Re: [ga] RIPE NCC response to the Lynn Roadmap

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

Dear Sotiris,
you have simply to remember this simple rule for naming plans:
- universe :
- network system        : aaa
- independent member : aaa bbb
- members elements    : aaa bbb ccc, aaa bbb ccc ddd ...
You can separate element with nothng, spaces, dots, dashes and get them 
from right to left or lef to right.

This used everywhere:
- Sotiris Sotiropoulos Canadian
- Mont Blanc, Mount McKinley
- 3615 SNCF (Mnitel, French Railways for people access)
- GERFORDSALES - first DN ever used (Bundespost Tymnet Service)
- sales.ford.de - same address on Internet
- Sotiris Sotiropolous Zipcode City Canada (Posts)
- most probably for your SSN, your driving license, your hard disk, etc...

None of them needs an ICANN to operate correctly nor to call the Army in!!!

I was the custodian of the international datanetwork naming plan integrity 
for years. I can tell you I never went into a single IP problem :-)  They 
just came when NetSol started permitting resales of names (ie reslling 
something's shadow).

I do not know about NZ, but in France there is no cybesquatting nor UDRP 
need because the AFNIC does not permit DN transfers. You want the DN: buy 
the Corp.

ccTLD are not "TLD Manager"; they are national virtual network operators. 
As Verisign is "com" virtual network operator. This is all acknowledged in 
a few lines in RFC 920. They do not need the ICANN, they only need the IANA 
secretariat. The TLDA is enough as far as the DNS is concerned.

Jefsey

On 03:02 03/03/02, Sotiris Sotiropoulos said:
>David,
>
>Thanks for this excellent summation!  How true.  A few
>questions:  What about "policy" decision making with
>respect to domain names (i.e. trademarks vs. domains)?
>Who/what will deal with such matters on the Internet, if
>at all?  Will "Intellectual Property" issues be left up to
>national jurisdiction(s)?  What about the COM, NET, ORG
>domains, what will be their policy scope and
>instrument(s)?   Lastly, Will we go back to Postel's
>vision of not allowing trademark claims priority or
>right(s) over domains on the Internet?
>
>
>DPF wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 02 Mar 2002 11:22:38 -0800, "William S. Lovell"
> > <wsl@cerebalaw.com> wrote:
> >
> > >I would heartily concur with this general concept, with one exception.
> > >Who needs ICANN? Why have a "middle man?"
> >
> > Indeed that is now the question.
> >
> > >All of the ccTLDs
> > >are perfectly capable, through the NIC, of setting up a global system,
> > >now hopefully to include .eu, without having the imperial ICANN make
> > >up a bunch of rules without any global consultation, the ccTLDs don't
> > >like parts of it and refuse to pay ICANN any money, etc. I'm aware
> > >that there are contracts, but these die out eventually (one would hope),
> > >and during that time a truly international authoritative root server could
> > >be set up, together with all the other paraphenalia.
> >
> > ICANN Management has effectively just declared war on the ccTLDs
> > saying they effectively wish to be able to force contracts and levy
> > binding fees on ccTLDs regardless of whether the ccTLDs agree or not.
> >
> > Many ccTLDs have given hundreds of thousands to ICANN and the ICANN
> > process as signs of good will despite receiving almost nothing in
> > return.  This was with the intention that mutually acceptable
> > contracts could be negotiated but ICANN refuses to negotiate and
> > rejects the ccTLD versions out of hand rather than uses them as a
> > basis for negotiation.
> >
> > I think it may be time for the ccTLDs to simply stop paying any money
> > to ICANN when ICANN is going to use that money to try and do them
> > over.  Probably to also stop turning up to meetings.
> >
> > ccTLDs do not in my eyes needs a NZ$90 million a year body to do the
> > job Jon Postel used to do.  ICANN was primarily created due to the
> > need to create new gTLDs not to form some mini-UN over the ccTLDs.
> >
> > In terms of the root zone, only three functions are really needed for
> > the ccTLDs:
> > 1) Updating of root zone details after authentication
> > 2) Notification of minimum technical standards for a TLD
> > 3) A re-delegation procedure where the old manager loses the support
> > of the local internet community
> >
> > This could all be done very easily by the ccTLDs acting as a peer
> > organisation.
> >
> > DPF
> > --
> > david@farrar.com
> > ICQ 29964527
> > --
> > 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
>
>--
>Sincerely,
>
>Sotiris Sotiropoulos
>         Hermes Network Inc.
>         Toronto, Canada
>
>----
>direct: 416.422.1034
>
>icq: 34564103
>--
>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

--
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