[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
FW: Esther Dyson Report (2of3)
----------
From: Ken Freed[SMTP:kenfreed@media-visions.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 1997 10:58 AM
To: Ken Freed
Cc: karl@cavebear.com; cook@cookreport.com; dcrocker@imc.or;
Jay@Iperdome.com; JimFleming@unety.net; ken@media-visions.com;
pres@domains.org; perry@piermont.com; carl@oppedahl.com; usdh@ccnet.com;
pvm@software.com; pvm@software.com; erony@marin.k12.ca.us; amr@ngi.org;
andy@interactivehq.org; rsexton@vrx.net; shaw@itu.int; rshu@inetnow.net;
bobr@dprc.net; dstein@travel-net.com; dont@netsol.com; susanc@netsol.com;
at@ah.net; avc@netnamesusa.com; wnoxon@nsf.gov
Subject: Esther Dyson Report (2of3)
(Part 2 of 3)
_______________________________________________
ELLEN RONY
_______________________________________________
[Ellen Rony at Alexander Works is the author of the
new book, The Domain Name Handbook, available in
February from R&D Press, a Miller-Freeman imprint .]
I don't represent any constituency except the assumed
readers of my book <grin>, but she ought to talk to Dr.
Paul Mockapetris, the "father" of the DNS. I think his
opinions at this point in the maturation of the Internet
(we call it, "The Coming of Age of the Internet") would
be very germane and interesting.
Dr. Paul V. Mockapetris
mailto:pvm@software.com
805/882.2470 ext. 278),
- - - - - - -
Ellen Rony
Director, Alexander Works
Tiburon, California
Phone: 415/435-5010
Fax: 415/435-5010
mailto:erony@marin.k12.ca.us
Fortiter in re, suaviter in mundo
_______________________________________________
TONY RUTKOWSKI
_______________________________________________
[Tony Rutkowski operates the Center for Next
Generation Internet, and you surely know his
credits better than I do. He's given this for you.]
Ken,
Tell Esther I said hi. If she wants to know about the
current situation is, you can tell her to check out:
<http://www.wia.org/pub/parts-is-parts.html>
Like it or not, what she or I like, however, doesn't
change reality.
<http://www.wia.org/pub/parts-is-parts.html> is an
overview and analysis of what's presently occurring
and where things seem to be heading.
If interested in an advocacy piece - there is one that I
facilitated among many parties in this controversy at
<http://www.wia.org/skunkworks/assessment.html>
I'm not particularly interested in "my voice" being
heard. This is complex development involving many
players and institutions around the world. As to the
power politics, a lot of us have the ability to influence
lots of people and outcomes, but unless Esther has
mastered time travel, she's not going to change
what presently exists. [What about tomorrow?]
cheers,
--Tony
- - - - - - - - - - -
Tony Rutkowski
Center for Next Generation Internet
Herndon, Virginia USA
mailto:amr@ngi.org
http://www.ngi.org
_______________________________________________
ANDREW SERNOVITZ
_______________________________________________
[Andy Sernovitz is the founder and president of the
Association for Interactive Media. A vocal opponent
of the IAHC plan, he testified before the House Science
Committee, 30 September 1997. Below is an excerpt,
which he asked to have forwarded to you. ]
Mr. Chairman, the IAHC plan is a poorly veiled attempt
to take over the domain name system by the Internet
Society and the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority.
[IANA]. As is documented in my written testimony,
the IAHC plan grants unprecedented authority to a
puppet organization controlled by Dr. John Postel, Mr.
Don Heath and the technocrat trustees of the Internet
Society. The IAHC plan sets up it's backers with total
rule and veto power over an offshore corporation that
has complete protection from legal liability, its own
kangaroo trademark courts, all under the protection
of the Swiss Civil Code. This action has significant
implications for the authority of the U.S. government,
U.S. courts and American Internet businesses.
We call on this committee to stop the Internet
Assigned Numbers Authority in this unprecedented
breach of trust by a federal contractor. IANA controls
the central assets necessary to keep the current
domain name system working and represents a vital
national resource. Now this contractor has begun
taking these assets developed for the U.S. government,
paid for by the U.S. government, and essential to the
operations of the Internet and begun transferring
them to the puppet operation in Geneva that they
control. This action demands immediate investigation
by this committee and the GAO of IANA and the
University of Southern California (who has received
much of the funding) and Dr. Postel. [Snip]
My final point today is that the IAHC, the Internet
Society and IANA are actively working to subvert the
efforts of this committee and the Administration's task
force. They intend to take control of the domain name
system in the next 120 days, intentionally preempting
the U.S. government. They do this without regard to
the wishes of the U.S. or risks to the stability of the
Internet created by such an ill-considered action.
They have been accepting and empowering domain
name registrars; they have a bid out that closes on
Friday to purchase [Emergent] software to run their
shared registry, and they have announced that they
will be operating a full domain name system by
January 15.
When they attempt to delay your investigation with
promises of change, remember that their intent is
clear and well documented. They are playing a stalling
game, attempting to distract this committee until their
control is secure. Mr. Chairman, hold them accountable
by demanding a sign of good faith. Ask them to stop
implementation of their plans until this committee
completes its work. Ask them to give up their total
veto power over the IAHC system. [snip]
We in the Internet industry ask that this committee
and the Administration take immediate action to
secure the stability of the Internet by proactively
stopping the illicit implementation of the IAHC's
takeover. We also ask that immediate measures be
taken to secure control of the Internet Assigned
Numbers Authority before it is transferred outside of
U.S. jurisdiction. That will enable us to take the time
necessary to follow the original, well-considered plan
of action of this committee.
For a copy of Mr. Sernovitz' full written
testimony, call AIM or visit the Web site at
http://www.interactivehq.org/docs/9-30.htm
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Andrew L. Sernovitz, President
Association for Interactive Media
Washington, DC
Voice: (202) 408-0008
Fax: (202) 408-0111
http://www.interactivehq.org
mailto:andy@interactivehq.org
_______________________________________________
RICHARD SEXTON
_______________________________________________
Robert Shaw - Int'l Telecommunications Union
Richard Shu - Universal DNS Confederation
Dan Steinberg - Attorney (Independent)
Donald Telege - Network Solutions Inc. (InterNIC)
Adam Todd - UURSC/Ah.Net (AuNIC)
Richard Zare - National Science Board/NSF (InterNic)
[Richard Sexton operates VRX Network services
in Ontario, offering domain registration operations.
He's an outspoken adversary of the IAHC proposal
and supporter of alternative DNS registration.]
>Richard --
>Is there any way to get a statement from Eugene?
>-- Ken
Yeah, I'll give you a statement from him. I know him,
his friends and his family well, and I've been in the
company of those that have visited him. Consider this
statement below, from him, as authoritative:
HELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLP! GET ME OUTTA HERE!!
He is now extremely depressed. He's been 15 days in
custody [as of Nov. 15], and he was punched a couple
of times for no reason [by other prisoners] ,and now he
feels like he's going to spend a LONG time in jail. Bail
in the U.S. apparently will be hundreds of thousands
of dollars. He has 4 kids, who miss him terribly.
Because it's impossible that NSI lost any real money
(they're gonna get those customers who apparently
were too stupid to click on the real link to Inter.NIC at
the Alter.NIC page; it's not like they can go somewhere
else to buy a .com address), and because the wire
fraud charge is only valid if there was $5,000 worth of
lost business, it looks to me like the charge is bogus.
They want this guy and don't care how they get him.
Look at it this way: Eugene wanted to compete with
the legacy root servers. The US Government runs the
legacy root servers and prevents his business from
being able to compete with the InterNIC. Then the
USG has him arrested on trumped up charges. By it's
inaction to do something about the mess it has created
with the cluster of IANA, NSI, NSF, etc., the USG is the
one who is in the wrong and should be embarrassed.
Eugene is being railroaded. For him to be locked up for
having a social conscience is unconscionable. To ruin a
man's life over a political protest serves nobody well.
- - - - - - - - - -
Richard Sexton
vrx.net
(613) 473 1719
mailto:rsexton@vrx.net
Bannockburn, Ontario
_______________________________________________
ROBERT SHAW
_______________________________________________
[Robert Shaw represents ITU in the gTLD-MoU.
Below is his latest gTLD-Discuss announcement.]
The following updates have been posted on the gTLD-
MoU web site at http://www.gtld-mou.org. As always,
news announcements relating to the gTLD-MoU can be
found at http://www.gtld-mou.org/index.html#news.
November 13, 1997: The gTLD-MoU interim Policy
Oversight Committee, after reviewing responses
received to the public request for comments Notice-
97-02: "Review of new generic Top Level Domains
(gTLDs)", consultation with the Council of Registrars
(CORE), and the gTLD-MoU Policy Advisory Body
(PAB), has concluded a review of the 7 gTLD names
suggested in the final report of the International Ad
Hoc Committee's (IAHC's) Recommendations for
Administration and Management of gTLDs.
The conclusions of this review are confirmation of
.firm, .web, .info, .art, .rec & .nom as new gTLDs and
the replacement of .store with the gTLD .shop. See
http://www.gtld-mou.org/docs/rfc-results.htm#97-02
Re. The November 25, 1997 meeting ,"Internet domain
name system, European information meeting on the
gTLD-MoU (sponsored by the European Commission,
DG XIII) in Brussels, Belgium, the venue for this
meeting has been changed and additional reduced-rate
hotel information is now available. Please see
http://www.gtld-mou.org/docs/meetings.html#nov25
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Robert Shaw, Advisor
Global Information Infrastructure
International Telecommunication Union
Geneva, Switzerland
mailto:shaw@itu.int
http://www.itu.int
_______________________________________________
RICHARD SHU
_______________________________________________
[Richard Shu as a leader in the Universal Domain
Name System (uDNS) root server confederation. He
represents uDNS at the Root Server Confederation
(RSC) roundtable, which includes the eDNS, uDNS,
AlterNIC, caNIC, AURSC confederations. Below is
an except from a longer work that he supplied.]
The Players in the TLD Industry:
- NSI is not going away.
- gTLD-MoU/iPOC is not going away.
- AlterNIC/Marc Hurst/caNIC is not going away.
- eDNS/Karl Denninger is not going away.
- AURSC/Adam Todd is not going away.
NSI's TLDs .com, .net and .org may become shared
TLDs (or they may not). The 7 deadly sins (uh, I mean
iPOC's gTLDs) are going to be put into service next
year, and those TLDs will be shared among the 80+
MoU registries. Additional MoU registries may be
admitted. I expect MoU will grab 5-10% market share
initially and may eventually push towards 20%. One
problem is that their TLD names aren't well chosen.
My belief is that there is too much greed in the
current TLD business model. We want to make money
but we are unwilling to share the potential profits
with those who can best help us succeed.
Proposal: Let us create two categories of TLDs:
proprietary and shared. I believe only trademarkable
names (like .ITG) should be proprietary. Common
words such as "hotel" should be shared. Also, let's
institute a business model with Registration Service
Companies (RSCs) and Registries. The business model I
propose would be one where the registry takes 50% of
the registration fee and the RSC takes the other 50%.
The catch is: No ISP customer will buy an SLD unless
their ISP is pointing at a root server that hosts the TLD
for which they are selling SLDs. Bingo! To sell SLDs
effectively, the ISP must point to our root servers.
Which is what we wanted, right?
- - - - - - - -
Richard Shu
uDNS Root Server Confederation
(mailto:rshu@inetnow.net)
Bob Racko (bobr@dprc.net)
http://www.wia.org/pub/racko-dnsnoi-comments.html
_______________________________________________
DAN STEINBERG
_______________________________________________
[Dan Steinberg, attorney and consultant, represents
himself and "quite a few of the unaligned people who
are interested in this arcane subject." Governments ask
his opinion, he says, "but I don't represent them."]
Our position is that is it is not necessary to have just
one winner in this shoot-out. So why lock into one
solution? Why not give everyone a chance? Three
principles:
1. Apply KISS to DNS
It is not a good idea nor is it practical for registrars to
play censor, court, tribunal, board, etc. Registration for
domains should be first-come-first-served. No other
scheme makes any sense and creates inequities.
Complaints can and should be dealt with through the
courts, even domain/trademark conflicts. [snip]
2. Monopoly TLDs, Shared TLDs, who cares?
There is no technical reason why competing registries
and competing registration models (monopoly vs.
shared) cannot co-exist. As long as there is no TLD
conflict, all models are possible. There is no real
technical limit on the number of TLDs possible.
Because of the legal uncertainty surrounding some
domains like .web, the experimental (Alternic, eDNS,
uDNS, etc.) should all be grandfathered as monopoly
TLDs. They all work together already without breaking
the net.
3. Rule of Law, Orderly Transfer, yada, yada, yada.
Who cares who really 'owns' the Internet? It doesn't
matter and only a few people really care. What is
required is an orderly transition. Let the US govt. state
who they are transferring interim control to, and let
the Internet get on with self-governance. A broad-
based conference should be convened, inviting
backbone providers, ISPs, content providers, code
providers like Microsoft and Netscape, standards
organizations, etc. [snip]
A few working groups (to get rough consensus and
running code to propose) may be needed in the
beginning. The key is that the working groups are
formed from broad-based consensus, not on an ad-hoc
basis. When you get people in a room, it is easier to get
agreement. When everything is done via e-mail,
personality defects get in the way.
- - - - - - - - -
Dan Steinberg
Law & Technology
Chelsea, Quebec
phone: (613) 794-5356
fax: (819) 827-4398
mailto:dstein@travel-net.com
_______________________________________________
DONALD. TELEGE
_______________________________________________
[Donald Telege is Senior Vice President and Director of
Network Solutions Inc. His remarks were submitted for
you by Susan Clark at NSI.]
Network Solutions, Inc. (NSI) manages the essential
infrastructure of the Internet Domain Name System (DNS)
in an agreement with the National Science Foundation
(NSF). NSI's duties include: 1) management of Root Server
System (RSS) and the "A" root server, 2) the addition of
all new top level domains (TLDs) on the Internet
worldwide, 3) the registration and management of all
second level domains (SLDs) in five TLDs ( .COM, .NET,
.ORG and .EDU), 4) the allocation and management of all
Internet Protocol (IP) numbers in North and South
America and parts of Africa, and 5) provides a rich
information and education program for both novice and
experienced Internet users. All of these activities are
funded by $35 from the NSF authorized $50 annual user
registration fee. The remaining $15 is placed into a
separate fund to be used by the NSF in improving the
"intellectual infrastructure of the Internet." NSI has
performed this role through various competitively
awarded US government agreements since 1988.
Exponential commercial growth began in early 1995
where the number of SLD name registrations has grown
from a few hundred per month to about 125,000 per
month. Commercial users now dominate the Internet and
their needs are tremendously different from the original
Research and Education (R&E) users. The R&E community
developed a method of "governance" based on "rough
consensus." It did not have any legitimate legal authority
for decision-making, but relied on the "fathers of the
Internet" to interpret what is good for the users. With the
tremendous financial investments made by the business
community, and the natural conflicts that arise in such
situations, there is reluctance by this new class of users
to accept the historical method of governance. The
Internet is in the process of evolving its infrastructure,
its business models and its legal structures to forms that
are more stable and can withstand the onslaught of
litigation that has hit the net in the last 30 months.
This litigation has ranged from disputes over trademark
verses domain names to antitrust suits involving NSI and
the NSF.
The Internet is currently a wild-west environment,
and there are numerous bitterly disputed proposals
for change. Unfortunately, no proposal has the support
of a consensus of the stakeholders. NSI believes that
the best hope for consensus and success rests with a
US Government (USG) sponsored process, working in
conjunction with a large group of major commercial
sector stakeholders. This approach calls for a transition
period wherein a relatively small international public
advisory group, legitimized by the USG, develops and
implements proposals for a secure infrastructure,
more competitive business models, and new legal
solutions for the Internet. There is no easy way to
avoid this maturing process. The Internet, like all
living growing things, must experience and survive
its own painful adolescence.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Donald N. Telage, Ph.D.
Senior Vice President and Director
Network Solutions, Inc.
Herndon, Virginia
mailto:dont@netsol.com
c/o Clark, Susan
mailto:susanc@netsol.com
_______________________________________________
ADAM TODD
_______________________________________________
[Adam Todd represents AURSC, a loose confederation
of ISP's in Australia and elsewhere. With wife
Suzanne, Adam owns and operates Ah.Net. He's
developing a shared DNS registry allowing ISP's to
register domain names ad hoc and as required. Ah.Net
operates TLD and DNS servers for small annual fees.]
I want to see DNS made available to the users of
Internet for the purpose it was created. That purpose
wasn't to charge money from people who often can not
afford or don't truly value a Domain Name more than
as a way of remembering an IP address.
It is hoped as more people use these services the
prices can be brought down. As more ISP's support the
servers the cost will obviously reduce. Perhaps at a
later stage AHNET will just subsidise the hardware
upgrade costs, rather than the costs of location,
bandwidth, management and administration.
NSI and MelboureIT, to Registras close to my operation
are both Outlaws in that they take moneys form the
public and in effect spend them on their own
infrastructure, rather than the global resource.
Melbourne IT pay only their salaries and overheads
and the moneys are channeled into consolidated
revenue of the company, none is as yet, returned to
the operators of the .AU Domain Servers.
NSI is not far different. The moneys I have paid from
Australia have not gone towards improving the DNS
system, or NSI's policies or data integrity. Even right
now I have been trying to update my own Domain
Record for the last 6 weeks with no result.
[On the arrest of Eugene Kashpureff:]
Disgusting, unfounded, criminal, and the FBI and AG of
NY should be prosecuted. It won't stand up in a court
if I'm called as a professional witness.
- - - - - - - -
Adam Todd
Ah.Net Inc.
Sidney, Australia
Phone +61 2 9729 0565
mailto:at@ah.net
Personal http://www.adamtodd.ah.net
Network http://www.ah.net
AU Root Server Confederation
http://aursc.ah.net
AU Internet News
mailto:internet-request@ah.net with "subscribe"
_______________________________________________
ANTONY VAN COVERING
_______________________________________________
[Antony Van Couvering, President of NetNames USA, is
Chair of the Policy Advisory Body (PAB) under the
gTLD-MoU. Ivan Pope, Managing Director of NetNames
Ltd. in London was recently "elected" to the Executive
Committee of the Council of Registrars (CORE).]
For two years, NetNames has doing nothing but domain
name registrations; for a long time we were the only
company to do so. Our specialty is international
registrations in all country TLDs, but we are intimately
concerned with getting new gTLDs off the ground.
We know that millions of people around the world face
are governed by restrictive regimes whose control of the
national domain structure could seriously hamper the
promise of the Internet as an empowering mechanism.
NetNames is committed to open registration policies in
all domains, and we are committed to making sure
that everyone has access to domain names. The
accompanying evils of cybersquatting and domain
hoarding are not small, but we believe that attempts
to police the domain space are fraught with far greater
dangers. For these reasons we support the creation of
new gTLDs under the gTLD-MoU.
As far as Eugene Kashpureff goes, we don't think he
should be locked up, or even tried. People have a right
to the profit and enjoyment of their domain names,
but Kashpureff did not seriously threaten this. Given
our knowledge of the history of Eugene and his
enunciated principles, we think his actions should be
considered civil disobedience more than anything else.
Network Solutions made its peace with him; why is the
US government getting involved?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Antony Van Couvering
President, NetNames USA
New York, New York
Chair, Policy Advisory Body
mailto:avc@netnamesusa.com
Phone Toll-free 888-NETNAMES
Intl: +1 212 627-4599
_______________________________________________
DR. RICHARD ZARE
_______________________________________________
(Dr. Richard Zare is Chair of the National Science Board
a section of the National Science Foundation. Below is
his public statement released after the scheduled
November 12-14 meeting of the NSB, where they
adopted a position (attached) on the NSF role in the
governance of the Internet: Little or none at all.]
The Administration has stated that it supports the
continued privatization and commercialization of the
Internet and is committed to completing the transition to
private sector governance. The National Science Board
(NSB) agrees, and has issued a resolution that the NSF
should no longer be involved in domain name registration.
The National Science Foundation originally got involved
in Internet registration processes when the agency
managed the major Internet backbone -- the NSFNET --
to support research and education, primarily in the
nation's universities. The NSFNET backbone functions
were quickly rendered redundant by commercial
success and privatized. It is now time for NSF to focus
on research and education, which will enable the Next
Generation Internet.
The NSF cooperative agreement with Network
Solutions, Incorporated -- the current registrar
for international (generic) top level domains --
expires March 31, 1998.
If the Federal government does elect to remain involved
in the policy and commercial issues surrounding domain
name management, it is the Board's position that the
Foundation should not solicit proposals for a new
cooperative agreement. NSF's mission is to promote
research and education in science and engineering,
and it can no longer commit resources to manage
today's Internet.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dr. Richard Zare, Chair
National Science Board
National Science Foundation.
Contact: Bill Noxon
(703) 306-1070
mailto:wnoxon@nsf.gov
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NSB-97-220
STATEMENT ON THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
ROLE IN GOVERNANCE OF THE INTERNET AS ADOPTED
BY THE NATIONAL SCIENCE BOARD AT ITS 346TH
MEETING ON NOVEMBER 12-14, 1997
Whereas the National Science Foundation, along with
other agencies, supported the research for and
development of what is now called the Internet or
World Wide Web;
Whereas the Internet has now gone from the
development stage to the application stage and has
become a major communications and commercial
medium for the whole world;
Whereas the Foundation's Acting Deputy Director, after
consultation with the Board, announced on April 23
that NSF has no plans to renew or re-compete the
cooperative agreement with Network Solutions, Inc.
for Internet registration;
Whereas research opportunities and technological challenges
whose exploitation and solution demand the Foundation's
attention and financial assistance exist with the Next
Generation Internet and not with the governance and
maintenance of the current Internet; and
Whereas the Foundation, while supporting the
Administration policy of privatization and the efforts
of the interagency policymaking group now examining
ways to transition the Internet to the private sector,
must focus its attention and resources on the Next
Generation Internet
_
Therefore, be it RESOLVED that the National Science Board
believes the Foundation should not solicit proposals for or
make a cooperative agreement for the purpose of funding
or overseeing the domain names system.
National Science Foundation is an independent federal agency
responsible for fundamental research in all fields of science
and engineering, with an annual budget of about $3.3 billion.
(Contact: Bill Noxon, mailto:wnoxon@nsf.gov)
___________________________________________________________
(continued in part 3 of 3)