From: Amanda Wray <>

To: NTIA.NTIAHQ(usdomain)

Date: 8/5/98 1:50pm

Subject: comments

I think it's a great idea...especially the part about printing out and

mailing e-mail to people who don't have computers yet, although how

would you deal with the postage issue, and what about privacy? It would

be very easy for a postal employee to read mail as it comes off the

printer, unless you had a machine that would automatically put the mail

into an envelope and seal it before anyone had a chance to look!

It could also add another layer of privacy. In other words, you could

"look people up" via their e-mail address and send them mail without

knowing where they live.


Amanda Wray


From: James Balliett <>

To: NTIA.NTIAHQ(usdomain)

Date: 8/5/98 1:25pm

Subject: US Domain Issue- Public Comment

I would like to comment on the .us issue as to if it would be

appropraite for the USPS to attempt to study the topic of managing the

.us domain for the US citizens in an effort to bring better access and

feasibility for a national system of electronic mail.

I encourage and strongly support any and all efforts of the USPS to

actvely pursue the issue of managing the .us domain name as means of

eventually setting up a national email system, where citizens can gain

an address, globally recognized. (mine could be jamieBalliett@MA.US

The day has come for the government to step in and map out a better

system for what has often been described as a, "vague assemblance of a

few million computers, loosely organized, where highly important, viable

information is exchanged". A reliable, government overseen system would

be productive, fast, it would save billions of tons of paper a year,

take minimal energy compared to todays USPS (plans, trucks), and most of

all, launch this country, as a leader, into the year 2000!

My great, great, great grandfather was William Fargo, a pioneer who

launched something called the Pony Express, where men on horses carried

letters to trains which grew and grew into what eventually became the

USPS. From private enterprise to public domain, once again we are

seeing the evolution of a means of communication.....and now the next

frontier is at hand!

Jamie Balliett

32 Pine Ridge Lane

Orleans, MA 02653


From: "Baressi, Joe" <Joe.Baressi@CWI.CABLEW.COM>

To: "''" <>

Date: 8/5/98 5:34pm

Subject: .us domain

One of the great thins about the Internet is that it will eliminate

monolithic, inefficient, 19th century organizations such as the US

Postal Service. I therefore find the US Postal Service's "proposal" to

manage the .us internet domain highly amusing. I mean, does the Postal

Service really think that people aren't going to recognize this proposal

as an out-dated bureaucracy's last ditch effort to survive?

Joe Baressi


From: Terry Bellamak <>

To: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(webmaster)

Date: 8/5/98 10:29am

Subject: request for comment on .us matters

1. NTIA requests comments from the public by September 3, but doesn't

publish the email address to send comments to. I've been all over this

website looking for it. It wasn't even in the NYT article today.

2. If this is an example of our esteemed bureaucracy in action (and I

think it is), this situation is a perfect example of why we need to keep

the Postal Service as far away from the internet as possible. Bone-headed

ideas, clumsily executed.

3. Making email addresses analogous to physical addresses defeats the

purpose (and beauty) of cyberspace. Currently, when you change physical

addresses, you don't need to change you email address. There is no reason

one should EVER have to change their email address. It should be

conceptually linked to the individual, not their IRL address. But I guess

the Postal Service is only capable of thinking in terms of zip codes.

Another reason to keep the the h-ll away from the internet.

Mr. Webmaster, please forward this to the appropriate NTIA elf. Thanks.


From: <>

To: "NTIA" <>

Date: 8/5/98 4:41pm

Subject: Fw: Request For Comments on .us Domain

Enclosed are my comments on the USPS proposal. The document is in Word 97 format.

Comments on USPS Proposal to utilize the .us domain

Prepared for the National Telecommunications and Information Administration


As a longtime user of the Internet, I am generally in favor of giving the United States Postal Service the authority to utilize the .us domain to establish universal email addresses.

The proposal does raise, however, a number of implementation questions that should be answered by the USPS.

Questions to be answered by the usps

The USPS should be required to deal with the following issues:

  1. How will user user name be established?

  1. How will domain names be established?

  1. Will users retain their current .com or .net addresses?
  2. Will the USPS establish a national directory of email addresses including a correlation between the .us and .com or .net addresses? Will users have access to this directory?
  3. Many people have faxes but not Internet access. Will the USPS have the capability to convert email to fax?
  4. Will the USPS create server hardware for each .us domain?
  5. The current USPS postage covers both the costs of picking up as well as delivering the mail. Since pickup will now be done electronically, I assume the delivery postage cost will be less than $.32. How will the USPS collect this postage?


From: Dan Einstein <>

To: NTIA.NTIAHQ(usdomain)

Date: 8/5/98 12:57pm

Subject: .us domain space

The attached document is Word 7.0a for Windows 95


From: <>

To: NTIA.NTIAHQ(usdomain)

Date: 8/5/98 3:50pm

Subject: .us

The proposed idea for an email us to be assigned to each person is a very good

idea. It permits a person to have information about bills sent to them when

they are on vacation or when they have moved. Often people do not have

computers but need to get information that is sent via the computer. I look

forward to an electronic .us address.

Thank you,

Florence Haseltine

340 McKinley Ave

New Haven, CT O6515


From: Paul Goldstein <>

To: NTIA.NTIAHQ(usdomain)

Date: 8/5/98 12:37pm

Subject: .us domain comment

I think the idea is insane.

You want to create a database of actual physical addresses? Linked to email addresses on

the net?

The possibilities for security exploitations by hackers we've been reading about on the New

York Times Cybertimes is immense.

Paul Goldstein


From: Jonathan Handel

To: NTIA.NTIAHQ(usdomain)

Date: 8/5/98 4:24am

Subject: USPS .US plan

Mapping physical addresses to .us is a great idea. Make sure people can

also set up forwarding from the .us to their preferred email address if



From: Mike Jamison <>

To: NTIA.NTIAHQ(usdomain)

Date: 8/5/98 1:35pm

Subject: Domains & Porn

If you force all adult sites to use the "XXX" domain name you could

greatly reduce the issues surrounding porn on internet. It would be

easy for search engines and filter programs to avoid unwanted sites

without the need to additional legislation.


From: "Guy Donald" <>

To: NTIA.NTIAHQ(usdomain)

Date: 8/5/98 11:31am

Subject: .us domain name

You should do it like we do here in Australia, where only commercial

enteties have access to they must prove conclusively they own the


This allows most companies access to a domain name, especially if someone

else has taken the .com varient.

Also, all US government bodies should convert their .gov to domain

names to distinguish the US government bodies from those of the rest of the



From: "Edward M. (Ted) Jennings" <>

To: NTIA.NTIAHQ(usdomain)

Date: 8/5/98 1:43pm

Subject: Postal Service and ".us" domain

It seems silly to connect people permanently with an initial geographic location. If the initial assignment were not permanent, there would have to be a way to change addresses, and a huge forwarding-address registry.

Why not connect individuals with a domain number, one analogous to a telephone number?

Ten or eleven digits would be briefer than apartment or room-number specificity.

A forwarding-address register wouldn't be needed.

Social Security numbers might be even better, of course, but might not be accepted easily by the public.

I am reminded by the quip that followed when the Postal Service added made things better by adding four digits to the Zip code: "Gee, pretty soon they'll invent the street address."


From: David Lawrence <>

To: NTIA.NTIAHQ(usdomain)

Date: 8/5/98 7:32pm

Subject: Letter against administration of email by the U.S. Postal service

To whom it may concern:

The U.S. Postal service is one of the most bloated buracracies in our

government today.

The expansion of its control onto the internet is a desire recucitate

a branch of government that will wither with the internet's further

development. I shudder to think of how their imposition of

"infastructure" will clog a vital and expedient mode of

communication. It isn't broken so lets not drag the postal service in

and break it. The postal service just has its eye on the e-mail stamp

revenue as anyone with a computer today sends e-mail. We do this

because it is quick and cheap and we don't want to wait for days or

weeks for letters to be sent across this nation and the world.

Intervention into the internet by the postal service is something most

americans don't need or want. I'm content to take my chances with

posssible loss of privacy as it is a far lesser evil than government

intervention. Please, please, keep the postal service off the



David B. Lawrence


From: "Wayne Lynch" <>

To: NTIA.NTIAHQ(usdomain)

Date: 8/5/98 3:35pm

Subject: Keep the U S Postal Service OFF the Internet !

From my 70 years with the mail man..... they need to get there ducks lined up on how to deliver the mail FIRST.....which as far as I have seen, is poor service and higher prices.

in the 1930's a one cent post card from Roper Kansas to Kansas City took 2 days ! today 1998 a 17 cent card takes 4 days !

Wayne Lynch


Home Page


From: "Carter Phillips" <>

To: NTIA.NTIAHQ(usdomain)

Date: 8/5/98 11:03am

Subject: Enhancement of the .us Domain Space

I think the Postal Services proposal of establishing eleoctronic

addresses in the ".us" domain is a good idea beacuse it gives everyone

access to "email." However I have serious questions about privacy from

either private persons or governmental bodies being able to access

either the contents of the mail or the addresses of the parties sending

and receiving the mail.

I am also concerned about junk mail or SPAM. Perhaps there needs to be

some restrictions on the type of email that is sent. All email must have

a specific address, no "The occupant of" type of email.


J. Carter Phillips

11000 Froke Cedar Trail

Austin, Texas 78750-1113

v. 512.373.3126

f. 512.373.3172

SkyTel 2-Way

800.759.8352 PIN 1384728


From: "Pozzerle, John @Hidalgo" <>

To: "''" <>

Date: 8/5/98 10:56am

Subject: Enhancement of the .us Domain Space

I don't really care how you do it, I just want the government out of it.

Every time the government gets in the act, we lose freedom or it costs

us money or both. Besides, because of the very nature of government,

its members don't need to be responsible for their actions. I don't

want a faceless government official to tell me what to do and/or how to

do it and that I have to pay for permits or licenses.

John Pozzerle


From: despotic neophyte <>

To: NTIA.NTIAHQ(usdomain)

Date: 8/5/98 2:00am

Subject: Re: .us domain

The domain serving the proposed .us email addresses should

unquetionably be managed by a private company. The United States Postal

Service is not in the business of email or electronic communications and

getting there would require costs that would excede estimations. A

universal system would be a great advancement, and the private domain

server which controls and operates these new email addresses should be

more than one. This could offer a great opportunity for new companies to

spring up in the telecommunications industry. If competition existed in

this matter, the process would undoubtedly run more efficiently and with

greater knowledge of what the citizens want from the service. Think of

it in similarity to the breakup of the US Postal Pagaging monopoly..

When private companies such as UPS and Federal Express were allowed to

enter the market, they offered new technologies, new and innovative

services which would have never been implemented had this service

remained under federal control.

Make the new .us addresses accessable by such companies as Fed Ex and

UPS.. It's the right thing to do.


Nicholas La Joie


From: Joseph Friedman <>

To: NTIA.NTIAHQ(usdomain)

Date: 8/5/98 1:12am

Subject: Request for Comments on the Enhancement of the .us Domain Space

In Response to the Department of Commerce, NTIA, Docket Number


To Whom It May Concern:

I would like to present some recommendations on the future of the .US

domain, in response to the DOC/NTIA Request for Comments on this issue.

1. How should the present geographic structure of .us be extended or

modified? What changes should be made in RFC 1480 or the posted policies

for .us?

A. It should not be changed. Any changes to the structure of the .US

domain should be done leaving the existing structure as an alternative.

This is necessary for "backwards compatibility" with the organizations that

have already registered domains in the .US hierarchy. For practical

reasons the existing domains cannot be removed.

2. What are the benefits and costs of different options for allocating

second-level domains under .us? How should the allocation of such

second-level domains be decided and administered? What should be the terms

of delegation?

A. The only way any business or other organization will register a domain

in the modified .US, is if it is a second level domain (SLD), as opposed to

a 3rd level (i.e. or 4th level (i.e. Why

should a business register a 3rd or 4th level domain in .US when they can

register a SLD in one of the new or existing gTLDs?

SLDs in .US should be registered with any American based registrar that

registers the gTLDs. Why start a new set of organizations to register SLD

in .US, when you can use the existing structure of registrars of the gTLDs?

3. Specifically, should special-purpose second-level domains be created

under .us? What are the benefits and costs of creating particular

special-purpose domains (e.g., industry-specific, credentialing, zoning)?

How should such domains be created and administered? Are there reasons to

map names and other addressing and identification systems (e.g., postal

addresses, telephone numbers, longitude and latitude, uniform resource

numbers or others) into .us?

A. No. There is no reason or need for them, and likely if created they

will be sparsely used.

4. Alternatively, should .us be treated as an unrestricted top-level

domain like .com or should one or more specific second-level domains such

as or be used for unrestricted assignment of domain names

(as in .com)? How should such unrestricted domains be administered and by


A. It should be treated as an unrestricted top-level domain like .COM.

Any other method will cause the new .US structure to be as obscure and

sparsely used, as is the current structure.

5. How should conflicting proposals and claims to manage or use .us

subdomains be resolved? Who should have responsibility for coordinating

policy for .us over the long term? What public oversight, if any, should be


A. It should be managed by the same organizations that will manage the new

and existing gTLDs (like .COM). Why create a new structure of

organizations when you will have an existing one in place? Registrations

for SLD in .US should be able to be done with any American based registrar

of the gTLDs, and the New IANA should set general policy for .US as it will

be doing for the gTLDs.

6. What rules and procedures should be used to minimize conflicts between

trademarks and domain names under .us? Should this problem be treated

differently at international, national, state, and local levels? Should

special privileges be accorded to famous trademarks, such as a right to

register directly under .us or a procedure to preempt the use of the

trademark in a range of subdomains?

A. Whatever way this issue is resolved in the discussions for the gTLDs,

use the same policy/dispute mechanism as is set up for the gTLDs.

7. What role should states play in the allocation and registration of

their respective subdomains? Should commercial names be permitted under

states as third-level domains? Or should such third-level domains be

limited to special categories such as domestic corporations or other

state-licensed entities? Should states and localities operate registries

and accept registrations directly? To what extent should state policies be

coordinated and through what mechanisms and procedures?

A. The states should play absolutely no role. This should remain entirely

a private sector/industry solution. Third level registrations are not

practical, and should not be registered under any new structure.

8. How well has the system of delegating third-level domains (localities)

to private registrars on an exclusive basis worked? How could it be

improved? Should registrars be accountable to their delegated localities

(just as country-code registries are accountable to national governments)?

Should registrars be limited to a single jurisdiction? Should multiple

competing registrars be able to register under any local, state, or

special-purpose domain under .us as in the plan proposed for generic

Top-Level Domains?

A. It has not worked very effectively in the sense that it isn't used by

many private sector entities (most public sector entities, outside of the

Federal government, must register in the current .US hierarchy). As such,

it should be continued as there is no reason to discontinue what is already

in place, and furthermore you can't take away the existing fourth level

domains (i.e. that exist, as these institutions that are

utilizing them may have used them extensively and would not be willing to

lose it.

9.How should the operation of the .us registry be supported? Should uniform

registration (and renewal) fees be instituted? Should registrars contribute

to the operation of the registry?

A. It should be supported in the same manner as the new and existing gTLDs

will be supported.

10.What are best management and allocation practices for country-code

domains? What practices should be emulated or avoided?

A. Emulate the models provided by the gTLDs, as these have been the most

successful TLDs. None of the ccTLDs compare to the demand or success of

the gTLDs.

11.By what type of entity should .us be administered? Private,

governmental, or quasi-governmental? For profit or not-for-profit? What are

the advantages and disadvantages of using one type of entity (private,

public, for profit, not-for-profit) over the others?

A. It should be administered by the same entities as will administer the

new and existing gTLDs. General policy should be set by the New IANA and

registrations should be able to be done with any American based gTLD


Conclusion: The best, most efficient, and most successful model, is those

presented by the gTLDs. Furthermore, there is no reason to create a

separate and distinct structure for policy and registration of the .US TLD,

when one will be in place for the other TLDs. Registrations in the .US TLD

should be a competitive process, as will be the case with the gTLDs.

Registrations should take place in the second level, as any other level

will discourage organizations from using it (they will just use one of the

gTLDs, where they can register a SLD).

The existing structure of .GOV and .MIL should be left intact. It is

serving its purpose well, and there is no reason to change it.

Consideration should be given to move State and Local governments use of

domain names from the current .US structure (stateagency.NY.US or

cityagency.CI.New-York.NY.US) to a more inclusive .GOV where every state

will have one SLD in .GOV (i.e. New Yorks would be NY.GOV) and it would

assign state agencies in the format of stateagency.NY.GOV and local

municipalities as cityagency.NY.NY.GOV. This seems to be a better format

than the existing structure for State and Local governments used currently

in the .US TLD.

It is my hope that you find use of the suggestions that I have offered.


Joseph Friedman


From: Larry <>

To: NTIA.NTIAHQ(usdomain)

Date: 7/5/98 12:50pm

Subject: "us " domain assignment internet for individuals as suggested today by the U.S post office.


It would be far more efficient to embed a cyber-chip in the head of

everybody born. This would allow for the mobile tracking of everybody

thru wireless technology. Thus proving the prophesies of "brave new

world" and "Brazil"

Citizen Larry Dersh a loyal tax paying unit



From: Steve Smith <>

To: NTIA.NTIAHQ(usdomain)

Date: 8/5/98 11:58am

Subject: comment on .us domain

I'd like to see the social security number used, e.g. would be routed to a preferred address or held for pick up

at a USPS site. This has the advantage of reducing the use of the SSN

for secure identification.

I'd also like to see the junk mail issue addressed more in favor

of the public.

Thank you,

Steve Smith


voice: (707)584-3679

mail: 780 Holly Ave

Rohnert Park CA 94928-1479


From: Vicki Brown <>

To: NTIA.NTIAHQ(usdomain)

Date: 8/5/98 4:17pm

Subject: Go for it!

This sounds like a great idea.

I hope you're considering how to handle the hierarchy of subdomains or

Another question - what if someone moves? One of the annoying things about

the current physical mail and telephone system is that you are required to

get a new address when you move. That is, your postal address and telephone

number aren;t YOURS, they belong to your house/apt./office. Email is

something where your address can stay with you. That is, one's email

address should be tied top the PERSON not the SITE.

My preference would be for a permanent which

I would keep even if I moved. After all, CyberSpace is not

three-dimensional! A proper lookup table could tie this to my physical

mail address to make life easier for the post office. I can already keep a

PO Box or a cellular phone or pager number, as long as I stay within a

pretty large radius of where I started out. This is the better system;

connectivity that isn't tied to physical location!

The answers to the above question will have a major impact on how to handle

the subdomains. Do you intend to keep thinking in an obsolete geographic

way? Or get some new ideas in place that aren't necessarily geographic, at

least not to a low level (I could deal with something at the granularity of

a state, or better yet a region; but please don't tie things down to my

street and apartment!)

- Vicki


Vicki Brown, |\ _,,,---,,_

Journeyman Sourceror ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_

Scripts & Philtres |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' '---''(_/--' `-'\_)

P.O. Box 1269 San Bruno, CA 94066


From: "Dr. Eric Wickstrom" <>

To: NTIA.NTIAHQ(usdomain)

Date: 8/5/98 8:56am

Subject: .us

Dear NTIA,

The Postal Service proposal to provide internet addresses for all US

customers under the .us domain seems to me valuable and logical. It should

be supported and executed.

Good luck with your work.

Sincerely, Eric Wickstrom

Eric Wickstrom, Ph.D.

Professor of Microbiology and Immunology

Thomas Jefferson University

1025 Walnut St., Room 420

Philadelphia PA 19107

voice: 215-955-4578 fax: 215-955-4580


From: "sherman freiedman" <>

To: NTIA.NTIAHQ(usdomain)

Date: 8/5/98 11:26pm

Subject: e mail by postal service

I think it,is a very good idea,and should be put into effect as soon as it can be done