Paul wrote:
End user or individual
An individual is always able to get involved in the IETF or the Regional technical meetings which give advice to the RIRs.
This individual requests the IETF hold a BOF at the upcoming meeting in LA following the draft outlined below. ______________START<PRE> New Top Level Domain BOF (Time/location To Be Announced) ================================ Chair: Bob Allisat DESCRIPTION: New Top Level Domain (nTLD) names have been proposed as a way of increasing the namespace choices available to Netizens worldwide. Currently people have only two choices: national registries and the traditional .COM/.ORG/.NET TLDs. Many nTLDs have been proposed to offer expanded identification opportunities for individuals, businesses and organizations. However, this raises various issues such as how many nTLDs are feasible, what are the required technical standards to run a Network Information Center (NIC) or Domain Name Registry (DNR) and so on. nTLD's are becoming more and more essential as more and more people utilize the Internet for their everyday communications. Everyone is experiencing the problem of a rapidly diminishing number of viable Domains. There is an urgent need to define mechanisms to achieve new Top Level Domain capabilies. Some of the issues that needs to be addressed are: 1. What are the basic technical requirements for Domain Name Registries (DNR). What are the technical requirements for Network Information Centres (NIC). Is there a differance between the two and if so we have to begin defining those differances. 2. Is there a necessity for various grades or "flavours" of DNR/nTLD (ie non-profit, commercial, small, mid-size, corporate). Are "shared" and "private" DNR/nTLD technically practical? Can shared and private DNRs technically co-exist. 3. What are the limitations and hindrances in existing software which may place practical limitations on the number of New TLDs. 4. How to provide Quality of Service while allowing widely dispersed, decentralized nTLD/DNRs and NICs. 5. Issues around "Root" servers. There are two basic challenges with naming: How to announce a server based on its nTLD, and how to find that server based on it's IP address. Currently this is done by 13 private Root servers to which all Domain Name Servers computers worldwide point to for that information. Is there a need for more Root Servers? What sort of technical regulation of these root servers require? How can we ensure universality of Internet addressing and still allow maximal dispersion of nTLDs, DNRs and NICs? The goals of the New Top Level Domain Name BOF are: 1. Decide if there is a need to form a working group to solve some or all of the problems above. 2. Which of the problems above should be addressed by the working group. 3. What will the working group produce. In our opinion, we need to interact with other groups such as various bodies of the UN, national governments, industry representatives and the general Netizenry to solve some or all of the problems above. 4. What other problems need to be solved for succesful deployment of new TLD's. AGENDA: Introduction, agenda review. Issue Briefs - 2 minute summaries of position papers to be filed and available on-line Discussion - succinct questions; 2 minute limit on answers, details and expansions presented as on-line addenda. Conclusion - organizing next steps. </PRE>______________FINISH TeleVirtually Yours, Bob Allisat Director, World TeleVirtual Network http://www.wtv.net PO Box 191 St E Toronto Canada M6H 4E2 info at wtv.net -------- Logged at Sun Feb 1 23:35:32 MET 1998 ---------
Keep It Simple and Scaleable Stupid the internet is a beautiful thing. it works, which is more than can be said about so many things in this world of our, less physics and nature. we can not allow the network to be governed by those that don't truely understand the nets inner workings. i am not pleased with the USG's "green paper." if you feel likewize and wish to see IANA and the rest of the I* organizations retain their ability to to effect positive and scaleable chage to this network, *please* ask your organization to sign the gTLD-MoU, as this is the single Best Way (tm) to vocalize to the USG that the *users* of the network wish to govern themselves. if we let this network be governed by any other, then we loose one of the greatest oppertunities to keep what works... working. regards, -rick -------- Logged at Mon Feb 2 00:25:16 MET 1998 ---------
Rick, I agree with you on your point. But considering when the Internet was developed, universities connected to each other to share info. Now corp. America has used the internet to Market,Sell,Instruct, and communicate. It scares me that now one governs the internet. It really is a bunch of networks interconnected with some minimal BGP rules. I think the Internet would be able to go to the next level with a controling body The old days are just that. We need to put things aside and work on the future. Just my 2 pennies... Cheers Marty -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Martin Essenburg | "Where's the ka-boom? There's supposed to be an HostMaster@ | Earth-shattering ka-boom!...Heavens! Someone has SunGod.com | stolen the Illudium Q-38 Explosive Space Modulator! "Delays, delays!"| The Earth creature has *stolen* the Space Modulator!" =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -------- Logged at Mon Feb 2 00:50:14 MET 1998 ---------
On Sun, Feb 01, 1998 at 02:35:06PM -0800, Rick H. Wesson wrote:
Keep It Simple and Scaleable Stupid
the internet is a beautiful thing. it works, which is more than can be said about so many things in this world of our, less physics and nature.
we can not allow the network to be governed by those that don't truely understand the nets inner workings.
i am not pleased with the USG's "green paper." if you feel likewize and wish to see IANA and the rest of the I* organizations retain their ability to to effect positive and scaleable chage to this network, *please* ask your organization to sign the gTLD-MoU, as this is the single Best Way (tm) to vocalize to the USG that the *users* of the network wish to govern themselves.
if we let this network be governed by any other, then we loose one of the greatest oppertunities to keep what works... working.
regards,
-rick
Heh, Rick. Monopolists lost. CORE was just another one, albiet in the worst, and most dangerous place - the top of the hierarchy. IMHO, Mr. Postel, who recently tried to put in place a way to hijack the roots, deserves to end up EXACTLY where Eugene is right now - facing federal criminal charges. -- -- Karl Denninger (karl at MCS.Net)| MCSNet - Serving Chicagoland and Wisconsin http://www.mcs.net/ | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service | NEW! K56Flex support on ALL modems Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| EXCLUSIVE NEW FEATURE ON ALL PERSONAL ACCOUNTS Fax: [+1 312 803-4929] | *SPAMBLOCK* Technology now included at no cost -------- Logged at Mon Feb 2 01:09:17 MET 1998 ---------
At 05:49 PM 2/1/98 -0600, Karl Denninger wrote:
IMHO, Mr. Postel, who recently tried to put in place a way to hijack the roots, deserves to end up EXACTLY where Eugene is right now - facing federal criminal charges.
Karl, Where would you put NSI, who have effectively hijacked the roots? Or the U.S. Gov't, for that matter? Overnight, the Internet mode of opeation has changed from bottom-up cooperation to top-down diktat. Jon was "ordered", to quote the Washington Post, to point everything at NSI. I thought the roots didn't belong to anyone, that they existed and ran smoothly as a result of root server operators' consensus. Until yesterday, no-one had challenged Jon Postel's authority to do what he thought was best with regard to the roots, because he has earned the respect of those operators. You have long been an expert at seeing power grabs where none existed. Now that there is one with huge implications for the Internet, right in front of your eyes, your only reaction is to be first in line to kick one of the fathers of the Internet while he is down. Bravo. Antony -------- Logged at Mon Feb 2 01:30:25 MET 1998 ---------
On Sun, Feb 01, 1998 at 07:08:51PM -0500, Antony Van Couvering wrote:
At 05:49 PM 2/1/98 -0600, Karl Denninger wrote:
IMHO, Mr. Postel, who recently tried to put in place a way to hijack the roots, deserves to end up EXACTLY where Eugene is right now - facing federal criminal charges.
Karl,
Where would you put NSI, who have effectively hijacked the roots?
One "hijacking" makes others legitimate?
Or the U.S. Gov't, for that matter?
The US Government owns the roots and owns IANA (since it funds it). Without direction from the government and absent their *constructive* abdication, the root system is effectively theirs. NSI's operation of "A" is under NSF directive - aka, the US Government. Now its under the Department of Commerce's directive. Again, the person paying the piper calls the tune. The piper has said they intend to pass control to a private, non-profit US corporation with the FULL IMPLICATIONS OF US ANTI-TRUST LAW bearing on that organization. That organization is *NOT* the current IANA, although it might bear the same name. To which I say "Its about darn time", and "while you're at it, prosecute any EXISTING anti-trust violations you might be able to find in the current IANA or any other so-called 'oversight' organziation for the Internet." And yes, I do mean Mr. Postel and Mr. Manning, specifically, should be investigated - in my opinion - and if cause is found, brought up on charges. Heh, if they did nothing wrong, then what's the problem with a look back at all of their decisions over the last 10 years in the areas of TLD management (or mismanagement), IP number assignment, etc? I can think of a few explicit instances where I believe that there could be trouble.... but heh, I might be wrong. That's what prosecutors and investigators are for though - to figure out whether or not laws were violated.
Overnight, the Internet mode of opeation has changed from bottom-up cooperation to top-down diktat. Jon was "ordered", to quote the Washington Post, to point everything at NSI.
You bet. This is as it should be. "Ye who pays the bill calls the tune."
I thought the roots didn't belong to anyone, that they existed and ran smoothly as a result of root server operators' consensus.
Wrong again; consensus requires discussion and OPEN PROCESS, neither of which has been present in the past. What has been present is an effective monarchy. I saw no discussion, comment, or public input into what Postel did - in fact, he did it "under the sheets" explicitly, and it wasn't until it was leaked that people became aware of it! That's not CONSENSUS - its control by an Emporer and, IMHO, an abuse of power.
Until yesterday, no-one had challenged Jon Postel's authority to do what he thought was best with regard to the roots, because he has earned the respect of those operators.
Wrong again. Jon Postel is an employee of the US Government in the function of the IANA, since the IANA is funded by the US Government directly and indirectly. Therefore, he has no authority to act on his own in this matter, and in fact never did have that authority.
You have long been an expert at seeing power grabs where none existed. Now that there is one with huge implications for the Internet, right in front of your eyes, your only reaction is to be first in line to kick one of the fathers of the Internet while he is down. Bravo.
Antony
IMHO he deserves to be brought up on charges for that action, and I believe he has deserved that same "reward" since September of 1995. In fact, this situation is far more serious than the one in 1995. Its rather obvious to ANYONE looking at this that Postel's actions were a prelude to a hijacking of the root system DIRECTLY IN THE FACE OF THE US GOVERNMENT - with the purpose of adding the CORE TLDs. If there's a violation of law in there somewhere (ie: conspiracy, or perhaps racketeering?) I ask that the Federal prosecutorial system bring charges. "Father figures" are supposed to be held to HIGHER accountability standards than the rest of us. Mr. Postel has breached the public trust placed in him and should be fully and maximally held to account for those actions. I have maintained precisely this position since that time, and the last time I looked I was entitled to my opinion (and to express it). -- -- Karl Denninger (karl at MCS.Net)| MCSNet - Serving Chicagoland and Wisconsin http://www.mcs.net/ | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service | NEW! K56Flex support on ALL modems Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| EXCLUSIVE NEW FEATURE ON ALL PERSONAL ACCOUNTS Fax: [+1 312 803-4929] | *SPAMBLOCK* Technology now included at no cost -------- Logged at Mon Feb 2 02:50:38 MET 1998 ---------
As always, we seem to be unwilling to let facts get in the way of a strongly held view: At 07:18 PM 2/1/98 -0600, Karl Denninger wrote:
One "hijacking" makes others legitimate?
When one is the well-established (i.e., ever since the inception of service) authority for an activity and when a change has been planned for a very long time, then one is not "hijacking" the service to put that change in place.
The US Government owns the roots and owns IANA (since it funds it). Without
False twice. The USG has power over a portion of the root, not all of it. Whether it has "authority" over any of it is yet a different question, but it certainly doesn't have authority over the entirety. The authority for root rests with IANA. The USG provides funding to IANA, but IANA's authority comes from the community not the US government.
NSI's operation of "A" is under NSF directive - aka, the US Government.
And how convenient has been NSI's interpretation of that directive. The directive was absolute yet NSI continued to add TLDs per IANA's direction, without further consultation with the USG.
Now its under the Department of Commerce's directive. Again, the person paying the piper calls the tune.
Directive? When did it achieve that status? I thought this was just a proposal being circulated for comments.
The piper has said they intend to pass control to a private, non-profit US corporation with the FULL IMPLICATIONS OF US ANTI-TRUST LAW bearing on that organization. That organization is *NOT* the current IANA, although it might bear the same name.
Odd that no one noticed that IANA has been exploring assorted methods of moving out from under USC-ISI cover and USG funding for some time. How very convenient that the USG "proposal" just happens to match the version of the plan that IANA has gravitated to.
And yes, I do mean Mr. Postel and Mr. Manning, specifically, should be
And how convenient that no one seems to have noticed that a judge did, in fact, do some review of IANA and the derivative IAHC work and found it just fine, thank you very much.
Heh, if they did nothing wrong, then what's the problem with a look back at
What an interesting approach to the Law, viewing it as a management review technique. I guess that explains the incessant calls for legal action.
Wrong again; consensus requires discussion and OPEN PROCESS, neither of which has been present in the past. What has been present is an effective
Right. Totally lacking. No public discussion or modification. Amazing that anyone would think otherwise. All the email exchanges, all the public meetings, all the modifications must be an illusion.
That's not CONSENSUS - its control by an Emporer and, IMHO, an abuse of power.
But, as Anthony noted, you would rather have control by the White House? d/ -------------------- Dave Crocker +1 408 246 8253 Brandenburg Consulting fax: +1 408 249 6205 675 Spruce Dr. dcrocker at brandenburg.com Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA http://www.brandenburg.com -------- Logged at Mon Feb 2 03:55:41 MET 1998 ---------
On Sun, 1 Feb 1998, Dave Crocker wrote:
But, as Anthony noted, you would rather have control by the White House?
mr.crocker thank you for clarifaying some facts any representative of any government/nation hase some of very fine and useful qualitys and so also the officers of the american government they help to organize and to find consensus in their society-in our case the next step of the development of the internet domain name system as you and some other folks have mentioned the politician and officers hase good diplomatic skills and trys to "make everybody happy" but they have not absolute knowledge in any aspects of live so they was not expert on internet so they learn and profit from experts like iana isoc iab ietf so the proposals of the usg hase their roots in the knowledge of internet founders-this are not only the people who pays money :-) BUT as ANY poltician today hase a problem with beeing LIMITED to the concept of ONE NATION so also the american government and hier is exactly the chalenge for the poltical science and management system they have to evolve in the face of internet the internet hase his origin in the united states of america but it is become a global system-wich is not entayerly builded by america allone:-) so there is the chalenge on both side on the side of the internet community to learn from governments how to manaege complex systems and to government to learn how to be a part of a common management of the planet earth system if we see the ideology of a national state and the ideologie of the internet than the internet is superior and its leads the political development so the internet is the superior political entity and poeple who hase understand this they angage them self in building up the internet as the new management system for the society of the planet earth the internet is the new government of the planet earth and it hase its own politicians one of them is dr.jon postel and many of his colegues who all together work for the vision of a new age where the boundaries of national states are nothing more wich will devide us becouse we have the internet wich unity us the aproach of the us government is nationalistic and bears no global visions and also dont meets the development at the present time so there is the need for involvment of the political systems into internet liek the commerce was involved into internet but neither commerce or policy can be the highest autority for the internet so this is the mesage the internet wants to give them
d/
thanks sascha -------- Logged at Mon Feb 2 04:11:22 MET 1998 ---------
A few lines: 1. Was it neccessary to have this subject line in order to start a serious discussion? 2. While you are discussing the problems in the US, don't forget we are facing the same problems in the emerging countries? I understand the importance of the TLD in the US, but believe me - it's very difficult to answer the questions of Bulgarian ISPs, internauts, and usual people when they see the same situation here, except that instead of USGovernment, you could change the words to BG-NIC. And despites our efforts to bring this issue to RIPE, IANA, ISOC, Bulgarian authority... there's no result. You can see the story at http://www.bol.bg, http://www.bioteam.bg, http://www.bis.bg, http://www.cyberlink.bg, http://www.inet.bg, http://www.mobiltel.bg and many other Bulgarian web sites under the gif picture named TLDA.GIF with a signature: .BG - For A Better TLDA Is there someone that can propose some help? Regards, Veni Markovski, Chairmain, the Internet Society - Bulgaria, http://www.isoc.bg, http://www.bulgaria.com/isoc/, http://www.bol.bg/isoc/ phone: (+359-2) 9809666, phone/fax (+359-2) 805012 mailing address: p.o.box 71, Sofia 1164, Bulgaria *** Because e-mail can be altered electronically, the integrity of this communication cannot be guaranteed. -------- Logged at Tue Feb 3 10:37:11 MET 1998 ---------
Tony wrote:
Until yesterday, no-one had challenged Jon Postel's authority to do what he thought was best with regard to the roots, because he has earned the respect of those operators.
Over the last two years EVERYONE has ripped Postel's authority to shreds. And the pitiful respect of ten guys and a handful of IETF stiffs is irrelevant. Postel is deposed. What remains is to install the next regime. One which must be broad based and democratic. If any of you imagine what occured in the past was even remotely democratic you are deluding yourselves. TeleVirtually Yours, Bob Allisat http://www.wtv.net -------- Logged at Mon Feb 2 04:43:45 MET 1998 ---------
Over the last two years EVERYONE
You don't have authority to speak on behalf of "EVERYONE".
has ripped Postel's authority to shreds. And the pitiful respect of ten guys and a handful of IETF stiffs is irrelevant. Postel is
You ARE irrelevant. Blaming respected people isn't a way to fix things. Or are you going to blow everything up and then build a "bright future"?
deposed. What remains is to install the next regime. One which must
Wow! How interesting. Are you offering yourself for the role of such regime's prophet or something? [can't write respectfully yours, regretfully] -edd -------- Logged at Mon Feb 2 15:01:41 MET 1998 ---------
I wrote:
Over the last two years EVERYONE has ripped Postel's authority to shreds. And the pitiful respect of ten guys and a handful of IETF stiffs is irrelevant. Postel is deposed. What remains is to install the next regime...
Ed replied:
You don't have authority to speak on behalf of "EVERYONE". (edit) You ARE irrelevant. Blaming respected people isn't a way to fix things. Or are you going to blow everything up and then build a "bright future"? (edit) Wow! How interesting. Are you offering yourself for the role of such regime's prophet or something?
Not prophet. More like the emmissary poet of this new direction. Furthermore if respected people blunder and fall and continue in the same disasterous paths we are left no choice but to summarily depose them and, if so called upon, to destroy all they misguidedly created. On the last matter as to who speaks for the prescient "EVERYONE" only tommorrow will tell. My sense is that the vision I promote is in closer tune with the interests of the General Good than is the cult of personaily aka: IANA/IETF/IAB/ISOC/IAHC/CORE/POC/ETC... Fighting words that would be unneccessary if you would but see youir collective folly. TeleVirtually Yours, Bob Allisat http://www.wtv.net -------- Logged at Mon Feb 2 16:03:06 MET 1998 ---------
On Sun, 1 Feb 1998, Karl Denninger wrote:
IMHO, Mr. Postel, who recently tried to put in place a way to hijack the roots, deserves to end up EXACTLY where Eugene is right now - facing federal criminal charges.
hijack the roots ? mr.postel IS the root you fool :-) he hase build them up at a time you probably where not even aware of your self-me too and terefor i respekt dr.postel and would folow his lead for ever sascha ps.sory to the list -------- Logged at Mon Feb 2 02:18:17 MET 1998 ---------
Sascha and all, Sascha Ignjatovic wrote:
On Sun, 1 Feb 1998, Karl Denninger wrote:
IMHO, Mr. Postel, who recently tried to put in place a way to hijack the roots, deserves to end up EXACTLY where Eugene is right now - facing federal criminal charges.
hijack the roots ?
mr.postel IS the root you fool :-)
He is no such thing. He is a human being not a machine you fool!
he hase build them up at a time you probably where not even aware of your self-me too and terefor i respekt dr.postel and would folow his lead for ever
Dr Postel did not do this alone for one thing. Secondly, hero worship is a very percarious thing ans has no place in this situation. Yes Dr. Postel should be respected, but not considered a god. No one should have that status in any field of endevor.
sascha ps.sory to the list
Regards, -- Jeffrey A. Williams DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng. Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC. E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com -------- Logged at Mon Feb 2 04:01:23 MET 1998 ---------
On Sun, 1 Feb 1998, Jeff Williams wrote:
He is no such thing. He is a human being not a machine you fool!
a system administrator on a unix system cals a root so dr.postel is something like internet dns root administrator i also want to thank and congratulate all this people who together build up the system we today call the internet i apologize also to mr.deninger-it was not bad minded he is shure trying as good he cans to contribute to the internet as we all and for that i also thank to him so please let us now change the subject and move from the ietf list this discussion thank you all very much and many apologize for using your lists to exchange this ideas and flames thanks sascha -------- Logged at Mon Feb 2 04:32:29 MET 1998 ---------
It would be nice if all of you restrict such talks to each other rather than sending it to everybody. I don't mean to say that this is crap, just that it would be better to restrict the use of mailing lists to disseminate knowledge and promote subject oriented arguments. I would and I am sure that many would appreciate if you take off those email addresses from the "To:" field. Thanks Saravanan R. On Mon, 2 Feb 1998, Sascha Ignjatovic wrote:
On Sun, 1 Feb 1998, Jeff Williams wrote:
He is no such thing. He is a human being not a machine you fool!
a system administrator on a unix system cals a root
so dr.postel is something like internet dns root administrator
i also want to thank and congratulate all this people who together build up the system we today call the internet
i apologize also to mr.deninger-it was not bad minded he is shure trying as good he cans to contribute to the internet as we all and for that i also thank to him
so please let us now change the subject and move from the ietf list this discussion
thank you all very much and many apologize for using your lists to exchange this ideas and flames
thanks sascha
-------- Logged at Mon Feb 2 06:55:17 MET 1998 ---------
Even I think So. _______________________________________________________________________________ Abhijit A. Naik (Software Engineer) Tata Interactive Systems Mumbai Ph :- (O) 8210748, 8220980 (R) 8872373. _________________________________________________________________________________ On Sun, 1 Feb 1998, Saravanan Radhakrishnan wrote:
It would be nice if all of you restrict such talks to each other rather than sending it to everybody. I don't mean to say that this is crap, just that it would be better to restrict the use of mailing lists to disseminate knowledge and promote subject oriented arguments. I would and I am sure that many would appreciate if you take off those email addresses from the "To:" field.
Thanks Saravanan R.
On Mon, 2 Feb 1998, Sascha Ignjatovic wrote:
On Sun, 1 Feb 1998, Jeff Williams wrote:
He is no such thing. He is a human being not a machine you fool!
a system administrator on a unix system cals a root
so dr.postel is something like internet dns root administrator
i also want to thank and congratulate all this people who together build up the system we today call the internet
i apologize also to mr.deninger-it was not bad minded he is shure trying as good he cans to contribute to the internet as we all and for that i also thank to him
so please let us now change the subject and move from the ietf list this discussion
thank you all very much and many apologize for using your lists to exchange this ideas and flames
thanks sascha
-------- Logged at Mon Feb 2 06:59:39 MET 1998 ---------
On Sat, 31 Jan 1998, Bob Allisat wrote:
New Top Level Domain (nTLD) names have been proposed as a way of
nTLD = National Top Level Domain -- Robert Martin-Leghne (RM59), Network Manager, DKnet (AS2109) main(){int a[2],b[2];pipe(a);pipe(b);if(fork()){dup2(a[0],0);dup2(b[1],1) ;}else{dup2(b[0],0);dup2(a[1],1);write(1,"R",1);}execlp("cat","cat",0);} -------- Logged at Mon Feb 2 15:32:36 MET 1998 ---------
participants (13)
-
abhi＠tis.co.in -
avc＠netnamesusa.com -
bob＠wtv.net -
dcrocker＠brandenburg.com -
edd＠aic.net -
jwkckid1＠ix.netcom.com -
karl＠mcs.net -
messenbu＠sungod.com -
robert＠DK.net -
rsarav＠ittc.ukans.edu -
signato＠email.archlab.tuwien.ac.at -
veni＠isoc.bg -
wessorh＠ar.com