Re: GTLD-SERVERS.NET (RE: $200 million (was [ga] Draft Resolution ))

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

Jefsey Morfin wrote:

>   On 19:29 19/03/01, Gomes, Chuck said:
> >Take a look at the last slide of the PowerPoint presentation at
> >http://www.gtldregistries.org/VeriSign_Global_Registry_Update.ppt
>
> Sorry it did not work for me?
>
> Chuck,
> I am sorry to say that negative spirits like some of us will think
> something like this:
>
> - VeriSign plans to spend M$ 20 a year during 10 years to develop
>    their Galaxy.

  I don't see that Verisign investing in their own future is a bad thing

for the stakeholder community, per se...  However the $20m/year
going to ICANN is a different matter entirely for a number of reasons.
One of those reasons is that it would be a direct tax deduction to
Verisign,
for instance.  But these funds should be earmarked, and not necessarily
just for "Registry" development for Versign or with Versign.....

>
> - why do they want to talk about this now? Would that mean there
>    is an advantage to do it?

  A big tax write off for one thing....

>
> - if there is an advantage it can only be to make that investment in
>    a way the support of the iCANN will help VeriSign, right?

  Right!  >;)

>
> - why would iCANN support help VeriSIgn unless that investment
>    without the iCANN support will not please the community?

  Good question.  I think the answer is relatively simple and already
known
to all here, or at least most....

>
>
> My personal feeling is that the Galaxy you plan will use a super
> DNS system (in competition/replacement of the CRADA) with some
> non compatible value added, and that proposing the other TLDs to
> join will amount to tell the ISPs "favor the VeriDNSign" and the
> iCANN "look all the money we agreed to spend for you: please
> make sure new TLDs use VeriDNSign".

  A good possibility, of course here....

>
>
> As you may recall the iCANN wants to over centralize the DNS
> and kill the Inclusive roots against its bylaws. More and more
> abuse of dominant position in the offing. Against MS this was the
> Justice Department and some States. In this case it will be
> a few Govs. Where is the good for VeriSign, the iCANN and
> for us all?

  They stand the chance of changing for a very long time the dynamics of

the Internet, is the the good FOR Verisign and ICANN, but not
necessarily
for the stakeholder...

>
>
> Let have the M$ on a reserved fund jointly managed by consensus.

Reserved fund, yes.  Managed by consensus, never happen, and shouldn't
happen....

>
>
> Jefsey

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@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