From: Phil Feeney <Phil_Feeney@mediaone.net>
To: "'dns@ntia.doc.gov'" <dns@ntia.doc.gov>
Date: 2/26/98 1:10am
Subject: The Internet

It is important for our government to keep the ball rolling by supporting the addition of IP addresses without strings.

Phil Feeney

###

From: "Kenneth F. Proctor Jr." <aka@maui.net>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 1:24am
Subject: Discussion Draft-attn:Ira Magaziner

The internet affords incredible freedom and opportunity to
anyone, U.S. citizen or foreigner. Boundaries are lowered or are
practically non-existant. Can we keep it that way please? I see
this insensitivity to the net community as standard for the
government. Let it be. Let it grow. Keep off the restraints
and controls. No taxes. No intervention by governments. No
government run or controlled DNS.

The following is copied for your enlightenment:

Originally, the new domain names were scheduled to become active
in the
Internet's Domain Name System (DNS) in February of 1998. As you
already
know, it is now February and the new domain names are not yet in
place.

That start date has been postponed. This is largely because on
January
30th, 1998, the U.S. Government released a proposal describing
its views on
how the Internet's DNS should be run. This draft may further
delay the
implementation of these domains.

The gTLD-MOU process has been 2 years in the making and is
supported by
such companies as MCI Communications, France Telecom, Bell
Canada, and the
U.S. Based International Trademark Association. At its heart,
the gTLD-MOU
process is supported by IANA (Internet Assigned Numbers
Authority), the
group that has run the Internet's DNS since it was created in
1984.

Unfortunately, the proposal set forth by the U.S. Government
seems to
neglect the consultative process put together by the Internet
community.
Though it is likely an oversight, the U.S. Government has assumed
it has
jurisdictional authority over a global Internet.

We feel that the reason the Internet has displayed such explosive
growth,
is not due to government guidance, but the lack thereof.
Although the U.S.
Government did provide funding for much of the earlier
development of the
Internet, this funding should not be confused with governance.
The
Internet has been governed by its stakeholders, such as
yourselves, and
groups of dedicated volunteers who make decisions in a democratic
process.

On February 26th, 1998, the European Union is scheduled to
publicize its
response to the U.S. proposal. It is a very negative response,
largely
criticizing the U.S. government for assuming authority over the
Internet
and disregarding many of the ideas set forth in the gTLD-MOU and
by the
Internet Community.

Though this is the core of the European Union's response, we also
fear that
they will make some attempt to impart their mark on the Internet.

We feel that this proposal and counter proposal may be a first
step on a
long and slippery road to the bureaucratization of the Internet.
At this
point, our greatest fear is that the Internet will become a
political tool,
to be fought over by various governments.

Since IANA is the governing authority behind the Internet's
domain name
system, the gTLD-MOU is empowered to move forward, however,
rather than
risk setting off a political chain reaction, we are at this
moment awaiting
the revision of the U.S. Government's stance. The government has
requested
comments on this draft, which is available at the url:
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/dnsdrft.htm

These comments may be sent to the address: dns@ntia.doc.gov.
Attention: Ira Magaziner
Re: Discussion Draft

The current launch date, April 1998, for these domains, is
dependent upon
the timely submission of public comment. We urge you to make
your voices
heard.

I have domain names reserved. I am willing to pay for them. I
need a web identity
now. Not later, not government imposed, regulated, assigned,
etc.

Thanks
Ken Proctor Jr.

###

From: "SCA" <alinet@email.msn.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 2:41am
Subject: Domains and the economy

Dear Sir:
While it is laudable that the government attempt to protect the rights of
citizens on the Internet by formulating certain standards for privacy, it is
disheartening to see the stance taken by this administration on the Domain
Name policy. In light of the spectacular growth of the Internet and its
implications for a more robust, information-rich and egalitarian society,
the present government paper is at best puzzling.

It is my strong opinion that a more consultative and accomodating approach
be taken in the DNS strategy, especially with regard to our European
associates. With the promise of scientific, academic and financial treasures
being unearthed by the Internet, it would prove disastrous to not accomodate
a more international standard. What is needed at this point is not
grand-standing and heavy-handed tactics but, instead, consultation,
accomodation and talk, talk, talk. (Even through e-mail.)

In closing, as a professional in the computer industry and an almost
thirty-something citizen, I hope that this administration leaves a positive
and historical mark on the Internet of which I can be proud.

Respectfully,
Sheridon C. Ali
...Shernish Inc....

###

From: System Administrator <Network-Development@IFBE.org>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 3:10am
Subject: TLD Registration

To whom it may concern,

We believe to continue growth of technology and expansion of ideas the
internet should be governed by free enterprise... Domain names should be
looked upon as did staking a claim when our forefathers came west...

Hans Schnauber
System Administrator
Network Development

###

From: megatrend <megatrend@adam.es>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 3:31am
Subject: Ira Magaziner

Dear Mrs or Mr Magaziner
The internet is a GLOBAL community.
There are just as many people in Europe than the USA, and millions and
millions more in Asia.
We do NOT want any government interference!
This place is run by people like myself, and millions and millions of
others all around the world, not by the US government!
The system set up by CORE is fair and efficient.
Much better than the current Internic.
Please keep US politics to the USA. Thank you.

###

From: <INHOUSE95@aol.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 4:27am
Subject: Re: Discussion Draft

Attention: Ira Magaziner

Dear Mr. Magaziner:

I am writing to ask that the government not interfere and change the ideas and
recomendations set forth in the gTLD-MOU and by the Internet Community.

The internet is meant to be a place where many ideas and expressions of
different kind, some distasteful, some vulgar, some racsist, and some
criminal, exist. However, the Internet is also a place where much valid and
useful information is distributed.

The internet is simply a vehicle for carying information, similar to a
newspaper o rmagazine. Just like a newspaper is not regulated with regard to
its content, nor should the internet.

The paranoia of certain groups should not be imposed on the rest of the
people. I too, have a child and don't want my son tpo be exposed to some of
the material on the internet. However, that is my responsibility to make sure
he does not see them.

Thank you

Ali Kamarei

###

From: "Rock" <rock@columbus.rr.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 5:22am
Subject: Discussion Draft

Keep Government out of the Internet!

###

From: Terry Boothman <writer@frontiernet.net>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 8:20am
Subject: internet regulation

We support the gTLD-MOU process and oppose excessive U. S. Government
authority over the Internet.

Terry Boothman

###

From: "Amar Singh" <krishanamar@hotmail.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 6:12am
Subject: comments

dear sir

i think it is unfair to hold the internet at guns point to any
governments' whim and fancy. the whole meaning of internet upto now was
the freedom behind it.

there should be no government anywhere in the world governing the
internet.

thank you

amar singh

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

###

From: "Amar Singh" <krishanamar@hotmail.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 6:16am
Subject: Discussion Draft

Attention: Ira Magaziner
Re: Discussion Draft

for gods sake, ira

i think the internet should be left alone wihtout any government
interefernce.

the important and most magical aspect of the internet is the freedom
behind it

thank you

amar singh

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

###

From: Mark Shay <mshay@gradschools.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 6:19am
Subject: Re: Discussion Draft

Attention: Ira Magaziner

Please do not restrict the allocation of the new set of Internet domains.
Our business has prospered under the unregulared environment of the
Internet and has grown into a leader in online academic directories. We
helped pioneer the field. Without regulation and restriction, who knows
what will follow. Let the new domains flow!

Mark Shay

---------------
gradschools.com
---------------
http://www.gradschools.com
265 E. Dutton Mill Rd, Aston, PA 19014 USA
phone: 1-610-364-0400 fax: 1-610-497-3812
email: info@gradschools.com

###

From: "Nicholas" <nicholas@swipnet.se>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 7:07am
Subject: Re: _Discussion_Draft

Attention: Ira Magaziner

I am a swedish internet user and I would just like to express my great amazement of how you can consider the global and marvellous internet your own property. To ignore the gTLD-MOU, representing a democratic consensus of the internet community, is not only arrogant but also dangerous. If there won't be a stable domain-structure on the internet, separate and limited systems might be set up, threatening to make the internet unstable.

Do what's right. Don't centralize.

with respect,
Nicholas M

###

From: "David & Julie Bailey" <ddbailey@roman.net>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 7:20am
Subject: Discussion Draft

Attention: Ira Magaziner

Please ensure that the U.S. government takes the lead in making sure that
the Internet does not become a political football, fought over by various
nations around the world.

The internet is the most powerful tool for spreading and ensuring democracy
in the world today.

It does not need to be controlled by the U.S. or any other political entity.
It can be regulated very well by the users. No government has the right to
try to control the content and direction it will go.

Please allow the new domain registration designations so that the expansion
can increase and that anyone, not just the very affluent can obtain a new
name registration.

Thank you for your consideration and support.

David Bailey ddbailey@roman.net

###

From: <BestQuote@aol.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 7:39am
Subject: Get New Extensions Moving!!!

Attention: Ira Magaziner
Re: Discussion Draft

As an internet citizen and big supporter of internet free speech, I have been
watching the IANA and the committee they set up and the gTLD-MOU.

Please just get the NEW INTERNET NAMES MOVING so people can start using them.
Eventually there should be more than the original 7 new extensions.

Wade Thomas
BestQuote@aol.com

###

From: Jim Baker <jim@onrampinc.net>
To: "'dns@ntia.doc.gov'" <dns@ntia.doc.gov>
Date: 2/26/98 7:54am
Subject: DNS

I feel the US and every other government should keep their nose out of the
Internet. This is the only way that the Internet can grow to become the
medium that it has the potential to be. It allows Free Speech, Education
and Access to Information to all at a very affordable price. The Internet
should be governed for the people by the people. Although the US
Government is one of the best in the world it too has strayed off the path
of it founders. It was about Rights for the Individual which is not always
what may be best for the whole.

Jim Baker
OnRamp, Inc.
16798 Hwy 10
Elk River, MN 55330
Phone: (612) 241-8898
Fax: (612) 241-8894
jim@onrampinc.net

###

From: "Don Kramer" <donkramer@hotmail.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 8:18am
Subject: Attention: Ira Magaziner.. Re: Discussion Draft

Dear Mr. Magaziner,

As a small business owner who depends heavily on the Internet for my
livlihood, I urge you to support the expansion of the Internet Domain
Name System (DNS) as proposed by the gTLD-MOU. As you know, the gTLD-MOU
process has been 2 years in the making and is supported by such
companies as MCI Communications, France Telecom, Bell Canada, and the
U.S. Based International Trademark Association.

Please do not ignore the results of the consultative process put
together by the Internet community. Move quickly to keep our federal
government's fingers out of the pie and make sure that this vital
expansion is not derailed.

Sincerely,

Don Kramer
Senior Partner At-Home Care
donkramer@palmnet.net
P.O. Box 372700
Satellite Beach, FL 32937
407-779-9555

Originally, the new domain names were scheduled to become active in the
Internet's Domain Name System (DNS) in February of 1998. As you already
know, it is now February and the new domain names are not yet in place.
That start date has been postponed. This is largely because on January
30th, 1998, the U.S. Government released a proposal describing its views
on
how the Internet's DNS should be run. This draft may further delay the
implementation of these domains.
The gTLD-MOU process has been 2 years in the making and is supported by
such companies as MCI Communications, France Telecom, Bell Canada, and
the
U.S. Based International Trademark Association. At its heart, the
gTLD-MOU
process is supported by IANA (Internet Assigned Numbers Authority), the
group that has run the Internet's DNS since it was created in 1984.
Unfortunately, the proposal set forth by the U.S. Government seems to
neglect the consultative process put together by the Internet community.
Though it is likely an oversight, the U.S. Government has assumed it has
jurisdictional authority over a global Internet.
We feel that the reason the Internet has displayed such explosive
growth,
is not due to government guidance, but the lack thereof. Although the
U.S.
Government did provide funding for much of the earlier development of
the
Internet, this funding should not be confused with governance. The
Internet has been governed by its stakeholders, such as yourselves, and
groups of dedicated volunteers who make decisions in a democratic
process.
On February 26th, 1998, the European Union is scheduled to publicize its
response to the U.S. proposal. It is a very negative response, largely
criticizing the U.S. government for assuming authority over the Internet
and disregarding many of the ideas set forth in the gTLD-MOU and by the
Internet Community.
Though this is the core of the European Union's response, we also fear
that
they will make some attempt to impart their mark on the Internet.
We feel that this proposal and counter proposal may be a first step on a
long and slippery road to the bureaucratization of the Internet. At
this
point, our greatest fear is that the Internet will become a political
tool,
to be fought over by various governments.
Since IANA is the governing authority behind the Internet's domain name
system, the gTLD-MOU is empowered to move forward, however, rather than
risk setting off a political chain reaction, we are at this moment
awaiting
the revision of the U.S. Government's stance. The government has
requested
comments on this draft, which is available at the url:
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/dnsdrft.htm
These comments may be sent to the address: dns@ntia.doc.gov.
Attention: Ira MagazinerRe: Discussion Draft
The current launch date, April 1998, for these domains, is dependent
upon
the timely submission of public comment. We urge you to make your
voices
heard.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Internet Domain Registrars
staff@registrars.nethttp://www.registrars.net

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

###

From: <skoug@mocca.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 11:45am

Attention: Ira Magaziner:

We are a small Internet service provider, active with what became the Net
since 1985.
For over a year, we have prepared a new information service based on a URL
xxx.info
Launch date for our new service was March, when we had every reason to
believe that
our URL, ending on info, would have been registered. We have put a lot of
money and effort into our new .info service and now the BIG GOVERNMENT and
its new-socialistic attitude to business, starts screwing things up. We in
the Net business NEED the URLs NOW.
The URL .INFO is absolutely needed so butt out or act responsively and
cooperate with the industry. We know best. Not you bureaucrats.
S. Erik Skoug.

###

From: "Skuppa" <skuppa@ecom.net>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 8:21am
Subject: A PROPOSAL TO IMPROVE TECHNICAL MANAGEMENT OF

CC: NTIADC40.SMTP40("staff@registrars.net")

attn: Ira Magaziner

REGARDING THE US PROPOSAL TO IMPROVE TECHNICAL MANAGEMENT OF INTERNET NAMES
AND ADDRESSES
DISCUSSION DRAFT 1/30/98

As a United States citizen, I am opposed to the U.S. Government thinking or
assuming that it has any jurisdictional authority over a global Internet. I
am opposed to any interference from my government in the global internet.
Please revise your "Discussion Draft.

Thank you,

Don Mulligan

Skuppa

one Ping only please...

###

From: "Merv Francis" <merv@aaaaustralia.com.au>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 8:34am
Subject: Hands off the Internet.

The Internet is a global entity.
NO Government from any country whatsoever has any power or rights to impose
rules on the internet. It should only be guided by the dictates of it's
users.

Merv Francis
Director - AAA Australia Shopping Mall
URL: http://www.aaaaustralia.com.au
Email: merv@aaaaustralia.com.au

###

From: "Don Kramer" <donkramer@hotmail.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 8:51am
Subject: Attention: Ira Magaziner.. Re: Discussion Draft

Dear Mr. Magaziner,

As a small business owner who depends heavily on the Internet for my
livlihood, I urge you to support the expansion of the Internet Domain
Name System (DNS) as proposed by the gTLD-MOU. As you know, the gTLD-MOU
process has been 2 years in the making and is supported by such
companies as MCI Communications, France Telecom, Bell Canada, and the
U.S. Based International Trademark Association.

Please do not ignore the results of the consultative process put
together by the Internet community. Move quickly to keep our federal
government's fingers out of the pie and make sure that this vital
expansion is not derailed.

Sincerely,

Don Kramer
Senior Partner At-Home Care
donkramer@palmnet.net
P.O. Box 372700
Satellite Beach, FL 32937
407-779-9555

Originally, the new domain names were scheduled to become active in the
Internet's Domain Name System (DNS) in February of 1998. As you already
know, it is now February and the new domain names are not yet in place.
That start date has been postponed. This is largely because on January
30th, 1998, the U.S. Government released a proposal describing its views
on
how the Internet's DNS should be run. This draft may further delay the
implementation of these domains.
The gTLD-MOU process has been 2 years in the making and is supported by
such companies as MCI Communications, France Telecom, Bell Canada, and
the
U.S. Based International Trademark Association. At its heart, the
gTLD-MOU
process is supported by IANA (Internet Assigned Numbers Authority), the
group that has run the Internet's DNS since it was created in 1984.
Unfortunately, the proposal set forth by the U.S. Government seems to
neglect the consultative process put together by the Internet community.
Though it is likely an oversight, the U.S. Government has assumed it has
jurisdictional authority over a global Internet.
We feel that the reason the Internet has displayed such explosive
growth,
is not due to government guidance, but the lack thereof. Although the
U.S.
Government did provide funding for much of the earlier development of
the
Internet, this funding should not be confused with governance. The
Internet has been governed by its stakeholders, such as yourselves, and
groups of dedicated volunteers who make decisions in a democratic
process.
On February 26th, 1998, the European Union is scheduled to publicize its
response to the U.S. proposal. It is a very negative response, largely
criticizing the U.S. government for assuming authority over the Internet
and disregarding many of the ideas set forth in the gTLD-MOU and by the
Internet Community.
Though this is the core of the European Union's response, we also fear
that
they will make some attempt to impart their mark on the Internet.
We feel that this proposal and counter proposal may be a first step on a
long and slippery road to the bureaucratization of the Internet. At
this
point, our greatest fear is that the Internet will become a political
tool,
to be fought over by various governments.
Since IANA is the governing authority behind the Internet's domain name
system, the gTLD-MOU is empowered to move forward, however, rather than
risk setting off a political chain reaction, we are at this moment
awaiting
the revision of the U.S. Government's stance. The government has
requested
comments on this draft, which is available at the url:
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/dnsdrft.htm
These comments may be sent to the address: dns@ntia.doc.gov.
Attention: Ira MagazinerRe: Discussion Draft
The current launch date, April 1998, for these domains, is dependent
upon
the timely submission of public comment. We urge you to make your
voices
heard.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Internet Domain Registrars
staff@registrars.nethttp://www.registrars.net

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

###

From: Jim Halpern <jim@digitalgreen.com>
To: NTIADC40.SMTP40("dns@ntia.doc.gov.")
Date: 2/26/98 9:55am
Subject: Internet

--
Jim Halpern, CAS (320) 240-8812 Phone
DIGITAL GREEN LLC (320) 240-8813 Fax
26 6Th Ave No
St. Cloud, MN 56303

Stay away from the internet, we need your help like we need AIDS. The
gov has only one goal and that is to hire more goofy people and make
paperwork and more paperwork all the while telling everyone what a great
job they are doing. Like the DOT using 1950 computers to control
airspace real sharp department. A box of rocks has more common sense.

###

From: Jerry <webmaster@4images.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/25/98 9:14pm
Subject: Attention: Ira Magaziner Re: Discussion Draft

I wish to express my opinion regarding the US Government attempt to
micro-manage the Internet, specifically the DNS portion of it. Throughout
history, the US Government has done a very poor job when it attempts to
control things that have nothing to do with the running of a country (and
many question your success in that area). The Internet should not be
controlled by any one party. Granted, the naming and routing should be
handled by only a few VERY capable entities, but the rest should not be
infringed upon. The companies that make the Internet what it is today
(excluding pornographers and those who are committing or conspiring to
commit illegal acts) should have a significant voice in how the Internet
should be configured and maintained. If these major players can reach a
suitable agreement, why is it so hard for the US Government to go along
with it? Please cease your quest to conquer the Internet and force it into
submission.

Jerry Winegard
ClubNET, Inc. ISP

__________________________________
ClubNET 872-2468
WHY IN THE WORLD PAY MORE?

$8 per month for 20 hours
$18 per month for unlimited use
$35 per month for 64K ISDN
$39.00 per month for a 10MB Web Site
__________________________________
A/V conference at http://ils.4images.com

###

From: Dennis Simpson <dwsimpso@august.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 9:34am
Subject: Re: Discussion Draft

Attention: Ira Magaziner

I feel the US should get out of this entirely, and let it be
goverened by a global body. The more the US gets into things
the more they screw it up, because of the low motives and
limited knowledge and understanding of its government members,
and the feeling the rest of the world is not as important
as we are.

Here is another case of our government coming to us and saying,
"We are from the government and are here to help you."

Rubbish! They can best help us by staying away.

Dennis W. Simpson
2219 Cedar Circle
Carrollton, TX 75006

###

From: "Sheryl E. Coe" <ecoe@worldnet.att.net>
To: Jeanne & Scott <mckinley@nji.com>
Date: 2/26/98 6:22am
Subject: Attention: Ira Magaziner Re: Discussion Draft

Sheryl Coe
9 Circle Drive
Mt. Arlington, NJ 07856
973.663.5966

Dear Ira Magaziner:

I would like to register my objection to the U.S. position
on domain names. The internet community should not be
second-guessed by bureaucrats. These are complex issues
that have been worked out in painstaking detail after much
grass roots participation in the discussions. We resent
your intrusion.

I am webmaster for my company as well as other web sites.

I'm sure you know that the internet is a great power for
democratization and economic growth. Real jobs. Not just
service-sector dead-end jobs. Real jobs that pay well for
work-at-home Moms like myself. Thanks to the internet, I am
able to spend more time with my kids ages 4 and 7, I have a
paycheck, a 401K plan and health benefits, and 3 weeks of
vacation every year. THIS is the answer to more than
economic issues, it brings workers back to their families,
to their communities. It allows disabled people to
contribute to the economy. Tapping the power of disabled
and stay-at-home parents alone could unleash the first real
growth in our economy in a century.

If you strangle the internet with bureaucractic red tape,
the only thing that will happen is that the internet will
leave the United States behind. We will become a digital
second-rate power and quickly. Things are moving SO quickly
right now you have no idea.

I realize you have the best of intentions, but the internet
cannot become a tool for political power. And I am asking
you to do everything you can to ensure that it does not.

If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to
contact me.

Sincerely,

Sheryl Coe

###

From: "Caroline E Horton" <computer_consultant@email.msn.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 10:12am
Subject: Internet & Domain Names

We think very strongly that no political body USA or European Union should
become involved in the Internet.

Domain naming should be controlled by an international committee without any
political interference - especially from those that have an axe (sic:
agenda) to grind.

Once the Internet becomes politicized it will be destroyed!

Free use is needed for continued unrestricted growth of the Internet.

This is not to say Internet crimes should not be punished - they should be
and harshly, but this is a separate issue!

Please consider the studies done by the international committee.

Dan Horton & Caroline Horton

###

From: BCCollins <BCCollins@aol.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 10:25am
Subject: Internet

I just wanted to voice my opinion that the US government should play as small
a role as possible in the Internet.

###

From: "Doug Tomlinson" <tomlinson@tomlin.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 10:32am
Subject: Discussion Draft

Attention: Ira Magaziner

Re: Discussion Draft

The entire world has entered into a global collaboration to arrive at a
workable solution to DNS. I feel that this process should be allowed to
proceed. Especially, listen to the Europeans about this.

Thank you,

Doug Tomlinson

###

From: "Webpro International, Inc." <development@webpro.com>
To: "'webmaster@ntia.doc.gov'" <webmaster@ntia.doc.gov...
Date: 2/26/98 1:25am
Subject: Just Because

Just because you guys can't develop a concise and succinct navigational website is no reason to hold back millions of people who can.

Bureaucratical hog-wash.

There I here..... I said it! In response to this email below.

Dear Valued Customer,

Originally, the new domain names were scheduled to become active in the
Internet's Domain Name System (DNS) in February of 1998. As you already
know, it is now February and the new domain names are not yet in place.

That start date has been postponed. This is largely because on January
30th, 1998, the U.S. Government released a proposal describing its views on
how the Internet's DNS should be run. This draft may further delay the
implementation of these domains.

The gTLD-MOU process has been 2 years in the making and is supported by
such companies as MCI Communications, France Telecom, Bell Canada, and the
U.S. Based International Trademark Association. At its heart, the gTLD-MOU
process is supported by IANA (Internet Assigned Numbers Authority), the
group that has run the Internet's DNS since it was created in 1984.

Unfortunately, the proposal set forth by the U.S. Government seems to
neglect the consultative process put together by the Internet community.
Though it is likely an oversight, the U.S. Government has assumed it has
jurisdictional authority over a global Internet.

We feel that the reason the Internet has displayed such explosive growth,
is not due to government guidance, but the lack thereof. Although the U.S.
Government did provide funding for much of the earlier development of the
Internet, this funding should not be confused with governance. The
Internet has been governed by its stakeholders, such as yourselves, and
groups of dedicated volunteers who make decisions in a democratic process.

On February 26th, 1998, the European Union is scheduled to publicize its
response to the U.S. proposal. It is a very negative response, largely
criticizing the U.S. government for assuming authority over the Internet
and disregarding many of the ideas set forth in the gTLD-MOU and by the
Internet Community.

Though this is the core of the European Union's response, we also fear that
they will make some attempt to impart their mark on the Internet.

We feel that this proposal and counter proposal may be a first step on a
long and slippery road to the bureaucratization of the Internet. At this
point, our greatest fear is that the Internet will become a political tool,
to be fought over by various governments.

Since IANA is the governing authority behind the Internet's domain name
system, the gTLD-MOU is empowered to move forward, however, rather than
risk setting off a political chain reaction, we are at this moment awaiting
the revision of the U.S. Government's stance. The government has requested
comments on this draft, which is available at the url:
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/dnsdrft.htm

These comments may be sent to the address: dns@ntia.doc.gov.
Attention: Ira Magaziner
Re: Discussion Draft

The current launch date, April 1998, for these domains, is dependent upon
the timely submission of public comment. We urge you to make your voices
heard.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Internet Domain Registrars staff@registrars.net
http://www.registrars.net

###

From: RIS-Michael Hollander <RACING@compuserve.com>
To: Ira Magaziner <dns@ntia.doc.gov>
Date: 2/26/98 10:55am
Subject: Discussion Draft

The United States Government has every right to control the ARPAnet, as
well as its own sites on the global Internet. The United States government
and any other government has absolutely NO right to control the domain
naming authority set up by the stakeholders on the Internet. The
stakeholders have an inherent and inalienable right, as proven and agreed
to by the founding fathers through the Declaration of Independence, to
control their own destinies. Therefore, the United States government and
any other currently empowered government, which receives its authority only
from the consent of the governed, should cease and desist immediately from
any attempt to control domain names, ceding any control to the IANA.

Thank you for considering this comment.

Michael F. Hollander
Citizen of the United States

###

From: Doug Anderson <doug42@ix.netcom.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 10:53am
Subject: Comments...

This e-mail contains comments on:
A PROPOSAL TO IMPROVE TECHNICAL MANAGEMENT OF
INTERNET NAMES AND ADDRESSES
DISCUSSION DRAFT 1/30/98

I have no major objections to the content and spirit of the draft
proposal. However, I would like to see the U.S. government fully endorse
the fine work that has already been accomplished by the gTLD-MoU Policy
Oversight Committee (http://www.gtld-mou.org). As I'm sure you are aware,
this proposal has been created in the "spirit if the Internet" and is fully
endorsed by IANA.
My company needs a solution to the Internet domain name system today!
The gTLD-MoU POC has already created and tested a working solution to
expand the Internet's domain name system. The gTLD-MoU's system is
ready-to-go today. While I understand the U.S. government's need to define
its position on the issue, to date the draft proposal has only hampered the
rollout of the new top level domains. The rollout of the new top-level
domains has been delayed solely because of the U.S. government's draft
proposal. In order to procede with the U.S. government's proposal, all the
work already performed by the gTLD-MoU Policy Oversight Committee would
have to be duplicated. The dulpication of this effort could take many
months or even years. The gTLD-MoU already has the backing of the
international Internet community, it is unlikely that any U.S. government
lead effort will achieve this same level of support.
I am requesting that the U.S. government fully endorse the gTLD-MoU
Policy Oversight Committee's plan to rollout 7 new top level domains. I
would like to see the government endorse this plan during the "transition"
phase to complete privitization of the Internet. The gTLD-MoU is a
solution available today that would serve as a great first-step in the
government's transition out of Internet domain name management.

Small Business Owner,

Doug Anderson
Solipsis Research Corporation
Orlando FL 32825-6490
http://www.solipsis.com

###

From: "john Elliott" <jpe@halcyon.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 11:13am
Subject: Internet Domain Name System (DNS)

Attention: Ira Magaziner
Re: Discussion Draft

As a US citizen, it is my opinion that governments should not attempt to
regulate the Internet's domaain name system. The Internet is a global
resource serving many diverse constituencies. Governmental regulation will
quickly degenerate into a quagmire if any individual nations assert
controlling authority. Moreover, experience demonstrates that regulation by
governmental agencies or by detailed policy regulations will likely be too
bureaucratic and slow to support the rapid evoution necessary for the
success of Internet commerce and communications.

Instead, the proposal developed through the gTLD-MOU process and supported
by the IANA (Internet Assigned Numbers Authority)should be embraced and
implemented.

John Elliott

###

From: Bob Soderberg <bobso@microcrafts.com>
To: "'dns@ntia.doc.gov'" <dns@ntia.doc.gov>
Date: 2/26/98 11:42am
Subject: INTERNET NAMES AND ADDRESSES DISCUSSION DRAFT

Dear Sirs and Madams,

I wish to wholeheartedly congratulate and voice my approval to Ira
Magaziner and others involved
in preparing the Discussion Draft for the governance of the Internet
Domain Name System. This
proposal is key to preserving the investment that the citizens of the
United States have made in
the development of the Internet by created an open and accountable
system that is legitimate in
the eyes of Internet stakeholders.

The move by private individuals to wrest control of the system from
legitimate agencies and from
the people of the United States was self-serving and did not meet with
the approval of many in the
Internet community.

Unfortunately this scheme was supported by Jon Postel, head of IANA, and
a man who has made
an unmeasurable contribution to the Internet's development. His support
has undoubtedly lent
legitimacy to this scheme.

You will undoubtedly receive a barrage of negative response from those
involved in the scheme,
especially those who have a financial stake in the ill-advised plan's
success, and from those from
whom they have solicited support through email campaigns.

Again, thank you for your efforts on this plan and congratulations for a
job well done!

Sincerely,
Robert Soderberg

###

From: "Julian Zambanini" <jzambanini@ofmconv.org>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 11:46am
Subject: Attention: Ira Magaziner Re: Discussion Draft - PLEASE GET ON WITH IT . . .

Attention: Ira Magaziner
Re: Discussion Draft

Dear Mr. Magaziner,

I expected the message I received from IDR would tell me that my Domain Name was all set to go. I have been waiting for one month and a half and now it seems that I have to wait another month!!! (AND WHO KNOWS HOW LONG AFTER THAT . . .!) It seems to me that if this question has been studied for 2 years and the go ahead was given it should be respected and the proposed new Domain Name catagories activated.

If other changes are decided for the good functioning of the INTERNET at that point having heard the people competent to give an opinion, the changes can be made in the future. ROME WAS NOT BUILT IN A DAY! AND THE INTERNET WILL CONTINUE TO GROW AND BE IMPROVED. My fear is that which is also expressed below: "this proposal and counter proposal may be a first step on a long and slippery road to the bureaucratization of the Internet." and continued delays.

At this point, "they" are talking about a "March-April" starting date. There is NO REASON the proposal to activate the new Domain Names catagories cannot go ahead as is, since everyone was and is in agreement. Once this is done the other problems, if there really are other problems can be dealt with. It is always the little guys that suffers.

Which brings me to another associated issue regarding the registering of Domain Names i.e. the payment of a registering fee.

I have no problem with the initial payment to offset the problem of persons blocking out names to sell them for profit at a later date and to pay the expenses of the registering service, but I think once the name is registered and especially now since most of the changes and updating is done by the registrant himself via the internet, the yearly fee can be lowered to something like $15-$20.

As the draft indicate a large sum of money was collected: "In excess of $46 Million has been collected to date." I object to whoever (government, registering agencies, providers, etc.) getting rich because of collecting unnecessary money.

So Mr. Magaziner, my suggestion to you and to whomever is blocking the process:

LET'S GET ON WITH IT!!

(I already have had to change my plans--I'm sure I'm not the only one, can't we try to get back on schedule!)

and

GET RID OF UNNECESSARY FEES !!!

J. Zambanini
jzambanini@pcn.net

------------------------------------------------------

"Dear Valued Customer,

Originally, the new domain names were scheduled to become active in the
Internet's Domain Name System (DNS) in February of 1998. As you already
know, it is now February and the new domain names are not yet in place.

That start date has been postponed. This is largely because on January
30th, 1998, the U.S. Government released a proposal describing its views on
how the Internet's DNS should be run. This draft may further delay the
implementation of these domains.

The gTLD-MOU process has been 2 years in the making and is supported by
such companies as MCI Communications, France Telecom, Bell Canada, and the
U.S. Based International Trademark Association. At its heart, the gTLD-MOU
process is supported by IANA (Internet Assigned Numbers Authority), the
group that has run the Internet's DNS since it was created in 1984.

Unfortunately, the proposal set forth by the U.S. Government seems to
neglect the consultative process put together by the Internet community.
Though it is likely an oversight, the U.S. Government has assumed it has
jurisdictional authority over a global Internet.

We feel that the reason the Internet has displayed such explosive growth,
is not due to government guidance, but the lack thereof. Although the U.S.
Government did provide funding for much of the earlier development of the
Internet, this funding should not be confused with governance. The
Internet has been governed by its stakeholders, such as yourselves, and
groups of dedicated volunteers who make decisions in a democratic process.

On February 26th, 1998, the European Union is scheduled to publicize its
response to the U.S. proposal. It is a very negative response, largely
criticizing the U.S. government for assuming authority over the Internet
and disregarding many of the ideas set forth in the gTLD-MOU and by the
Internet Community.

Though this is the core of the European Union's response, we also fear that
they will make some attempt to impart their mark on the Internet.

We feel that this proposal and counter proposal may be a first step on a
long and slippery road to the bureaucratization of the Internet. At this
point, our greatest fear is that the Internet will become a political tool,
to be fought over by various governments.

Since IANA is the governing authority behind the Internet's domain name
system, the gTLD-MOU is empowered to move forward, however, rather than
risk setting off a political chain reaction, we are at this moment awaiting
the revision of the U.S. Government's stance. The government has requested
comments on this draft, which is available at the url:
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/dnsdrft.htm

The current launch date, April 1998, for these domains, is dependent upon
the timely submission of public comment. We urge you to make your voices
heard.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Internet Domain Registrars staff@registrars.net
http://www.registrars.net"

###

From: Alan Carter <big_al@idacom.net>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 12:16pm
Subject: Assignment of domain names

The US Government does not assign phone numbers or street addresses. If
I want an
800 number that says 1-800-CALL2ME, and it's gone, too bad for me.
The US Government should stay out of the domain name business.
Just stay out! Leave it alone. Stay out. Let me make myself clear, STAY
OUT.
Thank You. Oh, STAY OUT!

###

From: Mark Ferguson <mark@pagemaster.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 12:13pm
Subject: Discussion Draft

Attention: Ira Magaziner

Dear Sir:

Since the Internet does not belong to any government entity and has only
developed & flourished because of independent, private enterprise, I
find this draft offensive and repugnant. The US Constitution gives no
authority of any kind regarding what is being considered in this draft.
In fact, it is prohibited by the US Bill of Rights, Amendment 10, and
leaves this right to the states or the people, but NOT the federal
government.

Furthermore, the technical aspects of this draft are already flawed and
antiquated by today's standards and those standards change on a daily,
almost hourly basis. Internet technology is the fastest growing
technology today and by trying to limit it with laws or "one way" of
doing something, begins to stifle it and chain it to yesterday's
science.

If you want to truly advance the Internet and all its ramifications, and
at the same time become a legend or figurehead in the business
community, then leave the Internet free of any government interference,
please.

Mark Ferguson
714-544-0596

###

From: Terry Ferguson <kitalet@trvnet.net>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 2:17pm
Subject: Discussion Draft

Ira Magaziner

We don't want to spark an internet war where different government bodies
fight for control. Please back off and let the proposed domain name
registration go forward as planned. Small fry like my wife and I are
able to compete with the biggest companies in the world. Don't try to
change that.

Terry Ferguson
Renwick, IA

###

From: Alan Barksdale <alan@alan.b30.ingr.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 12:21pm
Subject: keep DNS and Internet out of government hands

The title of this email says it all.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Alan F. Barksdale afbarksd@ingr.com
203 Utica Place, #4 (home) 205-830-6601
Huntsville, AL 35806 USA (work) 205-730-3764
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

###

From: Alan Wada <wada@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 1:21pm
Subject: Re: Discussion Draft

Attention: Ira Magaziner
Re: Discussion Draft

Please make the April 1998 date happen!!! I've been waiting for
a year for the new domains!

I agree with the reasoning presented in the following message
from IDR.

Sincerely,

Alan Wada

Originally, the new domain names were scheduled to become active in the
Internet's Domain Name System (DNS) in February of 1998. As you already
know, it is now February and the new domain names are not yet in place.

That start date has been postponed. This is largely because on January
30th, 1998, the U.S. Government released a proposal describing its views
on
how the Internet's DNS should be run. This draft may further delay the
implementation of these domains.

The gTLD-MOU process has been 2 years in the making and is supported by
such companies as MCI Communications, France Telecom, Bell Canada, and
the
U.S. Based International Trademark Association. At its heart, the
gTLD-MOU
process is supported by IANA (Internet Assigned Numbers Authority), the
group that has run the Internet's DNS since it was created in 1984.

Unfortunately, the proposal set forth by the U.S. Government seems to
neglect the consultative process put together by the Internet community.
Though it is likely an oversight, the U.S. Government has assumed it has
jurisdictional authority over a global Internet.

We feel that the reason the Internet has displayed such explosive
growth,
is not due to government guidance, but the lack thereof. Although the
U.S.
Government did provide funding for much of the earlier development of
the
Internet, this funding should not be confused with governance. The
Internet has been governed by its stakeholders, such as yourselves, and
groups of dedicated volunteers who make decisions in a democratic
process.

On February 26th, 1998, the European Union is scheduled to publicize its
response to the U.S. proposal. It is a very negative response, largely
criticizing the U.S. government for assuming authority over the Internet
and disregarding many of the ideas set forth in the gTLD-MOU and by the
Internet Community.

Though this is the core of the European Union's response, we also fear
that
they will make some attempt to impart their mark on the Internet.

We feel that this proposal and counter proposal may be a first step on a
long and slippery road to the bureaucratization of the Internet. At
this
point, our greatest fear is that the Internet will become a political
tool,
to be fought over by various governments.

Since IANA is the governing authority behind the Internet's domain name
system, the gTLD-MOU is empowered to move forward, however, rather than
risk setting off a political chain reaction, we are at this moment
awaiting
the revision of the U.S. Government's stance. The government has
requested
comments on this draft, which is available at the url:
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/dnsdrft.htm

These comments may be sent to the address: dns@ntia.doc.gov.
Attention: Ira Magaziner
Re: Discussion Draft

The current launch date, April 1998, for these domains, is dependent
upon
the timely submission of public comment. We urge you to make your
voices
heard.

###

From: "Michael H. Arick" <marick@bluedot.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 6:03am
Subject: Attn: Ira Magaziner; Re: Discussion Draft

Dear Ira:
I just want to say that the United States shouldn't govern The
Internet. Nobody should, really, at least not any single country. The
Internet has experienced tremendous growth in the past decade. This is
because of LACK of governing. Please choose the gTLD-MOU process and
keep The Internet international.

-Michael Arick
marick@bluedot.com

###

From: Jade Chinn <jchinn@unixg.ubc.ca>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 2:38pm
Subject: Comments on the Discussion Draft

If the U.S. government wants to control the internet, they should try to
do it in less obvious ways. The government's cunning cooperation with
Network Solutions Inc. is simply too apparent.

Everybody can see that The Commerce Dept. and NSI must be in cahoots in
order to maintain NSI's control over the old TLD's. NSI must love its
lofty position right now, as they continue to collect monopoly rents on
domain names registered under .com, .org, and .net. Not only do they hold
this advantage, but it also seems they are supported in this monopoly by
the U.S. government. Don't the Anti-Trust laws have something to stop
this Cyberspace Juggernaut?

NSI has already shown that they will fight to keep their monopoly on
strong footing. By expanding their services earlier this year, and
offering WorldNic, they are obviously trying to beat any competition to
the market. InterNic Knew that we would need some new gTLD's eventually,
but to tried to stave off this invasion on their turf. By announcing a
bunch of new partnerships and services in January, they were transparently
trying to delay the need for new TLDs (and thus, competition).

The internet definitely needs new TLD's, but rather than introducing more
generic ones, they should be catergorized, making it easier to find the
site you need, and also organizing the net in a more understandable
manner.

The U.S. government also needs to realize that the net has to govern
itself, with minimal intrusion from governments. The "inter" in internet
means international, not interstate!

Sincerely,

Janet Y.K. Chinn

J.Chinn
jchinn@unixg.ubc.ca

###

From: "Jack Parsons" <jcp@infobuy.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 3:06pm
Subject: Domain Name registration

I favor a total hands-off policy by the U.S. Govenrnment and (any) others, on any and all facets of regualation of the world-wide Internet, including the method for assigning Domain names.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Jack Parsons,
JcParsons Associates, dba:
infobuy.com, online2u.com,
quick-ce.com, select-search.com

###

From: Guy Tessier by way of Shaun Dolan <shaun@registrars.net> <GTESSIER@REDCROSS.CA>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 3:06pm
Subject: An IDR Update -Reply

I am Canadian and I frankly do not agree that the US Government dictate
how a WORLD WIDE Internet should be run. In the past, World members
decided and I truly believe that it should stay so.

A concerned Webmaster

###

From: "Adolph V. Stankus" <Adolph@Stankus.com>
To: "'dns@ntia.doc.gov'" <dns@ntia.doc.gov>
Date: 2/26/98 3:52pm
Subject: Re: Discussion Draft

Dear Mr. Magaziner:

I read A PROPOSAL TO IMPROVE TECHNICAL MANAGEMENT OF INTERNET NAMES AND
ADDRESSES DISCUSSION DRAFT 1/30/98.

I agree that the United States government should remove itself as quickly
as possible from any involvement in the Internet. I think this could be
accomplished faster than what you propose.

The Internet should not be regulated by any government. It should be
totally free of all government interference including regulation and
taxation. Free market is the only acceptable method of determining the
direction of the Internet.

I don't believe the proposed non profit corporation should be in the United
States. I believe it should be in a neutral country like Switzerland or
the Isle of Man. Both of these countries are stable and have been free
from war for hundreds of years. They are also not involved in world
political squabbles.

The United States may be the only super power, but that does not give us
the responsibility or authority to dictate to the rest of the world. Since
the United States is very involved in world politics, it can not be
impartial. The Internet must be free from United States interference as
well.

Best wishes,

Adolph Stankus

CC: "'staff@registrars.net'" <staff@registrars.net>

###

From: VicQuality <VicQuality@aol.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 4:23pm
Subject: Discussion Draft, attn: Ira Magaziner

Attention: Ira Magaziner
Re: Discussion Draft

I am FOR keeping Network Solutions the primary service.

In the past their service was terrible but for a long time now they have done
a terrific job.

IF that is not possible (and I don't think that is what a lot of people want)
then I am for the proposal as the U.S. Government has proposed (5 main) and
NOT the 80 plus registrars that also is on the table.

I have already dealt with a few of the 80 proposed "registrars"and it is my
humble opinion that the MAIN reason for them is for money and power and not
for the good of stability and the Internet as a whole.

Sincerely,

Vic Makau
QualityNet.com
530-891-1583
fax 530-891-0654

CC: NTIADC40.SMTP40("Vic@QualityNet.com")

###

From: Bill Sly <bills@rpa.net>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 4:46pm
Subject: Domain feedback

I would like to put forth my
views on the domain name controversy. I do not
believe any one goverment should have domain over
the entire internet. I believe the net has done
fine on it's own and should remain unfettered by
local goverments.

###

From: Mike <mike@execworld.net>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 5:06pm

dns@ntia.doc.gov

HAND OFF THE INTERNET!!

###

From: "Eric Renken" <ericrenken@forest-view-computing.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 5:14pm
Subject: Domain Names

Why does it really matter what we have for top level domains? Why can't
there really be anything you want. All they do is point to the IP address
anyway. So who really cares what the name shows. Let it go! This is a
world product. I thought the government released all control and made it
public. Let the people deiced what they want for domain names. I need and
want the ".web" designation.

Thank you for your time,

-Eric Renken
Forest View Computing
ericrenken@forest-view-computing.com
http://www.forest-view-computing.com

###

From: Rob Brown <rob@direct-connect.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 5:21pm
Subject: IDR Update

The new top level domains (web info shop rec firm arts nom)
need to be functioning by April of this year. It needs to
be free from the US government juristiction. The Internet
is the most open form of communication in the world. And
it needs to remain that way!

Sincerely,

Rob Brown

###

From: "Matthew Greer" <msg43@columbia.edu>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 5:36pm
Subject: LEAVE IT ALONE...

Please leave the governance of the Internet to people who know what they are doing... this is a medium which flourishes in freedom... stand in its way and you will look bad, accomplish nothing, and hurt the progress of a historic tool of democracy and freedom.

~M.
*********************************************
"Man lives in the tropics... he merely
survives elsewhere"
-Aristotle

###

From: "Fredrick James Mulica" <dreamtec@hotmail.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 5:53pm
Subject: Discussion Draft

Thank you for funding and guiding early development for the internet.
Albeit, originally as a military means of communication.
My hope and pryaer is that You, ie the government, stay out of the
further development of the internet. It is growing from within.
I fear political implications and using the web as a weapon rather than
as a resource.
Thank you
Jim Mulica
Dreamtec@ hot mail.com

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

###

From: Neal Graham <sundog@rmi.net>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 6:19pm
Subject: delay of issuance of new domain names

Dear Ira:

Please allow the plan that has been in place for the issuance of the new 7
TLD's go forward. If you guys want to fight over who controls the
internet, fine, but do not delay the current plan. You're (the government)
still going to be able to regulate the internet if you want, but delaying
the issuance of new names is just going to irritate people trying to start
new businesses, communicate with each other and generally expand the use of
this fascinating new medium, the internet. Please, before this gets
hoplessly balled up in an international political fiasco, let the exitsing
plan go forward.

-Neal Graham
sundog@rmi.net

###

From: "Fredrick James Mulica" by way of Shaun Dolan <shaun@registrars.net> <dreamtec@hotmail.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 6:17pm
Subject: Discussion Draft

I really hope and pray that the Federal Government will graciously
leave the Internet to the Internet. the Gove did a great job in the
beginning using this tool for communication and strategy development.
However it is time to let the baby begin to walk on its own.
Thanks
Jim Mulica
Dreamtec@hotmail.com

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

###

From: "T.M" <tmurphy@earthlink.net>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 6:35pm
Subject: 1/30/98 U.S. Gov. proposal

My response to the draft is overwhelmingly negative for many different
reasons. Some are:

a) the U.S. government should not make a framework for an international
Internet
b) other countries are not included
c) CORE is not included
d) The draft will continue Internic's (Network Solutions') monopoly
under
the guise of competition
e) There are no ethical standards of registries/registrars (that the
CORE
proposal has)
f) There is little about trademark problems (the CORE proposal has a
concrete dispute resolution process)
g) The draft is horribly vague. It doesn't even say what the domains
are
going to be.
h) It's going to take too long (the CORE proposal is ready to go now and
has been in the works for years.)

Thank you,
Tom Murphy
351 1/2 N.Orange Grove Ave
Los Angeles, CA 90036

###

From: James Martin <martinj@sinosa.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 8:19pm
Subject: Discussion Draft

Attention: Ira Magaziner
RE: Discussion Draft

Dear Sir,

It has become clear that the domain name issue needs to be resolved by
the inclusion of the new name extensions. I have yet to see a negative
opinion about this. Why has the Internet seen such explosive growth and
utility? Precisely because the US Government has left it to blossom on
its own. Thank you for considering this majority opinion and lets see
how fast the governments of the world can get out of the way!

Sincerely,
James T. Martin

###

From: "Pat McGarvey" <pat@py.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 12:45pm
Subject: Re: Discussion Draft

Attention: Ira Magaziner

I have been very concerned about the proposed new domain
extensions for these reasons.

1. I believe it's pure deception to say the price of $50.00 per
year is to high and with a competitive market it will be less. The
prices will go through the roof. The first increase will be blame
on the fact they have to cover the costs they've incurred waiting for
the U.S. to clear the way.

2. I believe that the conflicts in domain names will become
insolvable. The less imaginative say they are no names left, so they
need to use others.

3. Nobody talks about the users. It will be a mess and most business
people will have to fork out money to cover their current .com
domains on the other extensions. Costs, not just in getting the
domain, but in housing or parking it at an ISP.

These are my top 3 concerns. I appreciate this opportunity to
express them.

Thank you,

Pat McGarvey

###

From: Angela Charlebois <birdip@aloha.net>
To: "'dns@ntia.doc.gov.'" <dns@ntia.doc.gov>
Date: 2/26/98 9:01pm
Subject: governing the internet

The Internet is undergoing tremendous growth and success without government interference and should stay so. To have more than one place to file domain names would only create confusion. If there's to be any changes they should be made by those that are the network itself. My primary improvement comment would be to better define the search engines and establish constant rotation on result pages so that all websites are created equal and relative to content.

Sincerely,

Angela M. Charlebois
Kapaa, HI

###

From: A Watcher <dodge@aloha.net>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 9:11pm
Subject: Domain Names

Greetings,

Consistent with your draft at
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/dnsdrft.htm

I fear that the proposed gTLDs, as proposed, will confuse the general
public and cause unnecessary litigation in our courts system where,
the rightful owner of a TLD may lose a suit because the owner may not
have the legal and financial resources to defend the legal TLD
although registered prior to the newer gTLDs.

For example, I own the TLD spiced.com which had no trademark conflict
at the time the TLD was registered. A search in 1996 showed that
there was no trademark "spiced". During 1997 however, a popular
female vocal band from europe named Spice Girls, has popularized the
root of the name. I fear that this may cause some future conflict
where some may attempt to trademark derivatives of this name to
perhaps include spiced. The conflict will arise if/when this entity
goes on the WWW with their name as, spiced.firm and be in conflict
with my own TLD spiced.com. To prevent this, I have made an attempt
to pre-register the following gTLD's with some expected expense with
registrars.net (my ID is S22.) Note: not all available gTLDs names
are preregistered and someone may attempt to register those not
listed.

spiced.firm
spiced.shop
spiced.web
spiced.arts
spiced.nom
spiced.info
spiced.rec

Worse, I may not be able to obtain these gTLDs, if someone registers
the names prior to registrars.net. As I understand it, the database
will be updated from multiple sources and the company I am working
with may not be first in line to download their database. The owner
of the new gTLDs may then sue me in court for the rights to the name
spiced.com

Being a very small company, I do not have the resources to defend my
domain name against some larger firm, in some suit. I have no legal
fund.

Please be fair to the small guys.

Thanks,

John Suzuki

http:www.spiced.com

The more I know, the more I know -- I don't know.

{:>)=

http://www.spiced.com

###

From: "Bret Douglas" <bretdouglas@hotmail.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 10:46pm

I, as a taxpaying citizen of the United States, feel that the U.S.
government is overstepping its bounds by trying to regulate too much of
the Internet. In regard to the domain classifications (.com/.org/etc),
the worldwide community already has a good handle on the general
guidelines and things are "moving along swimmingly".

I feel that the U.S. government only has the right to manage the
properties -WITHIN THE U.S.- that deal with matters the U.S. government
has been given authority over -BY THE AMERICAN PEOPLE-. This might
include such things as have been deemed by the U.S to pose a threat to
the American public; but as far as world recognition of private names,
etc, I don't see how the U.S. can be egotistical enough to assume that
it has rights over all international parties! AND... this is not
something they could enforce, within rights, anyway. It HAS to be a
world-community decision.

Please... let us (the U.S) handle the standard questions of
import/export, international taxation, etc, in our usual manner... but
NOT something like the assigning of domain names!!

Respectfully,

Brett Stranne

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

###

From: "S.C.Foster" <S.C.Foster@Prodigy.Net>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 3:58pm
Subject: Discussion Draft

Attention: Ira Magaziner

We are very much opposed to the U.S. Government's attempt to regulate another part of the daily life of it's citizens. At the present time technology is moving at a rate that the bureacracy cannot keep up with. Your involvement would only hinder and obstruct the fast pace process in which we depend on for advancement, competition and value. The IANA and gTLD-MOU has conducted due process with the proposals and policies in the best interest of the Global Internet Community. Please don't let the U.S. political monster interfer with a cooperative that has been assembled on a Global level. We adamantly reject any offer of U.S. government involvement or regulation of the internet system.

Sincerely
S.J. Foster

###

From: "Kevin M. Smith" <kevin@kmsmith.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(webmaster)
Date: 2/26/98 12:08pm
Subject: Hi

I hav ea domain name already thru internic so what you do really doenot
affect my too much but I'd like my own name as a domain name - just
PRIDE but still. If you would allow those who have tried to work on
this problem to be part of your effort I hope the WHOLE internet
community mich end up with a workable id system instead of little groups
our there fighting each other. It's a BIG world we US of A are not all
of it please open your attempt to the rest that all may work together
This system has so much too offer let it happen.
Thanks for your time,
Kevin M Smith
kevin@kmsmith.com
a[[lied for kevinsmith.nom

###

From: Richard Miller <thepoet@thepoet.com>
To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date: 2/26/98 9:00am
Subject: Question

I read your article re: domain names set for new date as of April, 1998.

May I ask if this includes the new domains such as .web or .bus ?
If so how can I get a list of contractors who will be hosting or issuing
those domains since Internic is breaking up?
Thanks

###