RE: [wg-c] Eureka?

["Roeland M.J. Meyer" <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

Javier,
The contract for directory services was handed to yet another
contractor, not NSI. Besides, what do you consider proper "whois"
services? The way RIPE runs whois, or the way NSI does? Note that the
formats ARE way different and current EU law makes RIPE curtail whois
data much more than NSI is presently doing. Note also that the
distributed "whois" project got into a snarl and disappeared (bickering
over a caching problem, I understand, please correct). Many of the
current changes to "whois" are driven by the SRS, some are driven by EU
privacy laws, and others by reaction to spammers and anti-spam pressure.
IOW, they are not without external cause.

However, this is off-topic.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-wg-c@dnso.org [mailto:owner-wg-c@dnso.org]On Behalf Of
> Javier SOLA
> Sent: Monday, August 09, 1999 12:08 AM
> To: wg-c@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [wg-c] Eureka?
>
>
> The point is about scarce resources, not about companies that
> operate in an
> unlimited market. You can compete as a portal or a bookstore in the
> Internet. There might be as many of these as they wish to be,
> but only one
> registry can be ".info". It is a natural monopoly, and it is
> not a good
> idea to give it to somebody to explote it. One was given
> temporarily to
> NSI, and look what happened... or data, handed to a US Government
> contractor for handling the registry is considered by them
> now as their
> private property, and they have discontinued data services, a a proper
> whois...  Is that a free market?  If it was a bookstore, I
> would move to
> another one, I cannot do that here.
>
> Javier
>
> At 21:04 8/08/99 -0400, you wrote:
> >Javier SOLA wrote:
> >
> >> It is dangerous for the community, not for the company who
> would like to
> >> make a fat profit out of it.
> >
> >Javier:
> >You missed the point.
> >Is it "dangerous to the community" for private enterprises
> to operate, for
> >profit,
> >
> >> >1) radio spectrum bands?
> >> >2) real estate?
> >> >3) third-level domain names under a registered SLD?
> >> >4) an Internet exchange point?
> >> >5) a domain name server?
> >> >6) telecommunication links into the Internet?
> >> >7) a domain name brokerage for SLDs?
> >> >8) an Internet access provider?
> >
> >If you believe so, aren't your views out of step with
> thereality of the
> >Internet? Hasn't the growth and development of
> >the Internet and its accessibility to the people increased
> >enormously precisely by harnessing the incentives generated
> >by private, competitive business?
> >
> >Would you have us go back to the pre-1992 Internet?
> >
> >--
> >m i l t o n   m u e l l e r // m u e l l e r @ s y r . e d u
> >syracuse university          http://istweb.syr.edu/~mueller/
> >
>
>