DNSO Mailling lists archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[ga] Many subjects cross sub-list lines

Here is an example of a problem which we need help with in both
education and making the sub-list structure work.

Please add as further importance the USG putting dotUS out for bid.  We
must be cognizant of the fact that governments are really very good at
avoiding wars (collisions).  I would not expect the USG to attack the
Verisign Monopoly - ICANN consortium with missiles. I would expect them
to supply the competitors with advisors, supplies and opportunities to
make a war unattractive to both sides. The only problem with this
Kissinger model is escalation.

Eric Dierker wrote:

> Please step back and reread letter. The hand is quicker than the eye.
> would they write such a letter? Good political manuvering requires
wiggle room
> for any contingency.  There are very seldom direct requests.  So when
you see
> one you must evaluate it for the real request. Here there is a very
> warning regarding competition and there is no endorsement of ICANNs
dotBIZ.  I
> would even suggest that the letter is being passed through an
intermediary -
> ICANN - to Verisign.
> It was Mr. Williams who asked me to take a second look at this letter
> analyze it.
> This header is a dead giveaway on missinterpretation of such work.
The letter
> specifically, often refers to TLD not gTLD. The frequency and usage is
a dead
> giveaway to include Alternates and new ccTLDs. When you were young did
> ever praise you for your effort, well if they did you knew you were
> getting the job done. Why didn't the letter applaud the results.
> Now go and read the 1998 document he refers to (I think it is easily
> accessable on Ms. Rony's site) I personally faxed and emailed copies
of this
> document to many. That document is the real message.
> There are very few professionals in these areas who participate in
these type
> of lists.  I would suggest you listen more closely to those who you
would ban,
> you do what you do and we do what we do.  Judging something you are
> proficient in is seldom a productive endeavor.
> Eric
> Patrick Corliss wrote:
> > Leah
> >
> > I'd agree with the following comment made to me privately:
> >
> > > I'm sure you've read the US Dept of Commerce's letter to ICANN
this week
> > > that is in effect asking ICANN to 'hurry up and create more
> > >
> > > http://www.icann.org/correspondence/doc-to-icann-25may01.htm
> > >
> > > Having read that it is real difficult to see the US Dept of
> > > stepping in to delay anything by supporting an alternate root TLD
> > > over anything ICANN does.  It looks more like the US Dept of
Commerce is
> > > giving Vint Cerf approval to drive a steamroller over anyone -
> > > alternate root TLD holders - that gets in ICANN's way.
> >
> > What do you think ?
> >
> > Best regards
> > Patrick Corliss

This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>