Re: [ga-roots] Re: [ga] Letter to Dr. Vint Cerf

[Simon Higgs <simon@higgs.com>]

At 01:31 PM 5/8/01 -0700, you wrote:
>[copied from the main list, since it is really more of an issue for
>ga-roots -- my response to jefsey's open letter]
>
>Jefsey, I'm sure you didn't realize it, but you have made the strongest
>case I have seen so far for my proposal that there should be legal
>sanctions against the connection of alternate root system to the global
>Internet.

Gimme a break. It was never your idea, Kent. You're not that smart. But 
please do put all you energies into making alt.roots illegal. You do know 
what's going to happen when we are all forced to bow down and worship the 
"one true root", don't you?

>But you have posted these comments far and wide, and indicate yourself
>that you expect public response.
>
>Comments below:
>
>On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 07:56:26PM +0200, Jefsey Morfin wrote:
> > Dear Mr. Chairman,
>[...]
> > In all the ".biz" controversy we have heard many con and pros. There is
> > however a pro we never heard until now and that we are eager to hear from
> > you: what is that so important to the Internet about the ".biz" TLD? And
> > what made you vote to take it away from Leah Gallagos?
>
>Nothing is being taken away from her.

Bzzzzzzzzzzzzttt... just how much of the American flag is left, or did you 
burn the whole thing, Kent?

>She chose to use an alternate
>root system that was very unwisely connected to the global internet, and
>she can continue to do so.  However, her actions were irresponsible in
>that they ignored a very large scale process that has been going on for
>years, and she must take the consequences.

Could this be the same .BIZ that was part of the Draft Postel application 
process? Could it just be a pioneer registry from 1996 minding it's own 
business? That was supposed to be put into the root before Kent came along 
and screwed everything up as POC chair for the gTLD-MOU? Could it be that 
Kent tried this before by helping his buddy Dave Crocker to create a 
duplicate .WEB in 1997? Could it be that the US Government stomped on the 
gTLD-MOU and it's duplicate .WEB and squashed it like a bug?

Could it be that Kent is totally incapable of learning from his past 
mistakes? Could it be that the gTLD-MOU losers have corrupted ICANN by 
getting it to repeat history, thereby ensuring it's downfall?
[...]

> > 7) if a mail of mine was received by another party and disclosed due to 
> the
> > collision iCANN would have advised to the DoC, who would you advise me to
> > sue?
>
>The operator of the .biz that is operating in an alternate root.  Such
>operation is in direct contradiction to the best technical advice
>available (RFC 2826), and it is clearly irresponsible to operate in
>contradiction to such authoritative advice.

Unless, of course, you were operating it before RFC2826 was written. 
Besides, RFC2826 has zero legal basis. It's an informational RFC! It's just 
a suggestion ("Request For Comments") by the IAB. Nothing more, nothing 
less. It has about as much force in the law as a Monopoly "Chance" card. 
Besides, it's broken and needs fixing. :-)

>I am not a lawyer, but in a
>US court, at least, willfully ignoring such important and widely known
>information would be extremely damaging -- worse than mere negligence.

ROTFLMAO!!! OK, Kent. You go ahead and sue ARN for harming the Internet. 
I'll bring the sushi and your clown make up. We'll make sure the 
straight-jacket the Judge gives you isn't too loose, and that they give you 
the right medication.



Best Regards,

Simon

--
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity

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