07-03-97 Electronic Filings on Internet Domain Names

###
Number: 24
From:      "Claudio Allocchio, +39 40 3758523" Claudio.Allocchio@elettra.trieste.it>
To:        NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date:      7/3/97 4:05am
Subject:   Re: U.S. COMMERCE DEPT. NOI ON DOMAIN NAME REG. ISSUES


Hallo,

Just a few comments to help you in your survey.

My name is Claudio Allocchio, and I'm the chairman of the Italian Naming
Authority, i.e. the official body who is entitled to establish rules for
domain names definition within the country code "it" (both Internet and
ISO systems).

The problem of setting rules for domain name definition was raised in Italy
since mid 1993, and finally the final set of rules went into operation one
year ago: July 1st 1996. 

Among the fundamental statements in the set of rules, I can summarise the
following:

- a domain name is an identifier to assign a name to a "generic object"
  esisting on the network.

- a domain name has no relationship whatsoever with anything else: trademarks,
  registered names, company names, personal names, ... are indipendent 
  different objects, and correlation with domain names does not exist.

- domain names are only "assigned in use" by the Italian Registration
  Authority (a separate indipendent body) to the entity requesting them:
  domain names remain a property of the Italian Registration Authority.

- an entity requesting a domain name must declare its right to use such a name
  in written. If any dispute arises due to other entities claiming any kind
  of "xxx"rights on the name, the domain name holder and the other entities
  must solve the issue themselves or via a civil court. The Italian Registra-
  tion Authority just accepts the conclusins of the issue and acts consequently.

- an entity can request a single domain name only, within the "it" country code.

- official telecomunication and value added service providers (holding an 
  official license from the Ministry of Telecomminications) can request
  a separate domain name for these specific services offered to their
  customers:

     e-mail mailbox service
     X.400 ADMD service
     X.500 directory service
     on-line services (like America-on-line)
     gopher pages service
     web pages service
     ftp area service

The complete set of rules and procedures are available (in Italian Language)
at: 

     http://www.nis.garr.it/netdoc/ITA-PE/Documenti/regole-naming.txt

As a further comment, the Italian Naming Authority and the Italian Registration
Authority are jointly operating with the other European Top Level Domain
registration authorities about the current issue of the IAHC new top levels.
The official position of the Italian Naming and Registration Authorities is
that the IAHC proposal does not solve any of the issues, and just creates
more confusion and unneeded complexity to domain name structure. The proposed
new "categories" are just new large places where the same confusion existing
now in the ".net" and ".com" domains will spread out. Regulations about
domain names use can be established only at national levels, due to differences
in existing legislation. International domains should be used only for specific
cases of international entities, and anything else should be registered within
the national country code: for USA this is "us". Thus the IAHC proposal
should not be implemented, but effective regulations and international 
agreements should be established.

More over a set of compulsory netiquette rules are effective for all entities
requesting a domain name under "it" country code. I enclose them hereunder.
Whoever violates such rules can be taken to court and prosecuted. As you will
notice, commercial advertisement via e-mail is explicitly forbidden.

If you have further questions, just let us know

Regards
Claudio Allocchio
chairman of the Italian Naming Authority
(and Internet Engineering Task Force - Application Area)

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

                            N E T I Q U E T T E
           Ethics and rules for the correct use of network services


  Within the community of network service users, especially Internet users
  and, in  particular, inside the  "news"  service  Usenet,  a  number  of 
  "traditions"  and "principles of correct behaviour" have been  developed
  with time: all these rules are generally known as "netiquette".  Keeping
  in  mind  that whoever  provides your  network access  (provider, public
  institution  or  agency,  employer,  etc.)  can also  control even  more
  precisely  the  users'  duties,   we  summarise  in  this  document  the 
  fundamental principles of "netiquette",  reminding everybody  that these
  rules are mandatory.

  1 When you join  a new  newsgroup or a  new electronic mail distribution
    list,  read the  messages posted  there for at  least two weeks before
    starting  to  send your  own  around the world:  in this  way you will
    understand the topics of the discussion and the methods to be  used in 
    such an environment.

  2 If you send a message, be brief and concise, both in the subject field
    as  well as in the message itself.  Always use the  "subject" field to
    specify the topic. If using the "signature" file, please keep it short.

  3 Do not post or send messages  to the target newsgroup  or distribution
    list which deviate from the topic in question.

  4 Whenever possible,  avoid  broadcasting  your message  to many mailing
    lists  (or newsgroups)  at a time.  There is usually only one specific
    mailing list representing the correct target of your message and which
    contains all interested users in that particular topic.

  5 If you answer  a message,  quote  only the  relevant sections  of  the
    original message in order to facilitate understanding by users who did
    not read it,  and avoid  systematically  reposting the entire original
    text.

  6 Do not engage in  "opinion wars" on the network through the sending of
    messages and  replies:  if you have  personal discussions,  solve them
    via private electronic mail correspondence with the interested parties.

  7 Never  publish the  content of  electronic mail  messages  without the 
    explicit permission of the author.

  8 Do  not  post stupid  messages or take  sides  to  support  somebody's
    opinion  within  an  ongoing discussion.  Always  read the  Frequently
    Asked Questions (FAQ) relating  to the discussion topic before sending
    new questions.

  9 Never send advertising  or commercial  promotion messages or any other
    unsolicited message  via electronic mail,  unless explicitly requested
    by the recipient.

 10 Be tolerant with users  who makes  syntactical or  grammar errors when
    posting  messages.  Users  posting  messages must in any case  improve
    their  knowledge of  the  language,  in order to  be understood by the
    whole community.

  Furthermore, to the previously mentioned rules we must add the following
  criteria based on common sense logic:

  A The network is used as a  major work tool by many users.  They do not
    have time  to read jokes,  useless or personal messages which are not
    of general interest.

  B Any activity which heavily affects network traffic, such as bulk data
    transfers, reduces the overall network performance. Users should thus
    perform  these  operations outside  peak  network time  (at night for
    example), taking into account the different time zones.

  C On  the  network a  number  of file server  sites exists,  containing
    up-to-date  copies  of relevant  documentation,  software  and  other
    objects made  available via network. Users must  ask in advance which
    is the most convenient  accessible server  node for  their use.  If a
    file is made available on this server, or locally, there is no reason
    to load  it  again via  the network,  wasting network  bandwidth  and
    waiting much longer for the file transfer to be effected.

  D The software made available on  network servers can  be protected  by
    copyrights  and/or  other  restrictions on its use. Users must always
    read carefully any accompanying documentation before using, modifying
    or redistributing this software in any shape or form.

  E Incorrect behaviour of an explicit illegal nature by users, such as:

    - violating the security of network databases and hosts;

    - violating  other  users'  privacy,  reading  or intercepting  their
      electronic mail messages;

    - compromising  the  correct  performance of  the network and of  any 
      equipment  which  constitutes its  service  with programmes (virus,
      trojan horses, etc.) and other hacking tools;

    are  explicit  criminal  violations and,  as such,  are punishable by
    current laws.

  For  more detailed  information on the principles stated above,  please 
  refer  to the document   RFC1855  "Netiquette  Guidelines",   available 
  on-line at the following URL:

            http://www.nis.garr.it/netdoc/rfc/rfc1855.txt



CC:        NTIADC40.SMTP40("ALLOCCHIO@elettra.trieste.it")
###
Number: 25
From:      Martin Volesky M.Volesky@IEMINC.NET>
To:        NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date:      7/3/97 9:31am
Subject:   Domain Names

Hello.

     I have read thr story reported by the MSNBC Internet News Service
regarding the RFC regarding domain names. One issue that I feel is quite
inportant when setting up new top-level domain names is the length of these
names. Working as a systems administrator of ran interactive internet media
company IO have written many scripts and utilities that have been built on
the concept that all top-level domain named have three characters. I do not
think that it would be to dificult to maintain this standard with any new
top level domains. I belive this issue has not been sufficiently addresses.

Thank you for your time.

Martin Volesky.

###
Number: 26
From:      Bruce Paul birdcat@admin.con2.com>
To:        NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date:      7/3/97 9:50am
Subject:   In my humble opinion

I know that one voice does not count for much but since you asked...

I think the entire naming and numbering scheme of the internet should be
handled by a world wide organization - a for profit organization - that
should have accountability to the United Nations (they've got to be good
for something).  By making this new company a for profit organization,
they can fund themselves and by making it accountable to the UN, they
would be regulated on their prices (like the old AT&T before Judge
Green).  Since Network Solutions is already in this business, why not
let them continue but under the auspices of the world community's chosen
representatives?

Like I said, you asked.

Bruce Paul
birdcat@con2.com
webmaster@birdcat.com
bruce.paul@bowne.com


CC:        NTIADC40.SMTP40("webmaster@birdcat.com")

###
Number: 27
From:      Tom and Judy Devaney <1345deva@inet.westshore.cc.mi.us>
To:        NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date:      7/3/97 2:22pm
Subject:   Domain Names

Hello....


I want to comment on the "Domain Name" issue:


I want to be starting a business out of my home within the next year or
so.  My wife is going to school so putting all of my effort towards it is
impossible at present.


My biggest fear is that big business and the people who are able to able
to do something NOW will have a better chance of getting a domain name
than I will one or two years from now.  Or, that the price
will be out of reach for anyone with a low income.  Or, I
don't know the RIGHT people.   


I want EVERYONE to be able to have an equal chance to get a domain
name for ALL time to come.



Please consider this when you make your decision as it will affect my
children as well.


Thank You...


Tom Devaney

1345deva@inet.westshore.cc.mi.us

###
Number: 28
From:      "Fontenla" 
To:        NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date:      7/3/97 9:53pm
Subject:   Domain names, comment

To whom it may concern,

I think it was a very bad policy to give up full control of domain names to
a private company. Ethics considerations that say that the government
investment should not be given up unconditionally to any for profit
company. Much less with such long term contract and without direct
government supervision. The Internet was funded by our tax money, as a
technological and educational enterprise, and nobody likes giving it as a
gift to any company.

Moreover, this company now is blocking and difficulting the normal
functioning of the Internet, and should be stopped now. The administration
of the Internet should be closely supervised by the govrnment, and any
resolution should be contingent of NSF not opposing it. Besides,
international agreements should be put forward, and enforced by some
government institution.

Dr. Juan Fontenla

###
Number: 29
From:      
To:        NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date:      7/3/97 7:19pm
Subject:   Domain Names Comments


I do have a few comments on the Domain Name issue...The Idea that a solo
company should be allowed to monopolize on internet domain names is
ridiculous....one of the greatest things holding up the Internet today is
the organization of domain names.  Domain Names need to be geographic...if
I want to visit the web site of John K Paul in Burlington Vermont, I should
be able to visit him at www.johnkpaul.burlington.vermont.  Private
companies could compete for the business of registering the millions (or
billions) of domain names that would become availible (creating more
competition and driving the price down) and an advertising funded yellow
pages would make it easy for me to determine WHICH John Paul in Burlington
Vermont I was talking to....


Jason M Page
jpage@lucent.com

###
Number: 30
From:      "Bob Jordan" 
To:        NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date:      7/3/97 6:22pm
Subject:   Domain names

I think the government should step in and legislate that the polices in
place for the existing domains shall remain unaltered and that companies
have no claims to copyrighted domain names in those existing domains. In my
opinion, it is unfair to establish new standards and rules and make them
retro-active.

In addition, the government should legislate the establishment of new
domains, such as .firm or .inc (whatever) that do provide for copyright
protection.

###
Number: 31
From:      White 
To:        NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date:      7/3/97 4:58pm
Subject:   XXX domain


the NTIA's first step - just from a public affairs/pragmatic angle - should
be to create

".XXX"

as top level domain for all US adult sites.  this solution would instantly,
easily, and with few complications clear up the snafus attendent to the
just-killed CDA and the greater issues that surrounded it.  Better still,
it would be a solution internal to the Internet community, rather than some
sort of content regulation.
     The only step left would be to distribute client-side web software
that would not load .xxx domains.

     A mandatory ".XXX" domain would immediatly create a well-cordoned
Internet red light district - a solution that American courts and
communities have long held to be a viable one in the real world.

DRAWBACKS.
     1. A private citizen not in the business of selling adult content
could post adult content to a private site.
     Solution:  There is none.  The first amendment protects such
things.  However, a volunatry internet standard could be pushed by ISPs
(which are "bandwidth providers" of the vast number of personal webpages)
that anyone posting adult stuff should put it within an "xxx" directory on
their private site.  Not everybody would do it, but enough would that,
combined with the .xxx solution, internet adult content would be tough to
come by "by accident."

     2.  Foriegn sites.
     Solution:  With the US's massive percentage of the world's internet
sites, it is reasonable to expect many foriegn based adult sites to come
onboard such a plan, adopting a "xxx" based domain name.
     Those that don't - well, NO American-based solution will change
their minds anyway.

matt white

###
Number: 32  
From:      "Wm. MacDonald" 
To:        NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date:      7/3/97 4:17pm
Subject:   Domain Names

Domanin names should continue to be reasonable and free from having
commercial intrests run them.

W. MacDonald

###
Number: 33
From:      "John Alexander" 
To:        NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date:      7/3/97 12:59pm
Subject:   Comments on DNS proposal

Hi:

I believe that the current handling of the InterNIC is sub-standard, and
anything that is done should at least fix current problems, without
creating additional ones.

Network Solutions is incapable of handling the volume they currently
handle, so they do not get involved in any issues.  For example, there is a
domain, "congress.org", that has nothing to do with Congress, and is not a
non-profit organization.  There are also several ".net" domains which have
nothing to do with being Internet Service Providers.

When I brought this to the attention of the InterNIC, they sent back a form
letter asking why I thought that I had the rights to these domain names.  I
don't.  I just don't want to see other companies abusing the current
Internet domain naming system.

If you allow additional companies to create root-level domain names, here
are the things I think are important:

     * Competition will hopefully increase quality while keeping costs in
check.
     * The various root-level domain name providers MUST reference one another,
or each company connected to the Internet will be required to manually
modify their DNS machines to reflect the new root servers.  This would be
impossible for many Internet users.
     * A cross-domain board should be established to regulate names.  The rules
need to be enforced by an independent organization, rather than a company
who has a vested interest in selling domain names for money.

You may wish to work with the various tier-1 Internet Service Providers,
including UUNET, MCI, Sprint, PSINet, Digex, ANS, AGIS, etc.  They may be
able to offer a solution which involve using the ISPs as the root-level
DNS, then having the management of the domains handled by separate
companies.

My 2 cents, for what it's worth (if it's even worth 2 cents ).

/John Alexander
 Consulting Engineer
 IKON Technology Services

###
Number: 34
From:      Chris Ehrhardt 
To:        NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)
Date:      2/20/96 6:30pm
Subject:   input on domain names...

the system we are using now work. there is no reason to change it. its
bad enough when i get pissed off when i can't find an address because
its .net and i am trying .com ... if its working, why try and change it?

chrisehrhardt
hard2overcome




07-03-97