard Tan Chairman, National Internet Advisory Committee From owner-apple Mon Jun 23 16:38:27 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id QAA16224 for apple-outgoing; Mon, 23 Jun 1997 16:38:27 +0900 (JST) Received: from churchill.apic.net (root@churchill.apic.net [203.26.193.3]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id QAA16219 for ; Mon, 23 Jun 1997 16:38:24 +0900 (JST) Received: from boss.apic.net (boss.apic.net [203.22.102.40]) by churchill.apic.net (8.8.5/APIC-1.0) with SMTP id RAA07761 for ; Mon, 23 Jun 1997 17:40:50 +1000 (EST) X-Org: The Asia Pacific Internet Company Pty. Ltd. Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19970623173740.00ea960c@mail.apic.net> X-Sender: bala@mail.apic.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 17:37:40 +1000 To: apple@apnic.net From: Bala Pillai Subject: ISPs and Telcos Working Together - Speech Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Some of you may be interested in the speech I made at the recent Telecoms@InternetIII in London recently. Criticisms and kudos most welcome :-) cheers../bala The Higher You Rise, the Harder You Fall - The Dinosaur Syndrome Telcos and ISPs Working Together in Asia By Bala Pillai, CEO, The Asia Pacific Internet Company bala@malaysia.net Speech at Telecoms@InternetIII, London, June 10 1997 Points 1 Bigger, stronger legacy telco monopolies in Asia 2 Survey of telco/ISP mix in key Asian sub-regions 3 Very high risk of the Dinosaur-effect 4 The pluses of Telcos working with ISPs 5 The minuses of Telcos working with ISPs 6 The Way Forward "The Higher You Rise, The Harder You Fall" may sound unnecessarily alarming. But having been shocked with the many such phenomena, including the fall of the Berlin Wall in recent times, may I humbly suggest to you that it pays to be cautious. If we were to rank telcos in the world, having telcos that are least monopolistic and telcos that are most monopolistic, there would be general agreement that North American telcos fall in one end of the spectrum and Asian telcos fall in the other end of the spectrum. The Internet is going mainstream - telcos can try to be everything to everybody or they can follow the rules of nature. In the context of historical antecedents, I urge them to seriously follow the rules of nature. And I’ll go through the reasons why. TELCO/ISP MIX IN ASIA The countries that have a free rein for ISPs are Japan, Australia, NZ, Korea and the Philippines The countries that have primarily state-owned or "telco-ISP" only regimes are China, India, Malaysia and Singapore. Countries like Taiwan, Thailand, Indonesia are somewhat in-between in their regulatory posture. THE DINOSAUR EFFECT No mainstream business model from the dairy industry to the automobile industry has a situation where the manufacturer and the neighbourhood retailer is one and the same. The telco industry is fast forced to move from state monopoly to mainstream business - this is fuelled by the rapid increase in demand for entertainment and information and the fast growth of the service sectors of economies. Manufacturers by definition have to be process and plant driven. They have to focus on making a commodity at the lowest possible cost. Retailers - think of caryards and your neighbourhood grocer - are personal relationships driven - they grasp what their small group of customers want and present an appropriate selection to them in the way they want it - and a grocer in a tourist city takes on a totally different shape to one in a rural location. There is no company in a non-monopoly situation that has done both these vastly different manufacturing and retailing functions well, and telecommunication services are no different. Lingering pleas and cries to the contrary DO not change fundamental human nature. THE PLUSES a) It follows proven business models b) It removes the antagonism that is so widespread c) Manpower costs are more variable d) It focuses telcos on what they are good at - facilitating and financing expensive capital equipment; driving process efficiencies - yes bandwidth "manufacturing" is an industry e) It removes the managment diffusion caused by attending to individual customers f) It allows a new breed of telecomputing entrepreneurs to breed - one’s whose industry ownership interests overlap that of telcos. Computer and software manufacturers have done well with this channel strategy, so will telcos. g) It simply makes sense in an infotained world - one where a significant portion of a consumer’s disposable income goes toward paying for a wide variety of bandwidth driven infotainment. h) It takes cognisance of the strength of retail ISPs and helps them overcome their weaknesses. ISPs are relationships driven. They are lean and mean. They are devoted to their geographical niche of customers. They will stay up through the night to care for their customers. They find solutions for their customers because their bread and butter literally relies on it. The ownership intensity is significantly higher than the ownership intensity of a telco employees. i) Relative to the huge capital requirement of wiring Asia, telcos are very short of cash. Given this it makes sense to allocate capital to those areas where no one else has the capacity or comparative advantage to do so. Much of the capital that would have gone into elaborate customer service and sales infrastructure is better allocated to "bandwidth manufacturing" and process efficiencies leaving resellers to drive customer service and sales investments. THE MINUSES Most of the minuses to telcos are perceived. Many telcos presume that the "bandwidth products and services" business is merely an extension of voice telephony. It is NOT. The bandwidth products and services business is to voice telephony what the transportation industry is to the horse and buggy. a) Telcos perceive a loss of revenue. Why share the cake with resellers?. We should be well past this archaic thinking. It is NOT sharing. It is NOT loss or gain. Simply put, you either use employees or resellers. You deploy manpower on a fixed cost (employee) platform or a variable cost (resellers) platform. b) Loss of control. The likes of Microsoft and Sun Microsystems have shown great prowess in a short period of time. Have they lost control? Much of latter’s success is based upon channel leverage. It is based on the allocation of capital to where they are best at. Telcos allocation of capital has been skewed due to monopoly artificialities. Knowing that this is going to change, one way or another, doesn’t it make sense to consider historically proven free market business models? THE WAY FORWARD I mince no words in saying that telcos MUST work with retail ISPs and other resellers in bringing Internet driven services to the masses. This is especially so in the case for Asian telcos given the big disparities between the capital available and the capital needed to satisfy the market’s infotainment demands. Telcos ignore this phenomena at their own peril. Ignoring this will not make this phenomena go away - it will only have the market find other solutions including to ones akin to the Star TV phenomena India. Yes, let me end with a paradoxical example to prove the point. While India has one of the weakest telephone markets in Asia, it also has one of the most dynamic cable TV markets in the world. Star TV intelligently increased its stakes in the Indian industry in what would have been viewed to be an unlikely market given the regulatory rigmaroles there. How? It produced and quickly brought a whole host of cable TV resellers and through them end- consumers to "own" the industry. By the time India’s then TV monopoly, Doodarshan, could do anything about it (while it went on with its untenable cultural imperialism rhetoric) the political landscape had changed. Star TV had, one could say, snuck in. There were too many voters who had gotten used to the wonders of cable TV for the government to backtrack. Water finds its course so does human conversation. I predict the same thing will happen to all infotainment/Internet services in India and many other countries in Asia despite contrary aberrations to the trend in the interim. Telcos would be smart if they averted this by pre-empting it. Remember, the higher they rise, the harder they fall. Thank You. --ends. --------------------------------------------------------------------- bala pillai bala@apic.net * For quick info on AIM send blank founder * asian internet marketing (aim) cybercommunity ph: +61 2 9419 5333 fax: +61 2 9419 5155 where pan-asian internet marketing, media and sales pioneers mingle. --------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-apple Wed Jun 25 12:27:59 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id MAA27643 for apple-outgoing; Wed, 25 Jun 1997 12:27:59 +0900 (JST) Received: from nostromo.apnic.net (root@[202.186.142.92]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id MAA27638 for ; Wed, 25 Jun 1997 12:27:55 +0900 (JST) Received: from nostromo.apnic.net (davidc@[127.0.0.1]) by nostromo.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA01339 for ; Wed, 25 Jun 1997 21:29:29 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <199706251229.VAA01339@nostromo.apnic.net> To: apple@teckla.apnic.net Subject: ARIN created Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 21:29:28 +0900 From: David R Conrad Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Hi, ARIN (American Registry for Internet Numbers) is APNIC's counterpart in the Americas. It has taken far, far too long for this to be created. Regards, -drc ------- Forwarded Message Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 11:09:39 -0400 From: Gordon Cook To: naipr@arin.net Subject: ARIN LIVES!!! June 24: The National Science Foundation has just announced the formation of ARIN, (The American Registry for Internet Numbers). NSF has approved a Network Solutions plan to set up the independent IP registry. All necessary documents are signed and in place. Steps to establish ARIN begin immediately. The enabling breakthrough came in negotiations between the parties last week in Washington. >From the July - August COOK Report on Internet - published today. Administration Approves Formation of ARIN, pp. 1-10 In an eleventh hour decision last week, the Clinton Administration dropped its opposition to an American Registry for Internet Numbers. Ira Magaziner finally grasped what was at stake and, to his credit, acted forcefully to end foot dragging by other agencies. We applaud these events. For the approval for NSF to set up ARIN actually takes the first important and coherent step towards the Administration's announced goal of industry driven self- regulation. Nevertheless, the road to last week's decision was marked by a remarkable amount of bungling and lack of both coordination and leadership among federal agencies that, in the feelings of some, were more interested in protecting their turf and in not making "wrong" decisions than in really trying to understand the key reasons behind the crisis in Internet governance. Several issues compounded the problem. First, OMB, because of its role in coordinating implementation of the Federal Administrative Procedures Act, took a major role in deciding what should be done. Unfortunately the players at OMB had no understanding of the complicated historical, political and legal linkages that they were dealing with when, having been called on to fix Domain Name Service, they decided also to meddle in IP numbers. Second, while the policy makers felt there were issues of control over business critical elements of DNS as well as uncertainties about the role of the ITU and viability of the IAHC process, the Inter Agency Task Force set up to deal with the issue had no leadership worthy of the name. Many of the stake holders had no grasp of the technical complexity and legal linkages between what undoubtedly first appeared to them as nothing more complicated than intellectual property aspects of obtaining business addresses in Cyberspace. One person directly involved expressed dismay to us at the enormous gulf he saw between the concerns of the network engineers and the non technical policy wonks - something that he simply did not understand but intuited to be serious. Finally, in such a context, the only way to avoid disaster, was for those interested to lobby the top policy makers such as Magaziner and do whatever it took to educate them. We report with considerable relief that this seems to be what was finally accomplished last week. What we have seen however is only Act One. There is still much that remains to be decided about DNS policy. Some court cases are underway that will likely force rapid decisions. Some are also asserting that the "old boys network" of Internet governance is dead and that the commercial Internet industry must now throw out the consensual processes that have been the foundation of the Internet's growth and prosperity. These people we have little respect for. Therefore, in order to spread awareness of what has happened, we present a detailed summary of the behind the scenes maneuvering of the past two months. In April ARIN was back on track and headed for a September 1 opening, when, suddenly at the beginning of May, we received word that ARIN was once again on hold. Why? Because OMB had decided to fix the problems of IP. The only problem was that the underlying problems, which are technical, are not administratively "fixableÓ, and the people sitting around the Inter Agency DNS Task Force table either didn't know it or would not admit it. After sending scathing private mail to an administration official, we received a reply on May 11 that told us worlds about the problem. "As far as I know -- the only outstanding objection to ARIN is whether they are dealing with number portability.? Certainly -- number portability is critical in the telephony context to promoting competition - so people are asking -- why not portability for Internet? If you have any recommendations for people on the technical side - I'd appreciate it." We passed this data along to the appropriate technical leadership of the net, went to Russia and waited for more news. When it came it was that a succession of technical folk had done the educating called for but that amazingly ARIN had been thrown a new curve. The feds were now insisting it be announced in the Federal Registry before it was formed. We were told that this new delay would kill ARIN, and that worse, it was doing nothing to solve the authority problems of the IANA. On June 2 Ken Cukier published an extremely important article in Communications Week International. It detailed the Dublin meeting of RIPE the European Registry that had occurred a few days earlier. There it was announced that both RIPE and APNIC had made monetary contributions to take up the slack in IANA funding in view of ARPA's non renewal of the contract with ISI that had paid for many of Jon Postel's functions. For the more knowledgeable here was a clear implication that, if the US government didn't do something to stabilize IANA's problems, Postel could simply move this critical piece of Internet governance outside of the US. We sent the article to our electronic subscribers as an "extra" and later heard that the contents had found their way to the June 3rd meeting of the Interagency DNS Task Force where they had had a significant impact in raising the level of consciousness of what was at stake. In the meantime, on the way home, a visit to London (June 9 -13) enabled us to discuss matters with Tony Rutkowski, some key US regulators, and the CIX President and Executive Director. These meetings gave us a more balanced view of the position of the "other side". The CIX in particular indicated a feeling that ARIN was not urgent and that it was time for commercial providers working through a US Government "process" to reshape the way the net was run. Discussion with others after our return from Russia and London has left us viewing the CIX position with considerable dismay. With ARIN on hold, needed fundamental changes in IP policy could not be made. But with dues of $1000 a year, we'd estimate that 4 out of every 5 ISPs in the ARIN service area could afford to join. Since the member ISPs will elect the ARIN Policy Council, it seems to us that on sheer numbers alone, ARIN can be an effective mechanism against unwarranted industry consolidation. We have had serious doubts about the Clinton Administration's Internet policy. In this instance the Administration did the "right thing." We hope that it will continue to do so on heels of challenges that will follow. USISPA Lawyer Fails to Understand Needs of ISPs, pp. 11 - 13 On April 28, in some critical discussions on the NAIPR mail list, USISPA lawyer Rudolph Geist painted ARIN as device hatched by a monopoly in order to become another monopoly and perpetuate the interests of Network Solutions and the big service providers. To the response of Philip Nesser "I don't believe that the process should be completely open to the public (the finances yes, but not technical applications) because the information requested may be considered proprietary by many organizations;" Geist replied: "It is highly suspicious to maintain that technical information (or any information for that matter) regarding the allocation of IP address blocks, a finite public resource (like telephone numbers or radio spectrum), should be held proprietary by a monopoly outgrowth (ARIN) of another monopoly (Internic)." It developed that at least in one instance his way of trying to get an address block for his clients was by threatening to sue InterNic or force it to break the procedures set forth in RFC 2050. We believe that neither Mr. Geist nor his organization deserves respect. Seven New gTLDs Make No Business Sense, p. 14 A short cogent critique by Vanderbilt Professor Donna Hoffman UUNET and Sprint Charging for Peering, pp. 15 - 23 At the very end of April, in an explosion that rocked the Well and its ISP Whole Earth Networks (WeNet), David Holub, WeNet's founder refused an order from Well owner Bruce Katz to capitulate to UUNET's demand for paid peering. Holub was fired for taking what we view as a courageous stand against UUNET's insidious policy (since modified) of insisting that anyone who wished to even talk about remaining a UUNET peer would have to sign a non disclosure agreement that would presumably keep the fact that paid peering was under discussion and the price paid for peering a secret. UUNET actually had bought about three months of silence with this policy before Holub's courageous action blew the whistle. In the meantime Sprint began a policy by which its peers would have to pay in declining amounts, according to the number of exchange points where they conducted peering. Sprint's prices represent an average cost increase of $200,000 a year for each peer. If we look at the big five privately peered providers, we can see that, should all of them start doing what Sprint and UUNET have done, the average increase in operating expenses for the peers would be a million dollars a year per backbone. While Sprint and UUNET offered technical justifications for their charges, the cost benefit assessment of who should settle with whom in a connectionless network is still no more clear than it has been in the many many discussions of these kinds of issues that have cropped up on NANOG and elsewhere over the last couple of years. What does seem obvious is that there may be strong anti-competitive elements lurking in these new policies. Roughly two years ago the big five established criteria for free peering. Since then between 15 and 20 national high speed backbones have appeared that meet the criteria - - far more than many ever imagined possible. Now that this has happened, at least some of the big five are changing the rules in such a way as to put a financial squeeze on their own would be competitors. We present our own analysis of these events and a summary of mail list discussion from early May through mid June. Holub's Model of Open Peering Open Interconnect Internet, pp. 24 - 26 David Holub went to the California PUC and managed to have WeNet declared a common carrier. In a NANOG discussion with Kent England, he presents his strategy for open peering. Choosing an Upstream Provider and the Cost Equation for Dial Up Service, pp. 27-29, 48 On inet-access Sean Donelan provides valuable advice on the variable to consider when shopping for backbone service. Also welcome news is ANS's recent serious entry into providing backbone service for ISPs. In a second discussion, several ISPs respond to Avi Freedman's query on the costs of providing their dial up service. NSF Inspector General's Defunct Plan to Tax Domain Names, pp. 30 -35 This absurd plan was officially rejected on April 17. We publish our analysis of it and the plan itself in full as a monument to the kind of thinking that real policy makers should in future avoid. State of Russian Internet, p. 36 Brief reflections on internet developments in Russia. Book Reviews, pp. 37 - 40 Reviews of recent O'Reilly books on Java and the Web by Russian programmers in St Petersburg. K - 12 Technology Debate, pp. 41 - 46 Part 2 of a debate between Ferdi Serim and Jeff Michka. Part 1 appeared in the Feb 97 COOK Report. ************************************************************************ The COOK Report on Internet For subsc. pricing & more than 431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 USA ten megabytes of free material (609) 882-2572 (phone & fax) visit http://cookreport.com/ Internet: cook@cookreport.com On line speech of critics under attack by Ewing NJ School Board, go to http://cookreport.com/sboard.shtml ************************************************************************ ------- End of Forwarded Message From owner-apple Fri Jun 27 16:06:06 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id QAA13702 for apple-outgoing; Fri, 27 Jun 1997 16:06:06 +0900 (JST) Received: from churchill.apic.net (churchill.apic.net [203.26.193.3]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id QAA13697 for ; Fri, 27 Jun 1997 16:06:01 +0900 (JST) Received: from boss.apic.net (boss.apic.net [203.22.102.40]) by churchill.apic.net (8.8.5/APIC-1.0) with SMTP id RAA00742 for ; Fri, 27 Jun 1997 17:08:11 +1000 (EST) X-Org: The Asia Pacific Internet Company Pty. Ltd. Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19970627170441.0074773c@mail.apic.net> X-Sender: bala@mail.apic.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 17:04:41 +1000 To: apple@apnic.net From: Bala Pillai Subject: TELCO/AU: 4 Melbourne Councils To Introduce Overhead Cable Levy Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk I think this is the beginning of a great trend - it would be nice if the most lucrative local loop were free but I think just as local roads are to interstate highways, the best "owners" of local loops are local councils. I believe we'll have better luck with keeping the telcos honest as this trend develops. We'll watch as this trend develops. cheers../bala bala@apic.net News item:- Source: AAP through C & M Newsletter, Australia, Pg 6, June 30 1997, 4 Melbourne Councils To Introduce Overhead Cable Levy Four municipal councils in Melbourne are to start charging rates on cables installed by telecommunications companies. And they predict the move will yield them tens of thousands of dollars in revenue. The cities of Yarra, Moreland, Frankston and Bayside say they expect other councils to follow suit. >From July 1, companies with overhead or underground cables in the four municipalities will pay a rate for every kilometre of underground cable. Mayor of Yarra Councillor Linda Hoskins speaking on behalf of the four councils, said the rate will apply to present and future cabling. forwarded by:- --------------------------------------------------------------------- bala pillai bala@apic.net * For quick info on AIM send blank founder * asian internet marketing (aim) cybercommunity ph: +61 2 9419 5333 fax: +61 2 9419 5155 where pan-asian internet marketing, media and sales pioneers mingle. --------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-apple Sat Jun 28 11:19:55 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id LAA19045 for apple-outgoing; Sat, 28 Jun 1997 11:19:55 +0900 (JST) Received: from mallow.singnet.com.sg (mallow.singnet.com.sg [165.21.1.11]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id LAA19040 for ; Sat, 28 Jun 1997 11:19:42 +0900 (JST) From: laina@singnet.com.sg Received: from laina.singnet.com.sg (ts900-7003.singnet.com.sg [165.21.165.23]) by mallow.singnet.com.sg (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id KAA20386 for ; Sat, 28 Jun 1997 10:21:59 +0800 (SST) Date: Sat, 28 Jun 97 10:16:15 Subject: FW: CYBERSPACE-LAW #83: COMMUNICATIONS DECENCY ACT OVERTURNED To: apple@apnic.net X-PRIORITY: 3 (Normal) X-Mailer: Chameleon 5.0, TCP/IP for Windows, NetManage Inc. Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk For those of you not on the cyberlaw list, here is some interesting news. Laina RG --- On Thu, 26 Jun 1997 21:27:40 -0700 Alan Lewine wrote: -------------------------------------------------------- CYBERSPACE LAW FOR NON-LAWYERS Topic: COMMUNICATIONS DECENCY ACT OVERTURNED E-Mail Number: 83 Date Posted: June 26, 1997 * * * * * * * * * This morning (I'm writing on Thursday the 26th of June) the Supreme Court released its opinion on the Communications Decency Act (CDA). All nine justices found the CDA largely unconstitutional. Seven of the Justices completely struck the prohibitions on "indecent" and "patently offensive" expression from the law of the land. Two -- Justice O'Connor joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist -- found aspects of these provisions slavageable. All of the justices agreed that prohibitions on obscene expression in the CDA were consistent with existing law and precedent and not protected by the First Amendment. The CDA's ban on Internet obscenity, which was not challenged in this suit, thus remains on the books. Our authors are preparing a more in-depth look at this historic decision, which we'll post over the next week or so, so please stay tuned. The Supreme Court's opinion is online already in a variety of places, including http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/96-511.ZS.html. As you may recall from our earlier discussion of this law in our e-mail Posts # 71 - 76, this represents the first time the Supreme Court has had the opportunity to take a close look at the Internet and decide how principles of First Amendment law apply to the medium. You can review those lessons from this Cyberspace Law for Non-Lawyers seminar at http://www.ssrn.com/cyberlaw. By the way, one of our authors -- Larry Lessig -- was cited prominently in the text of the concurrance/dissent by Justice O'Connor! Alan Lewine Editor Cyberspace Law for Non-Lawyers * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * authors: Larry Lessig David Post Eugene Volokh * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Cyberspace-Law for Non-Lawyers is presented by the Cyberspace Law Institute (http://www.cli.org) and Social Science Electronic Publishing (http://www.ssrn.com). Please note that this is an announcement-only list and not a discussion list. Please, do not attempt to post comments to the list, as they will be ignored. We have, however, recently opened a discussion site at http://www.ssrn.com/webx?14@^36@.ee6b2aa or go to our homepage at http://www.ssrn.com/cyberlaw/CyberspaceLawList.html then just click on the word "Discussion" at the top of the page to enter and join or begin a discussion thread. ---------------------------------------------------------- We also now have an indexed archive of all the Cyberspace-Law for Non-Lawyers materials posted on the web at http://www.ssrn.com/cyberlaw You can also use e-mail to retrieve all of the material posted to date on Cyberspace-Law For Non-Lawyers by sending e-mail to: LISTSERV@PUBLISHER.SSRN.COM with the (optional) subject line: GET INDEX and in the body, type the message: GET CYBERSPACE-LAW.LOG9608 GET CYBERSPACE-LAW.LOG9609 GET CYBERSPACE-LAW.LOG9610 GET CYBERSPACE-LAW.LOG9611 GET CYBERSPACE-LAW.LOG9612 GET CYBERSPACE-LAW.LOG9701 GET CYBERSPACE-LAW.LOG9702 GET CYBERSPACE-LAW.LOG9703 GET CYBERSPACE-LAW.LOG9704 Type all nine lines above to get all the materials posted to date delivered by e-mail. If you want only some of the materials, you can type into the body of your message the line ending in "LOG9608" to get the materials posted through August '96. Type the line ending in "LOG9609" to receive all the materials posted in September, etc. ------------------------------------------------------------ To subscribe to Cyberspace-Law on the web, go to SSRN's homepage at http://www.ssrn.com/cyberlaw/CyberspaceLawList.html where you will find a simple form to fill out. ------------------------------ OR you can subscribe by e-mail by sending e-mail to: LISTSERV@PUBLISHER.SSRN.COM with the subject line (optional): SUBSCRIBE and the body message in the first line: SUBSCRIBE CYBERSPACE-LAW FIRSTNAME LASTNAME replacing "FIRSTNAME" and "LASTNAME" with your first and last names (or such pseudonyms as you prefer). ------------------------------------------------------------ To signoff (unsubscribe to) Cyberspace-Law, send a message to: LISTSERV@PUBLISHER.SSRN.COM with the subject line (optional): SIGNOFF and the body message in the first line: SIGNOFF CYBERSPACE-LAW (Do NOT include your name in an unsubscribe message.) ------------------------------- Thanks for your interest and for joining us in this seminar on Cyberspace Law for Non-Lawyers. Yours virtually, Alan Lewine Cyberspace-Law Editor and Listmeister Alan_R_Lewine@SSRN.com -----------------End of Original Message----------------- ------------------------------------- Name: Laina Raveendran Greene E-mail: laina@singnet.com.sg Date: 6/28/97 Time: 10:16:15 AM This message was sent by Chameleon ------------------------------------- From owner-apple Sat Jun 28 18:42:04 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id SAA21319 for apple-outgoing; Sat, 28 Jun 1997 18:42:04 +0900 (JST) Received: from out1.ibm.net (out1.ibm.net [165.87.194.252]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id SAA21313 for ; Sat, 28 Jun 1997 18:41:58 +0900 (JST) Received: from default (slip139-92-82-123.bar.es.ibm.net [139.92.82.123]) by out1.ibm.net (8.8.5/8.6.9) with ESMTP id JAA99516 for ; Sat, 28 Jun 1997 09:44:20 GMT Message-Id: <199706280944.JAA99516@out1.ibm.net> From: "Javier Ribas" To: "Apple Lista de distribucion" Subject: Is a crack legal? Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 11:45:05 +0200 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Last week in Spain took place the first criminal action against the owners of a web site who offered cracks to Spanish Internet users. As you know, a crack is a small piece of software that permits remove all logical protections that the author introduces in the code in order to avoid unauthorized copying of a computer program. Under Spanish law, cracks are illegal, because article 207 of Criminal Code punish all acts related with writing, keeping or putting available a logical or phisical device that permits remove a software protection, even in the cases that the offender has no commercial proposes. Cracks that remove limitations in the use of a program (i.e. demos, beta, etc.) are also illegal. The European Directive of 1991 on legal protection of software has also provisions against cracks and similar tools. This case is very interesting because the web site was hosted in two servers in Spain and in USA. In both cases we have no problems concerning jurisdiction issues, because Spanish courts can pursue all crimes organized in Spain by Spanish citizens and addressed to Spanish users. In addition, both domains .com and .es were registered in Internic and ES-Nic by the same Spanish person that developed the web site, and LOG's of servers showed that all visitors were Spanish. So, the Spanish Court where we filed the criminal action has jurisdiction to judge this case. The only question that lawyers of the presumed infractors have is what happens with cracks provided by US server. They say that, in the US, cracks are legal and web sites providing cracks are legal. This is not a problem for us because all reasons explained before, but it would be very useful for us to have an opinion of members of this forum about copyright law and juditial decisions related with this matter. We think that may be interesting for all people interested in copyright issues to have an international report about cracks as a tool that permits to infringe the copyright of a program's author. Thanks for your attention. Xavier Ribas ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- RIBAS & RODRIGUEZ Abogados Asociados http://www.onnet.es ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ATENCION: Las comunicaciones con nuestro despacho están protegidas por el secreto profesional. Por ello le solicitamos que utilice sistemas de cifrado que garanticen la confidencialidad de sus consultas. Si no dispone de programas de encriptación, puede solicitarlo a nuestro despacho. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-apple Sun Jun 29 22:08:54 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id WAA02413 for apple-outgoing; Sun, 29 Jun 1997 22:08:54 +0900 (JST) Received: from apnic-ttc.apnic.net (firewall-user@apnic-ttc.apnic.net [203.178.142.242]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with SMTP id WAA02408 for ; Sun, 29 Jun 1997 22:08:52 +0900 (JST) Received: by apnic-ttc.apnic.net; id VAA07587; Sun, 29 Jun 1997 21:52:22 +0900 Received: from unknown(10.0.10.5) by apnic-ttc.apnic.net via smap (g3.0.3) id xma007585; Sun, 29 Jun 97 21:51:54 +0900 Received: from apnic.net (davidc@localhost) by palmtree.jp.apnic.net (8.8.2/8.8.2) with ESMTP id WAA22147 for ; Sun, 29 Jun 1997 22:09:30 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <199706291309.WAA22147@palmtree.jp.apnic.net> X-Authentication-Warning: palmtree.jp.apnic.net: davidc owned process doing -bs To: apple@apnic.net Subject: Australian content regulation Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 22:09:30 +0900 From: "David R. Conrad" Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk ------- Forwarded Message Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 19:39:35 +0800 From: Kimberley Heitman To: waia-committee@waia.asn.au cc: efa-board@efa.org.au, rene@pobox.com, saia-committee@saia.asn.au, aussie-isp@aussie.net, kauer@pcug.org.au, tomw@acslink.net.au Subject: [Oz-ISP] Press release - Senate Report on Internet Regulation ********* Press Release - WA Internet Association ********* SENATE WANTS INTERNET PORN COPS AND $100,000 FINES The Senate Committee on Community Standards has just handed down its third report , which proposes fees, fines and harsh policing of the Internet. The WA Internet Association today condemned the majority report, and called for the Senate to re-examine plans for Federal legislation. The report's most contentious recommendation , rejected by the Labor and Democrat Senators on the Committee , was to ban the transmission of material rated legal for adults in other media. Effectively, the majority report seeks a G-rated Internet , with fines of $100,000 for non-compliance. Kim Heitman , spokesperson for WAIA , said "The Internet is a global network , not a local broadcast. The laws in Australia can't affect the content available on the Internet. This report would unfairly target Australia system operators , and freedom of expression would be severely restricted." "The costs of classifying Internet material would be huge ... some public and private web sites have hundreds of pages of data on every possible topic. To rate Internet material by guidelines for films is unrealistic and shows no understanding of the medium." "The proposal to have police paid to spot-audit web sites is unnecessary. Evidence before the Committee that illegal material represented less than a third of one per cent of Internet content was ignored." "New laws are unnecessary , and this report is the costliest Government proposal yet. It's time for the government to reject the majority report and consult with the industry and the community for a better solution." The WA Internet Association rejected the Committee's support for a bureaucratic Code of Practice for the Internet Industry based on the draft code prepared by the now-defunct Internet Industry Association of Australia. Mr Heitman said "The INTIAA code had no industry credibility and would have been impossible for smaller service providers due to cost of compliance. The only codes of practice with widespread industry support were those developed by WAIA and the South Australian Internet Association. These codes emphasise education and cooperation with authorities rather than harsh censorship." WAIA calls upon the WA Government to reject harsh Federal laws and to urge other States to do the same. The Federal proposals can only proceed with enabling legislation in all States and Territories. WAIA Media Contact: Kimberley Heitman Phone: (08) 9458 2790 E-Mail: kheitman@it.com.au -------------------------------------------------------------- Background: The Committee report is available at: http://senate.aph.gov.au/committee/reports.html Transcripts of the Committee's hearings are available at: http://www.agps.gov.au/parl/committee/comsen.htm WA Internet Association Home Page : http://www.waia.asn.au/ - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Kimberley James Heitman http://www.multiline.com.au/~kheit/ Internet kheitman@it.com.au Fidonet 3:690/254.14 Telephone +618 9458 2790 Facsimile +618 9356 1247 - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- Email "unsubscribe aussie-isp" to majordomo@aussie.net to be removed. Reminder: posts to list only accepted from your subscribed email address ------- End of Forwarded Message From owner-apple Mon Jun 30 11:13:56 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id LAA08696 for apple-outgoing; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 11:13:56 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id LAA08689 for ; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 11:13:50 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA11951; Sun, 29 Jun 1997 21:04:00 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC84D1.25181DA0@webster.unety.net>; Sun, 29 Jun 1997 21:12:26 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC84D1.25181DA0@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "'Stephen Sprunk'" Cc: "'apple@apnic.net'" , "naipr@arin.net" Subject: RE: ARIN /8s ? Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 21:12:25 -0500 Encoding: 67 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk On Sunday, June 29, 1997 8:21 PM, Stephen Sprunk[SMTP:spsprunk@paranet.com] wrote: @ At 18:36 29-06-97 -0500, you wrote: @ >The InterNIC, APNIC and RIPE were recently "given" or "leased" @ >new /8 allocations. The value of these allocations is millions of @ >dollars. @ @ Please tell us how you determined the value of these allocations. @ The street value of a /16 is $50,000 to $100,000. I am sure you can multiply... @ >APNIC and RIPE have recently stated that they are providing @ >"funding" to the IANA. The InterNIC and NSI have been providing @ >funding already. @ @ This funding is for the operation of the registry and does not involve the @ purchase/leasing of IP addresses. @ Without IP addresses (inventory) the registry is out of business. @ >Somewhere all of these assets and payments have to show @ >up on someone's books....I would assume... @ @ Since there are no payments and IP addresses are not an asset, they do not @ have to appear on paper anywhere. @ IP addresses have already been determined to be an asset by the IRS. From what I understand, the IRS has already sold them as part of bankrupcy and tax settlements. @ >Since ARIN claims it will be an IRS approved 501(c)6, I would @ >assume that all of these details will be spelled out in the ARIN @ >books and records. For example, if these are leases, what is @ >the term of the lease ? (BTW, ask the people in Hong Kong about @ >leases and the terms) @ @ The term of all IANA-registry IP leases appears to be indefinite; I doubt @ any formal terms have been put in writing yet. @ Surely there must be something in writing that indicates why APNIC is able to get IP addresses. How did APNIC come to have a monopoly for the Asia/Pacific region ? Are you implying that other companies, for instance an Australian company, could also obtain IP addresses just like APNIC ? Surely there must be an RFC documented procedure. There is an RFC for everything else. @ >P.S. You claim that Jon Postel owns all of the IP @ >addresses. Can you tell me when he bought them ? @ @ He didn't; I'll leave the explanation to the more eloquent David Conrad. @ He owns them....but he did not buy them....interesting... ...and now he leases them...but does not sell them... -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation From owner-apple Mon Jun 30 11:19:13 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id LAA08771 for apple-outgoing; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 11:19:13 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id LAA08740; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 11:18:03 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA11962; Sun, 29 Jun 1997 21:08:19 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC84D1.BF630460@webster.unety.net>; Sun, 29 Jun 1997 21:16:45 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC84D1.BF630460@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "'Bradley Dunn'" , "pagan@apnic.net" Cc: "'apple@apnic.net'" Subject: RE: past vs future use Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 21:16:43 -0500 Encoding: 20 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk On Sunday, June 29, 1997 4:13 PM, Bradley Dunn[SMTP:bradley@dunn.org] wrote: @ On Sat, 28 Jun 1997, Randy Bush wrote: @ @ > Assuming the above, what do we do for new applicants? And I mean the @ > question seriously and seek constructive suggesions. @ @ Copy APNIC. If APNIC's ISP policies were available to all regardless of @ geographic location, I think many of those who are now unhappy would be @ satisfied. @ I am not sure about that. Several people (mostly from Australia) have told me that there are real problems with the APNIC policies. I think that Australia should have its own APNIC/ARIN/RIPE etc. -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation From owner-apple Mon Jun 30 11:35:32 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id LAA08991 for apple-outgoing; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 11:35:32 +0900 (JST) Received: from apnic-ttc.apnic.net (firewall-user@apnic-ttc.apnic.net [203.178.142.242]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with SMTP id LAA08974; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 11:35:25 +0900 (JST) Received: by apnic-ttc.apnic.net; id LAA10098; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 11:18:53 +0900 Received: from unknown(10.0.10.4) by apnic-ttc.apnic.net via smap (g3.0.3) id xma010091; Mon, 30 Jun 97 11:18:28 +0900 Received: from apnic.net (davidc@localhost) by moonsky.jp.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id LAA11110; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 11:35:54 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <199706300235.LAA11110@moonsky.jp.apnic.net> X-Authentication-Warning: moonsky.jp.apnic.net: davidc owned process doing -bs To: Jim Fleming cc: "'Bradley Dunn'" , "pagan@apnic.net" , "'apple@apnic.net'" , davidc@apnic.net Subject: Re: past vs future use In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 29 Jun 1997 21:16:43 EST." <01BC84D1.BF630460@webster.unety.net> Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 11:35:54 +0900 From: "David R. Conrad" Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Jimmy, >@ Copy APNIC. If APNIC's ISP policies were available to all regardless of >@ geographic location, I think many of those who are now unhappy would be >@ satisfied. > >I am not sure about that. Why am I not surprised? >Several people (mostly from Australia) >have told me that there are real problems with the APNIC >policies. Please be sure to tell the "several people" to contact APNIC and we'll see what we can do to resolve any issues they might have. However, as you are privy to their complaints, perhaps you would care to pass them on? No need to attibute them, I'm sure you would never make something up just to attempt to prove a point. >I think that Australia should have its own APNIC/ARIN/RIPE etc. Tell the "several people" to contact the IANA and request a new regional registry be established. Of course, they'll need to prove consensus for the region. Might be a tough sell though, given the 200 or so existing APNIC members, including around 30 or so in AU, have not expressed displeasure with APNIC's policies (some have complained about costs, but when suggested to ask to request a waiver from the APNIC Executive Council, they have not done so). Regards, -drc From owner-apple Mon Jun 30 11:39:24 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id LAA09081 for apple-outgoing; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 11:39:24 +0900 (JST) Received: from unir.corp (root@[207.32.128.74]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id LAA09064; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 11:39:08 +0900 (JST) Received: from webster.unety.net (webster.unety.net [207.32.128.58]) by unir.corp (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA12008; Sun, 29 Jun 1997 21:29:25 -0500 (CDT) Received: by webster.unety.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BC84D4.B1DE4B80@webster.unety.net>; Sun, 29 Jun 1997 21:37:51 -0500 Message-ID: <01BC84D4.B1DE4B80@webster.unety.net> From: Jim Fleming To: "'David R. Conrad'" Cc: "'apple@apnic.net'" , "'Bradley Dunn'" , "pagan@apnic.net" Subject: RE: past vs future use Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 21:37:49 -0500 Encoding: 14 TEXT Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk On Sunday, June 29, 1997 9:35 PM, David R. Conrad[SMTP:davidc@apnic.net] wrote: @ @ Tell the "several people" to contact the IANA and request a new @ regional registry be established. Of course, they'll need to prove @ consensus for the region. Is that what you did to create APNIC ? Has ARIN done that ? -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation From owner-apple Mon Jun 30 11:59:28 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id LAA09591 for apple-outgoing; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 11:59:28 +0900 (JST) Received: from apnic-ttc.apnic.net (firewall-user@apnic-ttc.apnic.net [203.178.142.242]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with SMTP id LAA09583; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 11:59:25 +0900 (JST) Received: by apnic-ttc.apnic.net; id LAA10178; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 11:42:52 +0900 Received: from unknown(10.0.10.4) by apnic-ttc.apnic.net via smap (g3.0.3) id xma010169; Mon, 30 Jun 97 11:42:24 +0900 Received: from apnic.net (davidc@localhost) by moonsky.jp.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id LAA11199; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 11:59:54 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <199706300259.LAA11199@moonsky.jp.apnic.net> X-Authentication-Warning: moonsky.jp.apnic.net: davidc owned process doing -bs To: Jim Fleming cc: "'David R. Conrad'" , "'apple@apnic.net'" , "'Bradley Dunn'" , "pagan@apnic.net" Subject: Re: past vs future use In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 29 Jun 1997 21:37:49 EST." <01BC84D4.B1DE4B80@webster.unety.net> Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 11:59:54 +0900 From: "David R. Conrad" Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Jimmy, >@ Tell the "several people" to contact the IANA and request a new >@ regional registry be established. Of course, they'll need to prove >@ consensus for the region. >Is that what you did to create APNIC ? Yup, with the proviso that I didn't "create" APNIC, I'm merely the hired help. I was significantly involved in the establishment of APNIC, but not the sole "creator". >Has ARIN done that ? Yup. Now Jimmy, what were those complaints you mentioned? We wouldn't want to give the impression you were making stuff up again, now would we? Regards, -drc From owner-apple Mon Jun 30 12:18:40 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id MAA10010 for apple-outgoing; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 12:18:40 +0900 (JST) Received: from exchange2.ntu.edu.sg ([155.69.1.31]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id MAA10001 for ; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 12:18:32 +0900 (JST) Received: by EXCHANGE2 with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) id ; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 11:16:36 +0800 Message-ID: <6262D2BDE3E6D01186B508002BB487E10BB549@EXCHANGE2> From: Ang Peng Hwa To: apple@apnic.net Subject: RE: Australian content regulation Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 11:16:33 +0800 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Comments based on a very quick cursory glance at a subject close to my heart but on a gray Monday morning: 1. With all due respect to the WAIA, its claims seems to me a tad overblown. I have a lot of regard for any policy papers on the Internet coming from Australia after the Australian Broadcasting Authority's 1996 work: Investigation into the content of on-line services. It is the only content regulation report that I know of that has asked for comments worldwide. The Internet after all is worldwide, so why restrict requests for comments only within one's boundaries. (Modesty disallows me from naming someone who is no. 188 on the list of 219 submissions.) >The report's most contentious recommendation , rejected by >the Labor >and Democrat Senators on the Committee , was to ban the >transmission >of material rated legal for adults in other media. Effectively, >the >majority report seeks a G-rated Internet , with fines of >$100,000 for non-compliance. I did not see that but maybe if I look harder. Overall, the scheme seems to me to be: ISPs should develop a code of practice. Yes, there is a fine of $100k max. but it seems to me the stress was more on code rather than fine. 2. ISPs who abide by the code are mentioned as exempt from liability. There is even a Good Samaritan provision so that the verdict in the Prodigy case (attempt to censor backfired and created liability instead) would not happen. Seems to me sensible. 3. What is new is "Recommendation 8: That the Australian Government pursue at appropriate international forums the concept of classification at source of all material placed on-line, based on an agreed set of classification standards. (para 3.89)." This is the logical answer to "but the Internet is a worldwide medium so how can governments regulate." The bold answer from Australia is: so let's get governments together. My hunch is that if this happens, will be lowest common denominator classification for such areas as child porno, fraud, hacking, and perhaps defamation and impersonation. 4. I am not familiar with the Australian free speech clause in the constitution but should the recommendations be implemented and WAIA thinks some of them are unconstitutional, then they should challenge them in court. 5. My guess is that the fears of the WAIA is overstated. The ABA report of 1996 is a very thorough summary of the issues of content regulation and Australia is very aware of the ramifications. Regards, Peng Hwa ANG From owner-apple Mon Jun 30 19:32:32 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.6/8.7.1) id TAA14826 for apple-outgoing; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 19:32:32 +0900 (JST) Received: from sigma.itu.ch (sigma.itu.ch [156.106.128.30]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.6/8.7.1) with ESMTP id TAA14821 for ; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 19:32:13 +0900 (JST) Received: from ties.itu.ch (ties.itu.ch) by ITU.CH (PMDF V5.0-6 #16074) id <01IKOMKA8R1693632D@ITU.CH>; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 12:33:32 +0200 Received: from none.itu.ch (slip139-92-111-106.gen.ch.ibm.net [139.92.111.106]) by ties.itu.ch (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id MAA08670; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 12:33:31 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 12:36:41 -0700 From: Robert Shaw Subject: ITU Press Release: Council Endorses ITU Role in Internet Top Level Domain Names To: gtld-discuss@gtld-mou.org, newdom@ar.com, domain-policy@lists.internic.net, apple@apnic.net Message-id: <33B80AC9.237583FB@itu.int> Organization: ITU MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.0b5 [en] (Win95; I) Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Hi, Below is an ITU press release announcing the ITU's Admininstrative Council's Endorsement of the ITU's Role in Internet Top Level Domain Names. The reference on the ITU web site is http://www.itu.int/PPI/press/releases/1997/itu-11.html Robert ---- ITU/97-11 27 June 1997 Original: English Council Endorses ITU Role in Internet Top Level Domain Names Geneva – The annual meeting of ITU Council yesterday endorsed the approach taken by the International Telecommunication Union to act as the depository for a new Memorandum of Understanding on Internet generic Top Level Domain names. The gTLD Memorandum of Understanding is the result of a meeting hosted by the ITU in Geneva last April. This meeting was convened to present to the Internet community the results of a study undertaken by the International Ad-Hoc Committee on changes to the registration system of Internet Top Level Domain names, which is the system by which Internet addresses are allocated. At that meeting, ITU Secretary-General Dr Pekka Tarjanne took the initiative of accepting to act as the Depository of the MoU. The new role for the ITU was welcomed by Council members when it was presented to the meeting at a special late-night session on Thursday 26 June. It was acknowledged that wider consultation was required among ITU membership but that, when time was of essence, opportunities of such crucial importance should not be missed. The delegates from France and Switzerland underlined the special role the ITU had to play in the future development of the Internet, being the international telecommunication organization par excellence. The ITU was praised for the initiative taken on account that having failed to do so would have meant a lost opportunity for the Union to be involved in a very important issue. The French representative urged all ITU Members to interest themselves in this work, which would benefit from the widest possible international consultation to achieve global Internet self-governance. He also added that his administration was concerned to ensure that the Internet did not become over-regulated, while at the same time safeguarding principles of fair and broad competition in the operation of the network. The German delegation, while regretting the short notice given for the April meeting, said his delegation was very positive about the ITU's role, but felt that a better representation of interests from European entities was necessary. He stressed that the ITU representation in the Policy Oversight Committee should safeguard the interests of the Members of ITU (187 Member States and 432 Sectors members representing public and private companies and organizations with an interest in telecommunications). Adding its voice to the discussion, the delegate of Pakistan said he believed the Internet would be of great importance in the future, and that is was vital that the ITU play a leadership role in this area. He said the enormous impact the Internet has already had on text transmission would very soon also be seen in the areas of voice telephony and broadcasting. "At present, in developing countries there is a lack of information which would enable us to prepare ourselves for the technical, social, legal and cultural implications of this new technology," said Mr Javed, Chairman of the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority. "There is a need for collective action to find common ground so that instead of fearing this new technology we can instead make good use of it." A proposal from the US delegation to entrust the Chairman of Council, Mr Mauricio Bossa of Argentina, with the task of carrying out an inquiry into the substance of the MoU and on the ITU's role, was unanimously approved. Mr Richard Beaird, Senior Deputy Coordinator with the US State Department, said April's meeting of the Internet Ad-Hoc Committee "went to the heart of the future expansion of Internet services, including its commercialization." He proposed that all ITU Members be surveyed with a view to making comments on the role envisioned for the ITU in the implementation of the MoU and on its substance. A period of 60 days would be allowed for response, after which the ITU would circulate the results to its membership and all concerned. Mr Beaird stated that although the US Government was considering several options on the question of Internet gTLDs and had not endorsed any plan, the momentum of the April meeting should not be lost. -- From owner-apple Mon Jun 30 21:37:47 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.6/8.7.1) id VAA16098 for apple-outgoing; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 21:37:47 +0900 (JST) Received: from jakarta.regex.com (jakarta.regex.com [207.106.122.2]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.6/8.7.1) with SMTP id VAA16092 for ; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 21:37:41 +0900 (JST) Received: (qmail 19933 invoked from network); 30 Jun 1997 12:29:31 -0000 Received: from yapcs-r2.iscs.nus.sg (HELO yapcs-r2) (137.132.85.230) by tjt.or.id with SMTP; 30 Jun 1997 12:29:31 -0000 Message-ID: <33B7A8BF.C9B1256@tjt.or.id> Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 20:38:24 +0800 From: "Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim" Organization: VLSM-TJT X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (X11; I; Linux 2.0.29 i586) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: apple@apnic.net Subject: I am not happy with IANA's policy (so what?) References: <199706300259.LAA11199@moonsky.jp.apnic.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk > [...] given the 200 or so existing APNIC members, including > around 30 or so in AU, have not expressed displeasure with > APNIC's policies [...] Mm ... just 200 ISPs representing the AP area ? I am just one -- no worth to fight, lah ... Nevertheless, IP addresses ain't nothing 'till they are routable. Therefore, I am just wonder what the router owners have to say ... tabe, -- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim - CEO VLSM-TJT - http://www.tjt.or.id/rms46 ISO-9000:Write down what you do, do what you write down, verify it! From owner-apple Mon Jun 30 22:15:43 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.6/8.7.1) id WAA16205 for apple-outgoing; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 22:15:43 +0900 (JST) Received: from apnic-ttc.apnic.net (firewall-user@apnic-ttc.apnic.net [203.178.142.242]) by teckla.apnic.net (8.8.6/8.7.1) with SMTP id WAA16198; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 22:15:40 +0900 (JST) Received: by apnic-ttc.apnic.net; id VAA12225; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 21:58:53 +0900 Received: from unknown(10.0.10.5) by apnic-ttc.apnic.net via smap (g3.0.3) id xma012222; Mon, 30 Jun 97 21:58:39 +0900 Received: from apnic.net (davidc@localhost) by palmtree.jp.apnic.net (8.8.2/8.8.2) with ESMTP id WAA25020; Mon, 30 Jun 1997 22:16:15 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <199706301316.WAA25020@palmtree.jp.apnic.net> X-Authentication-Warning: palmtree.jp.apnic.net: davidc owned process doing -bs To: "Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim" cc: apple@apnic.net, davidc@apnic.net Subject: Re: I am not happy with IANA's policy (so what?) In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 30 Jun 1997 20:38:24 +0800." <33B7A8BF.C9B1256@tjt.or.id> Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 22:16:15 +0900 From: "David R. Conrad" Sender: owner-apple@apnic.net Precedence: bulk Hi, I suspect this is the wrong forum. A likely better place is "Policies And Guidelines for the Assignment of Network numbers" , to subscribe, send a message body of "subscribe" to pagan-request@apnic.net. However, with that said: >> [...] given the 200 or so existing APNIC members, including >> around 30 or so in AU, have not expressed displeasure with >> APNIC's policies [...] >Mm ... just 200 ISPs representing the AP area ? Who said anything about representation? It is a sample. As an aside however, I would note that member != ISP (e.g., JPNIC is composed of about 160 or so ISPs). >Nevertheless, IP addresses ain't nothing 'till they are routable. Not quite true. There are organizations who demand address space and pay for the allocation service even though the address space allocated will never be routed on the Internet. They are actually after global uniqueness. >Therefore, I am just wonder what the router owners have to say ... Depends. The people with a single router say "I don't want to renumber". The people with a few routers say "I don't want to be at a competitive disadvantage to the big boys". The people with lots of routers say "I don't want to pick the pieces of my router up off the floor". The registries, following the policies imposed on us, try to figure out a way to satisfy the conflicting requirements implied above. If you have suggestions on how we can do so, feel free to propose them (to pagan@apnic.net please). If you do not, sniping at the sidelines is perhaps not particularly constructive. BTW: I also am not happy with the IANA's policies. However, I'm still waiting for an implementable alternative (of which I don't consider Jim Fleming's proposal to allocate /8s to each state in the US a viable one) Regards, -drc