June 1998 - dns-wg - mailman.ripe.net

ISO 3166-based Top Level Domain Survey
by Robert Shaw 07 Nov '00

07 Nov '00

Hi, At http://www.itu.int/net/cctlds/nics.htm is a preliminary survey conducted by ITU of Internet ISO 3166-based top level domains. The material is in in draft form and is made available in order to solicit public comment. Information includes all known URLs for registration. While every attempt has been made to ensure accuracy, the information cannot be considered authoritative as the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) is the authoritative source for ISO 3166-based top level domain delegation information. All raw data gathered has been and will continue to be provided to IANA. Comments and/or corrections on these pages should be sent to Ms. Asa Johansson at <asa.johansson(a)itu.int>. Denominations and classifications employed in this publication do not imply any opinion on the part of the ITU concerning the legal or other status of any territory or any endorsement or acceptance of any boundary. Thanks, Robert -- Robert Shaw <robert.shaw(a)itu.int> Advisor, Global Information Infrastructure International Telecommunication Union <http://www.itu.int> Place des Nations, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland

4 3

(no subject)
by Sam J. H. Hamilton 22 Jun '98

22 Jun '98

1 0

RE: ISO 3166-based Top Level Domain Survey
by Shaw, Robert 22 Jun '98

22 Jun '98

> > At http://www.itu.int/net/cctlds/nics.htm is a preliminary survey > > conducted by ITU of Internet ISO 3166-based top level domains. > > This seems to be the whois data frozen in immutable form. > Though it seems to also have a URL if the form is available online. > > Freezing the data in immutable form seems counterproductive > and somewhat dangerous. Please clarify the benefits/goals here. Well, it started like this... The ITU gets a request about once a week along the lines "where is the NIC for so and so". We had no place to point them to as the whois data didn't have this. So I asked one of my assistants to collect this information by contacting the listings in the whois database and we'd make this information publicly available. When she started, she discovered that the whois data is often out of date - she found that about 50% of the whois records are wrong in some form (listing people who had died, left companies several years ago, invalid email addresses/telephone/fax numbers, etc...). So I told her to try to carefully collect this information and then we'd ship it off the database to IANA and hopefully get things up-to-date (which we've done). The web pages are auto-generated from this database. There's more in the database which we will slowly move out into the html pages (e.g., today, country names in three languages were added, later we'll add who is sovereign over various small territories). As soon as the authoritative data really is, we'll just point to that, and just list the extra info we've collected. Robert -- Robert Shaw <robert.shaw(a)itu.int> Advisor, Global Information Infrastructure International Telecommunication Union <http://www.itu.int> Place des Nations, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland

1 0

New TLDS for Old Administrators
by Jim Fleming 20 Jun '98

20 Jun '98

John, How do feel about the proposal to allow ALL existing 2-letter TLD managers to select 3 additional generic TLDs to help increase the number of TLDs ? Switzerland (.CH) and CORE could team up... Jim Fleming Unir Corporation - http://www.unir.com 1998 - The Year of the C+@

2 1

RE: ISO 3166-based Top Level Domain Survey
by Jim Fleming 20 Jun '98

20 Jun '98

On Friday, June 19, 1998 1:07 PM, John Charles Broomfield[SMTP:jbroom@manta.outremer.com] wrote: <snip> @I am however convinced that a mismanaged ccTLD for a country that has a fair @government will not remain mismanaged indefinitely, but will transform into @a fairer system basically because of user-presure, so as more of the planet @becomes internet-aware, more fairer the ccTLD management is going to be. I @also think that it will generally go along the lines of nominet. @ Let's get down to specifics. How about something closer to home? Look at the .VI TLD in the U.S. Virgin Islands. How do you feel it is being managed ? Do you think that RFC 1591 rules govern the .VI TLD ? @@@@ http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc1591.txt "The key requirement is that for each domain there be a designated manager for supervising that domain's name space." ... "The manager must, of course, be on the Internet." ... "The designated manager must be equitable to all groups in the domain that request domain names. This means that the same rules are applied to all requests, all requests must be processed in a non-discriminatory fashion, and academic and commercial (and other) users are treated on an equal basis. No bias shall be shown regarding requests that may come from customers of some other business related to the manager -- e.g., no preferential service for customers of a particular data network provider. There can be no requirement that a particular mail system (or other application), protocol, or product be used." @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ Jim Fleming Unir Corporation - http://www.unir.com 1998 - The Year of the C+@

2 1

RE: ISO 3166-based Top Level Domain Survey
by Jim Fleming 20 Jun '98

20 Jun '98

On Friday, June 19, 1998 1:40 PM, John Charles Broomfield[SMTP:jbroom@manta.outremer.com] wrote: <snip> @ @I'm not sure where you live (is it Illinois or USVI), but if you feel that @*you* have a problem with the USVI, try and get some USVI governmental @institutions involved if you can't seem to get the current management of the @TLD to listen to you... @ John, I am really shocked that you did NOT recommend that we take this up with the IANA. What good does it do to talk to the governments ? As you recently posted, TLDs are given to the first person that knocks on IANA's door. The government probably does not have a clue or care what is going on. The IANA holds all the cards... Again...I am shocked that you did not point this out... Jim Fleming Unir Corporation - http://www.unir.com 1998 - The Year of the C+@

1 0

RE: ISO 3166-based Top Level Domain Survey
by Jim Fleming 20 Jun '98

20 Jun '98

On Friday, June 19, 1998 10:26 AM, John Charles Broomfield[SMTP:jbroom@manta.outremer.com] wrote: @ @Hi Jim, @ @ As far as I'm concerned and WRT TLDs, the "exclusive is bad" applies @ALWAYS. Having an individual UNILATERALLY and with no consensus decide how @things are to be done is bad always. I agree...in the IPv8 Plan there are 8 people that "govern" a TLD in a 2+2+4 Trusteeship. I will be submitting more details on the IPv8 Plan to the <comments(a)iana.org> list. @ In the case of country code TLDs, the population that is going to @get the service is pretty obvious; in general it will be those @companies/organisations/individuals located in that specific geographical @area, and what is important is to try and make sure that it is that @population that is -in general- happy at the way things are run in that TLD. @All lovely words of course, but lets see where the problems are... @It is generally accepted that how a certain ccTLD is governed is a question @to be answered by the government in place in that place. And whether you @like it or not, it is ALWAYS the local government that is allowing that TLD @to be governed in that way. They do it by either actively participating, by @just letting things happen, or simply by not bothering to intervene. They @ARE responsible for it though (another thing is arguing about dereliction @(sp?) of duty... and personally I think ".us" would be a prime candidate). I am not sure it is fair to create something and then assume that a country has to step forward to manage it and if they do not that it is "OK" for someone else to exploit it. Also, what about 2-letter TLDs that do not seem to have a country ? .IO comes to mind. Are all of the fish in the Indian Ocean responsible ?...even if they do not use the Internet... @Nominet (for ".uk") is generally taken as an example of how to do things. @However, much as you dislike the way a certain ccTLD is run, if it is not @for your government, the only way to change it is to get THAT government to @change it. It's not a question of "can they or can't they?" but rather "will @they or won't they?" What percentage of 2-letter TLDs actually have active government involvement ? Do you consider the .US TLD under U.S. Government control ? @The fact that countries with flawed corrupt and non-democratic governments @are part of the U.N. doesn't mean that the U.N. is flawed, corrupt and @non-democratic. Those countries are not shaming the U.N. in any case, they @are shaming themselves. @However, trying to enter into how a foreign government applies its laws (or @lack of them) and/or how it runs its ccTLD is naive at least. It sounds to me like you are saying that there will never be any consistency in the 2-letter TLDs. If this is the case, then I suspect that we will have more people flocking to the new generic TLDs because it will be likely they can not trust their local government. In some cases, some of the 2-letter TLDs may disappear from lack of support or usage. @Yours, John Broomfield. @ @P.S. Before you attack me for "exclusive control of ccTLDs", you know very @well that we operate with full consensus of the local ISPs, and we are @forming a (very small) non-profit which will operate (albeit in a much @reduced fashion) to some extent a-la-Nominet. Sounds like a winner...keep up the good work... @ In any case, glad you can get some good discussions going every now @and then. You had me worried... Even so, I'm sure you knew the answers already. @ I asked Robert Shaw...and you answered... ...so I still do not know Robert Shaw's answers... @> On Friday, June 19, 1998 10:55 AM, Robert Shaw[SMTP:robert.shaw@itu.int] wrote: @> @Hi, @> @ @> @At http://www.itu.int/net/cctlds/nics.htm is a preliminary survey @> @> Robert, @> @> With so many 2-letter TLDs being operated by people with an exclusive @> personal interest and little or no association to a country, how do you @> see the future position of the ITU/ISOC/IAHC/PAB/POC/CORE evolving @> with respect to those TLDs ? @> @> In other words, why are those TLDs exempt from the "exclusive is bad" @> model that you promote ? @> @> Do you think the new IANA will bring all of the 2-letter TLDs into conformance @> with the ITU/ISOC/IAHC/PAB/POC/CORE model ? @> Jim Fleming Unir Corporation - http://www.unir.com 1998 - The Year of the C+@

2 1

RE: ISO 3166-based Top Level Domain Survey
by Jim Fleming 19 Jun '98

19 Jun '98

On Friday, June 19, 1998 10:55 AM, Robert Shaw[SMTP:robert.shaw@itu.int] wrote: @Hi, @ @At http://www.itu.int/net/cctlds/nics.htm is a preliminary survey Robert, With so many 2-letter TLDs being operated by people with an exclusive personal interest and little or no association to a country, how do you see the future position of the ITU/ISOC/IAHC/PAB/POC/CORE evolving with respect to those TLDs ? In other words, why are those TLDs exempt from the "exclusive is bad" model that you promote ? Do you think the new IANA will bring all of the 2-letter TLDs into conformance with the ITU/ISOC/IAHC/PAB/POC/CORE model ? Jim Fleming Unir Corporation - http://www.unir.com 1998 - The Year of the C+@

2 1

(fwd) .US domain managed by the Post office?
by Bob Allisat 19 Jun '98

19 Jun '98

>Mime-Version: 1.0 >Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 12:02:56 -0400 >Reply-To: "Phillip C. Reed" <reedpc(a)LIBBEY.COM> >Sender: Owner-Domain-Policy <owner-domain-policy(a)internic.net> >From: "Phillip C. Reed" <reedpc(a)LIBBEY.COM> >Subject: .US domain managed by the Post office? >To: DOMAIN-POLICY(a)LISTS.INTERNIC.NET > >Some people may recall that a few days ago, Robert Shaw dropped a comment >about the USG revamping the .US domain. However, details were lacking. > >Interested parties should take a look at >http://frisket.cstone.net/~jamie/usps.html, a recent Cook Report. The >bottom half purports to be the proposal. > >I'm posting this without comment (the first half of this page have quite a >bit of commentary, however). > >phil reed >libbey inc. >reedpc(a)libbey.com > Bob Allisat Director, World TeleVirtual Network bob(a)wtv.net - (416) 534-1999 - http://www.wtv.net Free Community Network - .FCN free TLD Registry - http://fcn.net

1 0

Every Active Member Deserves A Paycheck!
by NNtMoxVHV＠pro1p1hiteys.com 13 Jun '98

13 Jun '98

Every Active Member Deserves A Paycheck! No Sponsoring Required To Get A Paycheck! ***The True Network Marketers Dream.*** Simple And Unbelievably Lucrative! Click Here For More Information> http://www.gwc1.com/members/ch76/gwc1.htm To be removed - remove58(a)hotmail.com or call 904-282-0945

1 0

Door Number 1, 2, or 3 ?
by Jim Fleming 12 Jun '98

12 Jun '98

On Thursday, June 11, 1998 7:14 PM, Craig Simon[SMTP:cls@flywheel.com] wrote: @I'm not sure I'll be able to afford to attend, but I was able to get @myself added to the participant list pretty easily, which I take as a @reasonably good indication that the GIAW is open. If I can get in then @I'm sure you others can. @ The number of casual observers to the domain name debates is clearly growing. There are now at least three directions that these people can head, plus several other forums and lists that have been around for years. 1. IANA (New) - http://www.iana.org 2. ITU/ISOC/IAHC/PAB/POC/CORE - http://www.gtld-mou.org 3. Network Solutions, Inc. - http://www.giaw.org I suggest that people get behind the people forming the new IANA (#1 above) and take the following steps: A. Join the recently re-opened "newdom" mailing list for an open discussion on how to bring the serious stakeholders together ONLINE, via the Internet. Send a "subscribe" message body to majordomo(a)ar.com. B. Help the current IANA "staff" incorporate as a non-profit company. C. Launch the new IANA with a 15 person board appointed as follows: 3 - http://www.iana.org and "newdom" discussions 3 - http://www.gtld-mou.org and mail lists 3 - http://www.giaw.org meeting in July and open-rsc lists 3 - http://www.ripe.net dns & tld working groups 3 - APNIC & Australian DNS discussions dns(a)iia.net.au D. Deploy a NEW robust collection of RFC 2010 Root Name Servers E. Delegate .US, .COM, .NET and .ORG to the legacy NSI servers F. Deploy THREE new TLDs from the CORE choices for Switzerland (.CH) G. Allow ALL other existing country code TLD registries to select 3 more TLDs H. Select a 16 person IANA Inc. Advisory Committee by Choosing 2 people from each of the IPv8 regions shown here: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt This proposal should be easy for people following #2 to adopt. In my opinion, it will be the shortest path to introducing new TLDs to the general public. The 80+ CORE Registrars should be able to compete in the OPEN market place against the people that are trying to organize #3 above, behind closed doors in Washington, D.C. In my opinion, those people should be asked to supply 3 board members to the new IANA Inc. which should be well on its way to incorporation by July 4, 1998. Jim Fleming Unir Corporation - http://www.unir.com 1998 - The Year of the C+@ IS Coordinator for the AM Radio Station Registry - http://www.DOT.AM

1 0

Special World Friends
by UnitedWorldFriends＠linxzit.net 04 Jun '98

04 Jun '98

United World Friends Invitation # 201029 Dear World Friend: I am sure that by now you have tried all the "Get-Rich-Quick" schemes out there, and are ready and willing to turn your attention to something that really works. Most people are. Read on to unlock this Secret Door to your future. Would you like to quietly make extra money every month, year after year, and all of it be tax free? I knew you would. Now you can with the help of our World-Wide private network of friends helping friends. I would like to invite you to join a very special group of people and make the kind of money you are seeking. We have a private program based in the USA that extends around the entire world. Most of us are middle-aged or older, conservative and family oriented. We all made the commitment to do whatever we have to do -- as long as it is ethical, honest and legal -- to make tremendous income together in the years ahead. We have all `been there and done that' very much like you. We can all make money quietly and privately in comfort. You will not get rich overnight. If you want to get rich quick, this is not for you. By keeping it among private members, we can all profit handsomely in the coming months and years without drawing unnecessary attention to ourselves or our confidential strategies. I will show you how we use our unique, controlled, and honest program to put you in whatever income bracket you choose. All I want you to do is send $3.00 (to cover printing and postage) and I will send you all of our detailed information on how the club works and how everyone helps everyone. There is a one-time $10.00 set-up fee to become a member. Do not send the $10.00 now. If you like what you see after you review the information, then you can send in your $10.00 membership fee. We know you will like what you see. Our program will not interfere with any other programs in which you are participating. I will show you just how easy and powerful this program really is. Your tax-free cash gifts will come to you in increments of $10.00, not one or two dollars like some of the other programs out there. The money you can make is extraordinary, and we do most of the work. Our powerful Pentium servers and software keep track of everything for you.. You owe it to yourself to take a look and then decide if you would like to receive the kind of money that most people can only dream about. You will spend more than $3.00 on snacks today. Your future is worth more than a snack. No one will call you. No one will come see you. There is no pressure. You do not have to talk to anyone. You decide if you want to be part of our private network on your own after you review the information package. This is a private club with the privacy of each and every member protected. Quiet, confidential and comfortable. Mail this ENTIRE LETTER along with $3.00 inside US - $4.00 outside US (CASH only USD) for printing and postage to: UWF-Info * POBox 802-dd * CLEMMONS NC * 27012-0802 * USA Name: ______________________________________________________________ Address: __________________________________________________________ City: _______________________ State: _________ Zip: ____________ Country: ____________________ Email: ____________@________________ #201029

1 0