From: Gary Morrell <garym@LanMinds.Com>
To: Ira Magaziner
Date: 4/1/98 8:22am
Subject: Sound Suggestion
Hi Ira, my name is Gary Morrell. I am the President of LMI.Net, an internet
provider in Berkeley, California. My company is one of the members of CORE.
Ironically, I am also a member of eDNS, and I hold a pending trademark for
the .fam TLD.
I have watched the TLD debates rage on for close to three years now. I know
all sides very well.
As much as my company could profit from the implementation of the .fam TLD,
I firmly believe that the CORE plan is the best for the Internet and it's
users in all countries. I believe that enabling too many registrars with
unknown technical ability and non-existant oversight will be a nightmare
for the Internet. Sorting out prior use on proposed TLDs will be next to
I believe forcing NSI and all future registrars into a common shared
database method of registering all gTLDs, under the supervision of the new
IANA, is the best way to go. You can potentially appease everyone and bring
stability to the Internet. Appease may be too strong; you can at least put
all registrars on equal footing, which is fair. With CORE opening it's
doors again to new members, all of the eDNS and other independant
registries are granted an opportunity to become a registrar. The CORE plan
is well under way. The shared registry system (SRS Database) is ready to
go. Please give it a chance.
Good luck, you've got a tough job ahead of you.
From: Ivan Pope <email@example.com>
To: Ira Magaziner
Date: 4/1/98 8:29am
Subject: NSI's position on thier contract
Dear Mr Magaziner,
As one of the world's leading Domain Name registration companies, we were
shocked to recently be thrown off NSI's Gold Premier Program recently. We
applied to go on their Silver Program instead.
However, it seems that NSI are not prepared to offer account management
facilities to anyone at this stage.
I would note that this will act as a block on the development of Internet
business worldwide. I feel it is outrageous that a single company can block
its competitors in this way. It is incumbent on the US Government through
NSF to ensure that registrations in .com/.net and .org are open at a
competitive level immediately - not at the leisure of Network Solutions.
I quote a reply from NSI today:
>We have temporarily suspended signing new Premier Partners. The reason
>for this is because the DNS governance issues have forced us to
>redesign our service offerings. we are preparing for the new way that
>registration services are going to be structured. We will be addressing
>registry/registrar issues as well. With all of the changes taking place,
>will need new agreements. When we have our new agreements in place, which
>also coincide with the new partner structure, I'll let you know.
Ivan Pope firstname.lastname@example.org
NETNAMES * The INTERNATIONAL DOMAIN NAME REGISTRY
Global Domain Name Registrar - gTLD Registrar
http://www.netnames.com - http://www.gtld.com
UK Freephone 0800 269049
180-182 Tottenham Court Road London W1P 9LE UK
+44 171 291 3900 +44 171 291 3939 Fax
Faster, faster, until the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death.
Hunter S. Thompson
To: Ira Magaziner
Date: 4/1/98 3:15pm
Subject: [gis-net 109] DNS Comments of Ministry of Posts and Telecommuni
The DNS discussion and process is very important and it has
been helpful to see the discussion about it on this list. I hope
to get back to commenting on some of the recent discussion as soon
as I have the time (I have had some deadlines I have to meet first
though). But I found this interesting submission on the NTIA
web site where submissions have been posted so I thought I would
pass it along on this list.
It is by the Telecommunications Bureau, Ministry of Posts and
Telecommunications of Japan.
I would be interested in knowing more about the study that is ongoing
on this issue.
> From: <email@example.com>
> To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
> Date: 3/23/98 8:00am
> Subject: A Comment on NTIA's paper
March 23, 1998
Office of International Affairs
National Telecommunications and Information Administration
US Department of Commerce
14th and Constitution Avenue, NW
Washington DC 20230
Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications
Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-8798
A Comment on NTIA's paper entitled "A Proposal to Improve
Technical Management of Internet Names and Addresses"
You have publicized a green paper on January 30 entitled "A Proposal
Improve Technical Management of Internet Names and Addresses", and
comments have been requested from the parties interested. We
you adopted this open procedure, and will express our compliment to
efforts you made in this process.
Below is our view of Telecommunications Bureau, Ministry of Posts and
Telecommunications of Japan on your green paper and Internet domain
management. Overall policies related to the Internet, including domain
issues, is an important responsibility of our bureau. We recognize
management system of the domain names is one of the most important
will affect future development of the Internet. With this recognition,
formed a Study Group on Internet Domain Names which is participated by
experts from private sector and academics since this March and this
commenced a comprehensive study.
We do not submit a detailed comments on the green paper at the moment,
is based on the results of a profound study conducted by
group, because of the time constraints before the deadline of
comments. Instead, we present our basic view of the Telecommunications
Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications of Japan at the moment on
names management. We will appreciate it if we can contribute to a
discussion on this issue and hope that you reflect our comments in
paper in the near future.
The Status of This Green Paper
The Internet domain name is one of the fundamental factors for every
users in the world to enjoy fair and easy access to the Internet.
Thus, this is a
very important issue that is relevant to every Internet user.
Therefore with regard to the management system of the domain names we
that it will meet the benefits of users to decide the system after a
conducted internationally from wide points of view, instead of
deciding it hastily
only by a particular group or people.
This green paper is appreciative in that it accepts comments from
parties. In addition, it is desirable that from the viewpoint of
transparency in the
process of government behavior, that US government discloses its
action that the government will end contracts with IANA and NSI by the
The management system of the domain names after the US government
withdrawal is immediately concerned with Internet users in the world.
revised paper, therefore, should not be recognized as providing a
determination on this critical affair; instead the revision should be
regarded as a
precious contribution to stir up further discussion on this issue,
both in the
private sector and the government sector.
Establishment of a Management System to Fully Reflect Views of Parties
The US government proposes to end its contract with IANA, which is at
of the current management system of the domain names, and to establish
profit organization which will take the place of IANA. Apart from
whether or not
a non-profit organization be established, this management system is of
international nature in principle. Therefore, in the decision-making
at this system,
a full consideration should be provided to ensure as much reflection
of views of
interested parties as possible including those of registries or
We believe that by doing so an arbitrary decision-making with regard
management of domain names by a particular parties concerned will be
and that it would be possible to realize the democratic
decision-making to meet
the users' benefits that any user is ensured a fair and easy access to
Clarification of Discussion Process on the Topics on Which Views are
This green paper presents a particular view on each points of argument
whether or not to introduce competition in registry, the number of
We suppose that on these points varying opinions were presented which
those contradictory with one another; and in those cases you were
make a determination at the rate of 51 vs. 49.
We should discuss at length these issues on which a wide variety of
opinions are presented. Therefore, it is not appropriate to draw
hastily on these issues; instead it is expected that the process of
conducted from every standpoint is made clarified and further
stirred up on these issues.
Domain names is a key factor to have influence on Internet governance
in that sense we recognize that domain names management is a critical
affect the direction of global development of the Internet in the
Based on this recognition, the Ministry of Posts and
Japan has formed a Study Group on the Internet Domain Names since
this year. This study group aims to clarify issues related to domain
examine and organize proposals on its management system, its
businesses under the competitive conditions and the roles of private
This study group is widely participated by experts from private sector
academics and is scheduled to compile a report in this June. It is
intended that the
report is to be forwarded to overseas, as a material to stir up a
international disputes on the issue.
We would like you to recognize that Japan is also making such efforts
name issues as the formation of this study group and hope that more
management system of the domain names will be designed after a full
using our report as well as your green paper as materials.
From: Jay Fenello <Jay@Iperdome.com>
To: Recipient list suppressed
Date: 4/1/98 5:37pm
Subject: Re: Government involvement
At 08:48 AM 4/1/98 +0100, Jim Dixon wrote:
>Governments see the arguments over DNS as a way to get control over the
>Internet. Bureaucrats are beginning to appreciate the real potential of
>the Net, and the threat that it represents to things dear to their hearts,
>like raising taxes and controlling other people's behaviour. The DNS
>row is a Good Thing as far as they are concerned. It justifies their
>taking control of gTLDs - and just incidentally the entire domain name
>system and the allocation of IP address space.
Come on Jim,
You've been involved long enough to know that the US
Green Paper was a direct response to a small group of
people trying to take over the Internet.
>Why is the US government's assertion of jurisdiction over the Internet
>unwarranted? Because there is no legal basis for this assertion.
>For a longer reply see http://www.euroispa.org/papers/dns2.html
>Why is it unwise? Because the US government's attempt to seize control
>of an immensely valuable thing that belongs to all of the people of the
>world is provoking retaliatory actions by other governments -- and
>justifying those retaliatory actions.
The only groups attempting to seize control of the
Internet were the IANA, ISOC, ITU and WIPO. In case
you missed it the first time around:
The Green Paper process is being conducted by the
U.S. Government to get *out* of Internet governance.
The IAHC process was conducted by the IANA, ISOC,
ITU, and WIPO to get *into* Internet governance.
Seems like quite a difference to me ;-)
President, Iperdome, Inc.