Re: Special Attention Vinton Cerf to:Re: [ga] Verisign Agreement

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Jefsey and all remaining assembly members,

Jefsey Morfin wrote:

> Dear Patrick and Jeff,
> We are here at a time when the whole future of the internet is
> really at stake. Positions taken today will certainly have a final
> impact on the people, the companies, the technologies (through
> the M$ 200 R&D) DNS development, access costs,and therefore
> on business alliances and corporations survivals. If I judge from
> the Chinese case: also on international policies.
>
> On 07:50 19/03/01, Jeff Williams said:
> >Patrick and all remaining assembly members,
> >It seems from this article that Vint Cerf is either ignoring the vast majority
> >of comments regarding these "Options" or he has a reading impairment
> >problem...  I wonder which one it is???
>
> Jeff, there is also the possibhilty that Vint is playing tricky fox
> with them all, as he did for ".web".

  WHAT???  the .WEB position that Vint took was tricky???  How so?
I predicted what the ICANN BoD would do with .WEB before MDR,
and posted it right on this forum!   Nothing tricky or foxy about what
Vint's positions was and how he stated it!  You lost me totally on this one,
or you seem to have forgotten MDR rather quickly....

> Would he do it or not, our interest
> is that people do not know, and that he may claim that he is under vox
> populi's pressure.

  Well as we say down here in Texas, "If you can't stand the heat, get out
of the sun."

>
>
> >Patrick Corliss wrote:
> > > ICANN defers VeriSign decision
> > > By Stephen Withers, ZDNet Australia
> > > 13 March 2001
> > > These comments can be lodged through ICANN's Web site or sent to
> > > touton@icann.org until March 31.
>
> Looks like our only to interfaces are Chuck Gomes and Louis Touton.
> I am not sure which one is the Internet Community best ally?

  Neither is an ally.  I respect Chuck allot, but he works for Versign.
Louis Touton, is a matter of conjecture of course, but I don't trust the
guy very much....

>
>
> > > The board's discussion today suggested the weight of opinion favours
> > "Option B".
>
> Weight in term of stakeholder number, country Govs or added bucks?

  Added bucks!  Money rules, most times, Jefsey....

>
>
> > > As happened at the public forum, most of the concerns expressed seemed
> > to be
> > > about due process, rather than either of the options facing the board.
> > >
> > > "My view is that [Option B] is an improvement and a benefit," said
> > Cerf, shortly
> > > before he left the meeting prior to the close of business.
>
> May be Vint's list of con and pros would be more convincing than
> this view. "Prior to the close of business" might be an appropriate
> formula for many.
>
> > > Following the discussion, Elliot Noss, president and CEO of registrar
> > Tucows,
> > > said "This deal [Option B] is much preferred to the previous deal,"
> > although
> > > ICANN had missed "an opportunity to get concessions that would have
> > been good
>
> We need all the elements to be put on the table.
> I wish to know when press quotes one Registrar against the
> others or one stakeholder in favor of VeriSign, who is what,
> who is related to SAIC/VeriSign.

  I don't think this matters all that much really.  Although it certainly could...

>
>
> Would some one know the Registrars group enough to either
> describe or ask one of them to describe the economic links
> between the field players?

  Don't really need to Jefsey.  Just do some basic ROI projections...

>
>
> Talking of feeling, mine is that we head towards a huge anti-trust
> international case in the years to come.

  Very possibly, yes....

> But in in the meanwhile
> and during its legal and international resolution the Internet will
> suffer instability and development delays.

  Yes, as it already has begun to do to some of the ICANN BoD's
gamesmanship....

> This will also affect the
> credibility of the iCANN or kill it. I would not bother would the IP
> addressing plan not to be at stake. It will also affect SAIC/VeriSign,
> and we have no more reason to see them hurt than we have to be
> hurt by them.
>
> This to say that we have all the elements to properly advise
> the Board and report to the press. Chuck Gomes is obviously trying
> to help: but the take it or leave it attitude from VeriSign does not help
> him and does not help us.

  Good point here!  But remember, Chuck works for Versign.  His
near term future at least is intertwined with them.  He is at least
somewhat predisposed to tow the company line....

>
>
> Jefsey
>
> --
> 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

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


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