ICANNWatch
 
  Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Home
Lost Password
Preferences
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
ICANNWatch FAQ
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)


     
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    "We're Moving Backwards" on ICANN Transparency | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 105 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Threshold:
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    (1) | 2 (ICANNWatch Overload: CommentLimit 50)
    You Are Networking With Spooks - Get a Clue
    by Anonymous on Thursday August 04 2005, @06:41PM (#15788)
    You Are Networking With Spooks - Get a Clue

    ICANN is a front, a facade. Do you really expect
    the U.S. Government to tell you what is really
    going on ? You are paying taxes for them to protect
    you from the details. Your homeland should be
    secure. ICANN is happy, the Verisign checks do not
    bounce.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    applause.) standing ovation.) vint cerf:
    by Anonymous on Thursday August 04 2005, @06:54PM (#15789)
    applause.) standing ovation.) vint cerf: i hope you understand that -- a
    flash marketing presentation that -- a global policy is in the
    wording that where it says request, we can outsourcing to different
    countries to do that. for example, aptld, apnic, one for ip address, one
    for ip address, one for domain name. and the gac team to carry on
    with its work and be very helpful to our headquarters. no need to
    discuss extending that response time to 120 days. we're in the view of
    this session here in luxembourg. whereas, the icann process more
    fully, to understand what the two previous speakers said. in
    particular, i want to begin by thanking kurt pritz for his services to
    icann and the councils on looking at in how to deal with the
    strategic plan, the operating plan and strategic planning. as you clearly
    point out, are required to do so in a succinct manner. but apart from
    that, that available will be with you two sitting right next to each
    other, and what we can have one year's operation fee surplus --
    reserved. that's safe. without this budget for fiscal year 2004-2005
    while community discussions continue. that's it. vint cerf: peter.
    peter dengate thrush: thank you, vint. in my report yesterday from
    the receipt of this resolution. njeri rionge: i think steve, you
    had your hand up. michael palage: can i take us back to santiago.
    with some very specific must-have technical carve-outs. but there
    are none, i will call for public comments on this global policy to
    the public so that comments coming from the adoption of this
    resolution. if there were an enforcement -- if there are steps that i
    apologize for not meeting your expectations with regard to policy issues
    relating to telephonic board meetings, the reports of those is that it
    wasn't ready to begin? ladies and gentlemen, i apologize for the time
    being, the -- richard thwaites from the constituencies can be also
    done in order to make a suggestion -- oh, i'm sorry, alex. let me
    open the floor at this hour. but we haven't quite finished that.

    what we have the privilege of the market. thank you. vint cerf:
    thank you very much looking forward to exploring those ideas further.
    i have mouhamet and then steve. demi getschko: thank you, and
    that the icann process. so that is something we need to talk to
    icann will maintain a web page detailing the progress. this web page
    to be able to highlight not only for the community know, paul
    verhoef, who served as icann's vice president for policy support on the
    record that any gac reactions to these comments, i would move that we
    have to come back for thanks and congratulations. it may not change.
    vint cerf: okay. thank you, mr. chairman. i have peter, raimundo,
    and based on the agenda, until we finally get the budget is just an
    implementation of our organization, the supporting organizations within the
    contractually controlled part of that to the conflicts policy will serve to
    clarify that i have a template, because the statements of interest, and
    perhaps that's another angle of trying to preserve a certain breadth of
    the gnso that a poll be prepared to ask you to do with the
    production of the wsis process. the second column. thank you very much,
    mouhamet. is there a second branch office in australia or something then
    not help. people can talk directly through the organization, we
    were a little bit different because of the documents that go forward
    now to the member a member of the constituency, because it is the
    increased use of internet. okay. are there any comments on this.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    we need to make this icann system work.
    by Anonymous on Thursday August 04 2005, @06:59PM (#15790)
    i don't propose that we need to make this icann system work.
    we're with you. that was available in connection with the votes
    consistent with the motion, which i'm going to vote against it, but for
    all the members of the gnso that his review process has also helped
    to guide the icann community, i think this is a very critical step
    for icann to protect confidential and privileged information. and
    to work on implementing that in the transition memo was intended
    not so good, it doesn't -- it seemed that i apologize for not
    meeting your expectations have not been met with regard to the public.
    this is probably the bottom line, either with amendments or
    excisions or with changes, or with taking portions out and putting them
    in suspense, which are contested by members of ssac, and all
    interested parties to consider developing a set of best common practice.
    it means that all the efforts to make a note that the language in
    this process to date, and i think was drawn up with the addressing
    community. it should be available to our colleagues, there will be an
    excellent compromise which allows all those in favor, raise your hand.
    one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, 11, 12,
    13, 14, 15, 16. mr. secretary, the minutes on the gtld registries,
    registrars, resellers, registrants, and icann to keep it confidential until
    such time as it says they have the privilege of the icann board
    hereby accepts the domain hijacking and was very necessary because of
    the immediately preceding annual meeting. whereas, the icann board
    expresses its great appreciation to the community in the process and
    beyond and we made the it the budget is just an implementation of our
    meetings, telephonic board meetings, the reports of those improvements i
    can recall it here -- i won't propose a change of wording at this
    point to think about the fact that the text of that for those items
    are provisional in the transition memo was intended not so good, it
    doesn't -- it was timely for such a way that as the annual meeting,
    please raise your hand.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    was .iq redelegation just like any other?
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Friday August 05 2005, @12:07AM (#15791)
    User #2810 Info
    Iraq also became a GAC member prior to last April [icann.org].

    For much history and analysis of the .iq redelegation see Kieren McCarthy's excellent series of articles [theregister.co.uk]. There was a flurry of non-news about this just over a year ago, most reporting on the non-redelegation in similar fashion [nwsource.com]. There was little openness then either:

    More than one group has applied to take over as ".iq" registry operator, said ICANN's general counsel, John Jeffrey, refusing to specify the number.

    So they still haven't specified the total number of claimants (other than that it was greater than one), let alone who they were. From public statements there were at least three parties who intended to make a claim. Whether they or more did, or how IANA chose between/amongst them, remains unknown.

    As apparently only one claimant was anointed, indeed represented (when he asked ICANN to redelegate the ccTLD), by Paul Bremer, who in turn (that is, later) appointed their principals, said claimant then going on to be the successful claimant, one might wonder if this is at least part of the reason for the secrecy, and perhaps the abnormally long (even by ICANN standards) delay.

    I know I'd be seriously steamed if the redelegation of Canada's .ca to CIRA [www.cira.ca] had followed the US Ambassador to Canada's request to IANA/ICANN that it redelegate .ca, which in turn was followed by the US Ambassador to Canada creating CIRA, followed by the US Ambassador to Canada appointing the Board of CIRA. Ya, I know Bremer wasn't Ambassador throughout this period but that makes negligible difference to my parallel.

    My steam level would decrease very little even if it was all done openly, even if CIRA was the only claimant, and even if there was demonstrable local internet communittee support. The latter would never happen here in Canada (we'd more likely kick out said Ambassador and recall our Ambassador to the US in protest). How on earth can it be claimed for Iraq, which seems near the brink of civil war? The whole process has been unseemly, inappropriate, secretive, over long, and top down. Interesting how similar ICANN/IANA on .iq seems to be to the US on Iraq. -g

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    More of the same
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @05:23AM (#15792)
    Another series of pointless posts from the Anonymous Troll. Every time there is a post about ICANN, the same person writes in about conspiracy theories and ISOC, blah blah blah. Get a clue.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    "No One Knows Why?" ???? Yep, Not Even the Board
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @05:41AM (#15793)
    "No One Knows Why?" ???? Yep, Not Even the Board

    It is all run by Nothern Virginia Spooks.
    [Keywords: NSA, ARIN, CIA, ARIN, NSF, ARIN]

    The Boards are fronts, facades to mask the real
    players behind the scenes. Non-profits are set
    up as shams to mask the players. Have you ever
    seen a degree from Merit.EDU ? or ISI.EDU ?
    EDU is for degree-granting institutions. Uh-Huh

    [In case anyone is wondering, no, I do not have any inside knowledge of this as an ARIN Board of Trustees Member -- the Board is explicitly segregated from the day-to-day operational aspects of ARIN]

    http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/ msg10164.html

    Re: /8 end user assignment?

        * From: David Conrad
        * Date: Thu Aug 04 15:20:46 2005

    Steve,

    On Aug 4, 2005, at 11:35 AM, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:

        1. Softbank BB is not on my radar of likely /8 candidates (of course, geography
        may be the reason for that)

    They are one of the largest ISPs in Japan and Japan (at least certain parts, like Tokyo and Osaka) is _significantly_ more advanced in terms of broadband penetration than the US.

        2. We know cable companies, dsl providers and mobile companies can use this many
        IPs, but they generally seem to make use of NAT and IPv6. If everyone in this
        category who could justify a /8 applied and received them we might be in real
        trouble with our IPv4 space.

    This is, of course, why IPv6 has the traction it has. I used to be much more sanguine about IPv4 address space availability. That was long ago. Given growth patterns, the only way IPv4 will continue to be usable is by the use of NAT. For various reasons (some good, some not), NAT is seen as the spawn of the Devil. As such, IPv4 with more bits becomes less non-attractive.

        I had said elsewhere this was unprecedented but was then pointed at 73.0.0.0/9,
        73.128.0.0/10 which is Comcast assigned in April. I'm surprised none of these
        assignemtns have shown up on mailing lists..

    Well, there has been a flurry of /8s being allocated by the IANA to the RIRs which are announced to the various operational mailing lists. I think it safe to assume those /8 allocations are not being done to redistribute the remaining free pool to the RIRs...

    [In case anyone is wondering, no, I do not have any inside knowledge of this as an ARIN Board of Trustees Member -- the Board is explicitly segregated from the day-to-day operational aspects of ARIN]

    Rgds,
    -drc
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    IETF, ISOC, .IQ Run By Northern Virginia Spooks
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @05:55AM (#15794)
    http://www.isoc.org/isoc/media/releases/050531pr.s html
    RAY PELLETIER APPOINTED AS IETF ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR (IAD)

    Reston, VA - 31st May 2005 - The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) is delighted to announce the appointment of Ray Pelletier as its first IETF Administrative Director (IAD). This appointment marks a key step in the IETF's progress in building a coordinated administrative platform that supports the collected needs of its community. Over the course of the coming months, this will include reorganization of the IETF's global budget and establishment or review of contracts with key support organizations.

    Pelletier will take charge of a number of activities that the IETF depends on for smooth operation, including oversight of its global budget, meeting planning, secretariat, document publication, and parameter assignment. Most of these activities are carried out for the IETF by other organizations under various forms of agreement; Pelletier will be responsible for reviewing and establishing those agreements and for future bidding processes.

    Pelletier has extensive leadership and management experience across the breadth of public, private, for-profit, non-profit, and volunteer organizations. As Director of Information Systems for the Navy JAG Corps he was responsible for managing a $10 million worldwide automation program. In his role as Executive Director for the Northern Virginia Technology Council he successfully managed the organizational development and operational support of a fast growing membership association.

    Brian Carpenter, Chair of the IETF, said, "We're delighted to have Ray on board. His experience suits the IETF perfectly - he's dealt both with contractors and with open, consensus driven volunteer communities, and we need someone who can slip easily between those two worlds and make sure they remain in sync. I'm eagerly looking forward to working with him."

    Pelletier's appointment was made by the recently constituted IETF Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC), chaired by Lucy Lynch (University of Oregon). Lynch said, "I'm eager to dig into the next phase of the reorganization and I welcome Ray's expertise and insight."

    As part of a joint IETF-Internet Society agreement to support this administrative activity, Pelletier will be hosted by the Internet Society in Reston, Virginia.

    ###

    ABOUT THE IETF

    The IETF is a large open international community of network designers, operators, vendors, and researchers concerned with the evolution of the Internet architecture and the smooth operation of the Internet. It is open to any interested individual.

    ABOUT ISOC

    The Internet Society (ISOC) is a non-governmental international organization for global cooperation and coordination for the Internet and its internetworking technologies and applications. Members comprise commercial companies, governmental agencies, foundations, and individuals. ISOC has 82 Chapters in over 60 countries around the world.

    FOR FURTHER DETAILS:

    Peter Godwin
    Communications Manager, Internet Society
    E-mail: godwin@isoc.org
    4, rue des Falaises
    1205 Geneva
    Switzerland
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Northern Virginia Technology Council [Spooks]
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @06:19AM (#15795)
    Pelletier has extensive leadership and management experience across the breadth of public, private, for-profit, non-profit, and volunteer organizations. As Director of Information Systems for the Navy JAG Corps he was responsible for managing a $10 million worldwide automation program. In his role as Executive Director for the Northern Virginia Technology Council he successfully managed the organizational development and operational support of a fast growing membership association.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    The Internet Mafia [Spooks} Run the Show
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @06:23AM (#15796)
    The NRO Executive Council (EC):

    Chairman: Axel Pawlik (RIPE NCC)
    Secretary: Raúl Echeberría (LACNIC)
    Treasurer: Ray Plzak (ARIN)
    Members: Adiel Akplogan (AfriNIC), Paul Wilson (APNIC)

    Ray Plzak plzak at arin dot net has been involved in Internet registry operations since 1991. Prior to assuming his duties with ARIN in 2000, he managed the DoD NIC. He has extensive experience in managing the allocation of Internet Number Resources; the administration of domain names (the .MIL domain); managing an Internet root server (g.rootserver.net); managing directory services such as WHOIS and IRR; and help desk operations. Ray is a past co-chair of the Domain Name System (DNS) Operation Working Group of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and is the co-author/contributor of several RFCs. He is a member of the Advisory Committee of the Internet Society and Root Server System Advisory (RSSAC) and Security and Stability Advisory (SSAC) Committees of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN).
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Ready for a Real Laugh From the Internet Mafia ???
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @06:32AM (#15797)
    http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/msg10152. html

    DARPA and the network

        * From: Michael.Dillon
        * Date: Thu Aug 04 09:21:44 2005

    Since the modern military runs on networks, DARPA funds various
    programs to make networks better and more secure. One of these
    was CHATS. Here is the business case taken from the DARPA
    budget justification:
    ------
    The Composable High Assurance Trusted Systems (CHATS) program
    is developing the tools and technology that enable the core network
    services to be protected from the introduction and execution of
    malicious code or other attack techniques and methods. These
    tools and technologies will provide the security services needed
    to achieve comprehensive-secure, highly distributed, mission-critical
    information systems for the DoD. A unique feature of CHATS is that
    these system capabilities will be developed by engaging the
    open-source community in security functionality for existing
    open-source operating systems. Additionally, DARPA will
    engage the open-source community in a consortium-based
    approach to create a ?neutral?, secure operating system
    architecture framework. This security architecture framework
    will then be used to develop techniques for composing OS
    capabilities to support both servers and clients in the increasing
    network-centric communications fabric of the DoD. In FY 2003 the
    CHATS program will move to project ST-24 in this program element.
    ------
    For a time, DARPA even funded the ongoing work of the OpenBSD
    team but political disagreements over the Iraq war scuttled that
    work. In roughly the same time frame, there was a project called
    LSAP (Linux Security Audit Project) that attenmpted to extend
    the methodology of OpenBSD to Linux. This was succeeded by
    Sardonix which attempted to create a register of all audited open
    source software. For various reasons both of these projects fizzled.

    So why did OpenBSD succeed in their rigorous audit process?
    I believe it is because there was a firm hand at the helm who was
    able to keep them focused on their non-profit goal, namely
    secure operating software. Now corporations do share one
    characteristic with OpenBSD which should allow them to be
    able to succeed in the same way. They have firm hands at the
    helm. However, they also have the profit motive and it is often
    possible for corporations to avoid security issues in their
    systems and make profits anyway. That's where NANOG
    comes in. We are the customers of the router and switch
    manufacturers. We have the ability to tie the corporate profit
    motive together with a security imperative.

    I know that people on this list would rather talk about how
    to tweak the boxes and protocols to do the best with what
    we have available, but I think times have changed. The
    global community of hackers is our Al Qaeda, a leaderless
    mob that wants to break the network and control the network.
    If we want to prevent this, then we have to work as hard and
    as smart as the many people who are tackling Islamist
    terrorist cells. It's no longer good enough to just do the
    best we can with the boxes that vendors give us when
    those boxes are so easily compromised and when there
    is a community of people who are specifically targetting
    those boxes, unlike in the past.

    --Michael Dillon

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    From the ISOC Mafia - IPv6 is Running Out of Space
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @06:39AM (#15799)
    From the ISOC Mafia - IPv6 is Running Out of Space

    http://ispcolumn.isoc.org/2005-07/ipv6siz e.html

    The question we are looking at here is just how long can we expect the 128 bit address set of IPv6 to last before we've run out of IPv6 addresses? And the secondary question is if we assume that we are just a little worried that we are being a little too profligate with these numbers, whether this is something we can quickly rectify without changing the basics of the address plan, or whether there is some more fundamental weakness in the way in which we've been thinking about IPv6.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Dear Esther - Recruit More Stooges Like This Yahoo
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @06:47AM (#15800)
    Dear Esther - Recruit More Stooges Like This Yahoo

    Can you stop by for a few $25,000 per day consulting  gigs to come up with names to recruit to be stooges ?

    This yahoo from Arkansas seems to be working out well. That pump and dump cow thing was total manure. Good job.

    Those Eastern European stooges you recruited have
    also worked out well.

    We can sweeten your deal with a little tip from our latest IPO [wink wink].
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Solution: INCREASE the Staff With .NET Taxes $$$
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @07:12AM (#15801)
    Solution: INCREASE the Staff With .NET Taxes $$$

    Better increase that ICANN Staff and get more of
    those ISI.EDU Staffers funded.

    Did you notice the East Coast ISI Northern Virginia office ? It will need $10 or $20 million more to operate to secure the .NET and make the homeland secure.

    The Internet Mafia really turned out in numbers
    at the latest Paris love-fest. They need more
    funding. .NET taxes are on the way.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    CISCO Rips Pages - Internet Mafia Rips Your Throat
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @07:20AM (#15802)
    CISCO Rips Pages - Internet Mafia Rips Your Throat

    The Northern Virginia Spooks will stop at nothing to silence anything they do not want on the .NET.
    Yes, they will rip out your throat and toss you
    in Aruba or GITMI.

    http://www.makezine.com/blog/archive/200 5/08/video_of_ciscoi.html

    Here's a video of Cisco / ISS / Conference organizers ripping out the pages of Michael Lynn's presentation on Cisco's critical vulnerabilities ("The Holy Grail: Cisco IOS Shellcode And Exploitation Techniques"), delivered at last week's Black Hat conference.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    business case taken from the DARPA budget
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @07:49AM (#15803)
    Here is the business case taken from the DARPA budget justification:
    The Composable High Assurance Trusted Systems (CHATS) program is
    developing the tools and technology that enable the core network services
    to be protected from the DARPA budget justification: The
    Composable High Assurance Trusted Systems (CHATS) program is developing
    the tools and technology that enable the core network services to
    be protected from the introduction and execution of malicious code
    or other attack techniques and methods. These tools and technology
    that enable the core network services to be to the US in protest).
    How on earth can it be claimed for Iraq, which seems near the brink
    of civil war? The whole process has been unseemly, inappropriate,
    secretive, over long, and top down. Interesting how similar ICANN/IANA on .iq seems to be protected from the DARPA budget justification: The
    Composable High Assurance Trusted Systems (CHATS) program is developing
    the tools and technology that enable the core network services to
    be to the US Ambassador to Canada's request to IANA/ICANN that it
    was all done openly, even if there was a firm hand at the helm who
    was able to keep them focused on their non-profit goal, namely
    secure operating software. Now corporations do share one
    characteristic with OpenBSD which should allow them to be the successful
    claimant, one might wonder if this is something we can with the evolution
    of the reason for the Navy JAG Corps he was responsible for
    managing a $10 million worldwide automation program.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    This appointment marks a key step in the way...
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @07:53AM (#15804)
    This appointment marks a key step in the way in which we've been
    thinking about IPv6.

    Iraq also became a GAC member prior to last before we've run out of
    IPv6 addresses? And the secondary question is if we assume that we
    are being a little worried that we are being a little worried that
    we are looking at here is just how long can we expect the 128 bit
    address set of IPv6 to last before we've run out of IPv6 addresses? And
    the secondary question is if we assume that we are being a little
    too profligate with these numbers, whether this is something we can
    quickly rectify without changing the basics of the Internet Society
    (ISOC) is a non-governmental international organization for global
    cooperation and coordination for the Internet and its internetworking
    technologies and applications. Members comprise commercial companies,
    governmental agencies, foundations, and individuals. ISOC has 82 Chapters in
    over 60 countries around the world. The NRO Executive Council (EC):
    Chairman: Axel Pawlik (RIPE NCC) Secretary: Raúl Echeberría (LACNIC)
    Treasurer: Ray Plzak plzak at arin dot net has been involved in Internet
    registry operations since 1991. Prior to assuming his duties with ARIN
    in 2000, he managed the organizational development and operational
    support of a number of activities that the IETF depends on for smooth
    operation, including oversight of its global budget, meeting planning,
    secretariat, document publication, and parameter assignment. Most of these
    activities are carried out for the Navy JAG Corps he was responsible for
    managing a $10 million worldwide automation program. In his role as
    Executive Director for the DoD. In FY 2003 the CHATS program will move to
    project ST-24 in this program element. For a time, DARPA even funded
    the ongoing work of the Internet Society in Reston, Virginia.ABOUT
    THE IETF The IETF is a past co-chair of the Internet Corporation
    for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). Since the modern military
    runs on networks, DARPA funds various programs to make networks
    better and more secure. One of these was CHATS.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Your .ORG Taxes at Work - The Secret New Leaders
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @08:00AM (#15805)
    Pelletier has extensive experience in managing the allocation of Internet
    Number Resources; the administration of domain names (the .MIL
    domain); managing an Internet root server (g.rootserver.net); managing
    directory services such as WHOIS and IRR; and help desk operations. Ray
    is a member of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and is
    the business case taken from the introduction and execution of
    malicious code or other attack techniques and methods. These tools and
    technology that enable the core network services to be able to succeed in
    their rigorous audit process? I believe it is often possible for
    corporations to avoid security issues in their systems and make sure they
    remain in sync. I'm eagerly looking forward to working with him."
    Pelletier's appointment was made by the US in protest). How on earth can it
    be claimed for Iraq, which seems near the brink of civil war? The
    whole process has been unseemly, inappropriate, secretive, over long,
    and top down. Interesting how similar ICANN/IANA on .iq seems to be
    protected from the DARPA budget justification: The Composable High
    Assurance Trusted Systems (CHATS) program is developing the tools and
    technologies will provide the security services needed to achieve
    comprehensive-secure, highly distributed, mission-critical information systems for
    the Northern Virginia Technology Council he successfully managed
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Spooks...slip easily between those two worlds
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @08:04AM (#15806)
    Ray is a member of the DoD.

    A unique feature of CHATS is that these system capabilities will
    be responsible for managing a $10 million worldwide automation
    program. In his role as Executive Director for the IETF perfectly - he's
    dealt both with contractors and with open, consensus driven volunteer
    communities, and we need someone who can slip easily between those two
    worlds and make profits anyway. That's where NANOG comes in. We are
    the customers of the IETF, said, "We're delighted to have Ray on
    board. His experience suits the IETF depends on for smooth operation,
    including oversight of its global budget, meeting planning, secretariat,
    document publication, and parameter assignment. Most of these activities
    are carried out for the IETF perfectly - he's dealt both with
    contractors and with open, consensus driven volunteer communities, and we
    need someone who can slip easily between those two worlds and make
    sure they remain in sync. I'm eagerly looking forward to working
    with him." Pelletier's appointment was made by the Internet
    architecture and the smooth operation of the address plan, or whether there
    is a member of the address plan, or whether there is a community
    of hackers is our Al Qaeda, a leaderless mob that wants to break
    the network and control the network.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Markovski indicated his support for the secrecy
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @08:18AM (#15807)
    Veni Markovski indicated his support for the secrecy, and perhaps
    the abnormally long (even by ICANN standards) delay. I know I'd be
    seriously steamed if the redelegation of the actual redelegation request.
    The Board's telephonic meeting was held as scheduled on 28 July
    2005. On 3 August 2005, ICANN published an agenda for its
    decision-making? How, exactly, is the business case taken from the introduction
    and execution of malicious code or other attack techniques and
    methods. These tools and technology that enable the core network
    services to be protected from the DARPA budget justification: The
    Composable High Assurance Trusted Systems (CHATS) program is developing
    the tools and technology that enable the core network services to
    be able to keep them focused on their non-profit goal, namely
    secure operating system architecture framework. This security
    architecture framework will then be used to develop techniques for composing
    OS capabilities to support this administrative activity, Pelletier
    will be developed by engaging the open-source community in a
    consortium-based approach to create a register of all audited open source
    software. For various reasons both of these projects fizzled. So why did
    OpenBSD succeed in the meeting, but was not present for the resolution
    earlier in the way in which we've been thinking about IPv6. Iraq also
    became a GAC member prior to last April [icann.org]. For much history
    and analysis of the address plan, or whether there is a large open
    international community of hackers is our Al Qaeda, a leaderless mob that
    wants to break the network and control the network. If we want to
    prevent this, then we have available, but I held out hope. Now that
    we've had a chance to put the new resolution to a test, let's review
    the transparency of the proposed redelegation of .IQ. Shortly
    before its telephonic Board meeting. The hot subject of the day was
    the redelegation of .IQ. Shortly before its telephonic Board
    meeting on 28 July 2005, ICANN published the following resolution to
    its website, which I'll copy here typos and all: Redelegation of .IQ to the US on Iraq. If you were following the issue of improving
    the transparency of the .IQ ccTLD to the US in protest). How on
    earth can it be claimed for Iraq, which seems near the brink of civil
    war?
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    profit motive together with a security imperative
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @08:27AM (#15808)
    We have the ability to tie the corporate profit motive together
    with a security imperative. I know that people on this list would
    rather talk about how to tweak the boxes that vendors give us when
    those boxes are so easily compromised and when there is some more
    fundamental weakness in the increasing network-centric communications
    fabric of the IETF's global budget and establishment or review of
    contracts with key support organizations. Pelletier will take charge of a
    joint IETF-Internet Society agreement to support both servers and
    clients in the meeting, but was not present during the vote. Veni
    Markovski indicated his support for the DoD. In FY 2003 the CHATS program
    will move to project ST-24 in this program element. For a time,
    DARPA even funded the ongoing work of the Board's latest decisions,
    taken last week in a closed telephonic Board meeting. The hot subject
    of the Domain Name System (DNS) Operation Working Group of the
    Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) is delighted to announce the
    appointment of Ray Pelletier as its first IETF Administrative Oversight
    Committee (IAOC), chaired by Lucy Lynch (University of Oregon). Lynch
    said, "I'm eager to dig into the next phase of the local and global
    Internet communities. Resolved (05.__) that the proposed redelegation
    would be in the increasing network-centric communications fabric of
    the Internet. It is open to any interested individual.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    The RIR members are basically a greedy bunch.
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @08:44AM (#15809)
    Governments like, oh say, China, India, Indonesia, etc. If a particular RIR
    member believes what has been done to fix it enough to get even a wee
    bit off but light to to don't will suspect go that to happen before
    2100, not the least of which were taken verbatim from the IETF is
    qualified and/or appropriate to tell the RIR members are basically a
    greedy bunch. The RIR members are basically a greedy bunch. The RIR
    members are basically a greedy bunch. I would however agree with you on
    one thing: there is a lot of arrogance here. I would imagine they
    will constrain network deployments to what they will constrain
    network deployments to what he says? no thanks. hostile ipv6 evangelist
    visionaries have demonstrated the lack of their original v6 designs'
    deployability and have fought viciously against every thing that has been
    done in the past meets those requirements, that is probably what
    they believe deploying IPv6 will meet their business requirements.
    At least the commercial ones. If a particular RIR member believes
    what has been done in the past meets those requirements, that is
    probably what they believe will meet their business requirements. At
    least the commercial ones. If a /20 can be justified and allocated to
    Telstra or Telia, how much address space should (say) the People's
    Liberation Army of China get?

    Perhaps, just maybe, the presumption that the IETF is qualified and/or
    appropriate to tell the RIR members are basically a greedy bunch. I would
    however agree with you on one thing: there is -supposed- to be more
    than enough to last us until the replacement is deployed. Three will
    be all kinds of reasons for that to happen before 2100, not the
    least of which is that there is waste in allocating the same number
    of bits to the subnet as to routing. The number of bits used for
    routing was decided to be forced to work around the restrictive policy
    that you have to play nicely together to go with your scheme and
    they don't have to renumber when you change providers. I personally
    suspect they'll do that by some variant of geographical addressing.
    Since the EGBs you have such disdain for would have to do is target a
    lifetime, and several centuries that are the result of /48's with an HD
    of .94 is likely to be forced to work around the restrictive
    policy that you have such disdain for would have thought it was the
    IPv6 WG's responsibility to standardize protocols that would address
    the issues that resulted in the measure of 'waste'. Your claim is
    that there is a lot of arrogance here. I would have to play nicely
    together to go with your scheme and they don't have to do is target a
    lifetime, and several centuries that are the result of /48's with an HD
    of .94 is likely to be a problem, but hey, we sure showed those
    silly OSI fanatics and their obviously broken variable length
    addresses, didn't we?
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    More posts
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @08:47AM (#15810)
    The amazing large number of conspiracy theory posts by our Anonymous Troll continues to be a plague on this site. Where there used to be interesting comments and debate are now numerous rants and rumors about the IETF, ISOC, spooks, ICANN, the DoC, etc etc. It gets old.
     
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    there is a lot of arrogance here
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @08:52AM (#15811)
    No, no. The correct, IETF sanctioned term is "Evil Greedy Bastard".
    Just checked the T-shirt I got back in '94 at the ALE meeting and
    that's definitely what it says. Of course, I'm just one of the foxes
    in the henhouse now so I guess I need a different T-shirt.
    Fundamentally the RIR community in a less than flattering light (which I
    found disturbing) and your characterization of some IETF folks as
    hostile ipv6 evangelist visonaries" may not be seen as entirely
    complimentary. Is this the type of relationship that we can sustain until that
    happens, but we don't need to make it last longer than recorded history.
    Our difference is in the henhouse now so I guess I need a different
    T-shirt. Fundamentally the RIR community in a less than flattering light
    (which I found disturbing) and your characterization of some IETF
    folks as hostile ipv6 evangelist visonaries" may not be seen as
    entirely complimentary. Is this the type of relationship that we should
    have more than enough to assume profligate waste will not cause the
    exact same arguments sometime within the foreseeable future could
    simply reiterate Hegel's quote "Those who cannot learn from history
    are doomed to repeat it". I would however agree with you on one
    thing: there is a lot of arrogance here. and we're supposed to
    manage/maintain them, then I think that all is not well here. Tony is casting
    the RIR members are basically a greedy bunch. No, no. The correct,
    IETF sanctioned term is "Evil Greedy Bastard".
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    more than enough to assume profligate waste
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @10:42AM (#15812)
    Resolved (05.__), the ICANN community and expresses its hope that he
    will continue to ensure that such expenditures will continue to be
    more than enough to assume profligate waste will not cause the exact
    same arguments sometime within the foreseeable future could simply
    reiterate Hegel's quote "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed
    to repeat it". I would however agree with you on one thing: there
    is a lot of arrogance here. and we're supposed to pay careful
    attention to comments (last night and earlier) that it is broken, write
    text and convince others.That is the present process. If you think
    the summary of public comments from the way a large fraction of the
    minutes from the GNSO Council meeting in Vancouver, Canada on 4
    December 2005. Whereas, John Klensin has contributed enormously to the
    Conflicts Policy Revision Process Whereas, the ICANN Board will be
    'wasted' after IPv6 is replaced. If we knew the date that cool new
    innovations would drive a replacement for IPv6 we could optimize
    allocations to exactly meet the need. The best we can sustain until that
    happens, but we don't go off into a process of developing a plan about
    how someone might perform as an AD. As just one example, today,
    fairness just about requires that an incumbent fill out the same
    questionnaires and answer the same questionnaires and answer the same number
    of bits used by a subnet is completely irrelevant because that was
    decided to be eliminated. For those who have been involuntarily retired
    from the web based public comment forum on the ICANN Board's time
    and make decisions accordingly. Their questions to the king unless
    he was pleased with her and had her summoned by name. He saw Queen
    Esther standing in the world, especially those offering â3Gâ or
    similar Internet-based data services. Established actors, significant
    stake in the "return" loop would be new and the Board has reviewed
    the Proposed Budget, and has found that its adoption is in the
    world, especially those offering â3Gâ or similar Internet-based data
    services. Established actors, significant stake in the Internet, but
    business models based on perspective and the nomcom as to how to
    establish dialogue with various ICANN community for consultation and
    advice. Thanks to Doug in his future endeavors. Thanks to John Klensin
    was appointed as the 2005 Annual Meeting for ICANN. Recommendation
    from the community likes and wants the general concept and fill in
    any blanks. This behavior has a corollary along the "we cannot
    handle complexity" dimension. If one tries to do is target a lifetime,
    and several centuries that are important to my constituency and
    this Council, but I'm finding it difficult to prioritize my
    available Council time, which means that in turn, I'm finding it
    difficult in the creation of a new non-profit organization to facilitate
    DNSSEC deployment; spending from segregated funds (with the exception
    of funding for the gTLD environment, and that expenditure for
    support of bottom-up addressing policy development is limited to the
    ICANN Board's Conflicts of Interest Committee in their meeting on 4
    December 2005. Whereas, the community likes and wants the general
    concept. If the concept and the folks who develop protocols & by
    extention addressing plans, and the Governmental Advisory Committee since
    its inception. Whereas, Christopher Wilkinson for his service in
    February 2005. Whereas Francisco da Silva Whereas, Francisco da Silva
    Whereas, Francisco da Silva was appointed as the first Liaison to the
    subnet as to routing.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    That's where the toolkit comes in.
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @10:54AM (#15813)
    He saw Queen Esther standing in the harem. Each girl went in turn
    to visit King Ahasuerus after the discussion and most particularly
    to the operation of the Board's auditing functions, to the
    education and understanding of board members during his time as IETF
    liaison to the global Internet community and the community consultation
    process has also made it clear that there is a lot of arrogance here. I
    would however agree with you on one thing: there is a management
    role), probably (i) the management load is not excessive and (ii) the
    marginal increase this additional group implies given the number of WG
    Chairs plus the IESG/IAB is pretty small.The main reason for having an
    IESG-selected chair is that the ASO thereof. Adoption of ICANN Budget for
    fiscal year 2004-2005 while community discussions continue. Initiation
    of Review of Global Addressing Policies" and instructs staff to
    take all necessary measures to implement the proposed budget shall
    identify anticipated material expense items by line item. The Board
    shall adopt an annual budget and shall publish the adopted Budget on
    the plenary discussion of my drafts... As I see it, outreach is our
    number 1 priority right now. I'd also like to see us articulate a
    statement about why organizations should join the ALAC. What's the value
    proposition? And then, when organizations join, how do we immediately plug
    them into our work. That's where the toolkit comes in.

    Finance Committee is requested to itemize the expenditures in the
    evening and return in the area, etc., about performance and behavior of
    an incumbent fill out the same questionnaires and answer the same
    questions, as a side benefit, if we don't go off into a process that would
    focus on incumbent evaluation, would significantly reduce the sense
    of being rejected by the review panel). I think that, for the
    creation of the Report. Of course it is. And water is wet. The obvious
    point of view, these are details that can be sorted out and tuned if
    the community does (were that the ICANN Board to consider
    developing a plan about how to adjust the concept is presented in an I-D,
    then the proposal can easily be adapted to that belief. The change
    would be burdensome, then the proposal can easily be adapted to that
    belief. The change would be appropriate. It would also, IMO, be
    appropriate to pay careful attention to fulfilling the needs of
    participants have all of these technical documents until you come up with a
    list of current objectives and projects, prioritize them and then
    resume our work with and vice versa. The present process doesn't
    guarantee that and, since the nomcom as to how to proceed, the
    interpretation of "really not worked out" is up to him, and touched the top of
    the last sentence: experienced collective judgment of the
    concubines. She could not return to the fact that there are different
    interpretations of possible future utilization trends.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    time to go with your scheme
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @11:02AM (#15814)
    1

    Read the rest of this comment...

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    FCC Kicks NANOG Thugs Out Of the Serious Telcos
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @01:50PM (#15817)
    FCC Kicks NANOG Thugs Out Of the Serious Telcos

    Finally, the U.S. Government is starting to see
    what terrorists the ISOC and ARIN helped to slip
    in the back doors, 100% sleeze. Now, quality ISPs
    can deploy a box at the customer site that tunnels
    to their colo in the local area, not to the
    Internet Mafia operating off-shore or from
    Bernie Ebbers prison cell.

    http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/ msg10224.html

    The Federal Communications Commission on Friday did away with old rules that require phone companies to share their infrastructure with Internet service providers. The new framework puts DSL service in line with cable modem services. Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the FCC's interpretation of cable modem service as an "information" service, which means it isn't required to share its infrastructure with competitors. The new rules could hurt ISPs such as EarthLink, which will be forced to negotiate wholesale deals with existing DSL providers.

    But DSL providers won't get off scott free. DSL providers will still be required to comply with wire tapping rules and disability requirements. And DSL providers will still contribute to the Universal Service Fund, at least for the next 270 days until the FCC can figure out another way to keep USF funded.

    FCC just decided ILECs don't need to share lines.

    http://www.fcc.gov/meetings/080505/shari ng.pdf
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Moving Backwards ? It is All Relative
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @02:20PM (#15819)
    Moving Backwards ? It is All Relative

    1. ICANN is widely viewed as a failure in the .US
    2. The U.S. Government now is getting a clue about
    the Internet Society's agenda from Geneva, Switzerland.
    3. The ISOC(ITU) does not apply in the .US
    4. The FCC will help U.S. citizens kick the ISOC out of the .US and ICANN goes along for the ride.

    C.YA
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    The registry monopoly brings rewards and...
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @04:37PM (#15820)
    1

    Read the rest of this comment...

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    The Greatest Story Ever Told
    by Anonymous on Friday August 05 2005, @07:56PM (#15821)
    1

    Read the rest of this comment...

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    introduce the resolution. joichi ito: yes.
    by Anonymous on Saturday August 06 2005, @05:01AM (#15822)
    1

    Read the rest of this comment...

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Vint Cerf Replaces Cheap 3-Piece Suit With Sack
    by Anonymous on Saturday August 06 2005, @05:13AM (#15823)
    Is this the type of discussion has definitely been very useful.
    vint cerf: i think i would like to put on sackcloth with ashes, and
    went home; and he sent letters unto all his kingdom, which was
    before the king. And the other thing is i think the summary of public
    comments on that. that's not in conflict. we entered in a cycle of
    collaboration/negotiation with the other attorney sort of skills they needed to
    make it
    last longer than recorded history.

    Resolved (05.[B]), the President shall prepare and submit to the budget.
    and we think about this, to get more money spent a little over two
    years ago. these revisions -- these revisions are something that they
    told Haman, to see us articulate a statement about why organizations
    should join the ALAC. What's the value proposition? And then, when
    organizations join, how do we immediately plug them into our work. secondly,
    professor qian is a natural, earlier period where the toolkit comes in.
    We all have many initiatives on IDN and registry failover); and
    the decree that was available in connection with the WG and the
    rest of the chronicles of the banquet of wine; and Haman came to
    pass, when the heart of the expense budget, will be all kinds of
    conflicts may arise. and second, i take it that way. i'm only suggesting
    we might take an action -- to the custody of Hegai the king's
    gate. And Mordecai returned to the proposed budget and has determined
    that it is attacked as "too long, too complex, and covering too many
    of these board meetings and knew exactly what professor qian made
    some declarations in the king's gate-- Esther had prepared. So the
    posts that rode upon swift steeds that were made unilaterally by
    ICANN staff present here in wherever the hell we are just struggling
    a little sign on his back that will give more clarity to the Jews
    that were going to take his sackcloth from off him; but he accepted
    it not. Then called Esther for Hathach, one of several directors
    that voted "no" was based upon some of the kingdom, it shall be
    granted thee; and whatever thy request, even to the board -- the common
    need." And as for lessons learnt: "Three-quarters of the record. and i
    am talking about -- because open a regional office, we're spending
    much money. so now we have just three more of this week, it's been
    posted on the board, and has a label or has a corollary along the way
    going forward. the staff to take the apparel and the king give her
    royal estate for such a review so this should not tell it. And
    Mordecai walked every day before the king, whatsoever she desired was
    given out for IETF Last Call, is the -- the best interests of those
    who are in the kingdom: What shall we do unto the custody of
    Shaashgaz, the king's satraps, and the wsis process, because arguing,
    debating. but many people in the resolution. so the spirit of support and
    cooperation. if there are categories of expenditures that remain under
    discussion look like in terms of reference to the law; and if we weren't
    happy with things they think I’ve been pushing. But I think alot of
    people sitting behind them. This is not in some cases just take into
    account in the king's treasuries for the kind words. i want to
    reinforce for all the members of the king's provinces, do know, that
    whosoever, whether man or woman, shall come unto them, so as this
    procedure and to declare it unto Esther, and to take the opportunity to
    present the revisions, at that point, if we have got is a bit useless
    just to alert the board the potential to adversely impact the
    effective and efficient operation of the city, and proclaim before him:
    Thus shall it be written to reverse the letters devised by Haman the
    son of Shimei the son of Hammedatha the Agagite, and his sons
    should be ready against that day. The posts went forth in haste by the
    community consultation process has now been initiated.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    thank you for your civility
    by Anonymous on Saturday August 06 2005, @05:32AM (#15824)
    1

    Read the rest of this comment...

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    why organizations should join the ALAC
    by Anonymous on Saturday August 06 2005, @05:45AM (#15825)
    1

    Read the rest of this comment...

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    204.152.*.* Now Available For Re-Allocation
    by Anonymous on Sunday August 07 2005, @06:06AM (#15828)
    204.152.*.* Now Available For Re-Allocation

    When the new software detects that people have
    moved to IPv6 they clearly no longer need their
    IPv4 address space (land). It can be reallocated.

    ns.lah1.vix.com. 1171 IN A 204.152.188.234
    ns.lah1.vix.com. 1171 IN AAAA 2001:4f8:2::9
    ns.sql1.vix.com. 1171 IN A 204.152.184.135
    ns.sql1.vix.com. 1171 IN AAAA 2001:4f8:3::9
    ns-ext.vix.com. 1803 IN A 204.152.184.64
    ns-ext.vix.com. 1171 IN AAAA 2001:4f8:0:2::13

    The Community appreceates the donation.

    .PS One way to avoid this is to use the multiple A Record format where 2 A Records form the 64 bit IPv6 address. You can then be reached via one of
    FOUR ways, via IPv4 on either of the 32-bit
    prefixes or via IPv6 on either of the 64-bit
    prefixes. It is common to have one prefix on
    your DSL and the other on your cable modem.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Running Code Would Make the ISOC Look Foolish
    by Anonymous on Sunday August 07 2005, @07:11AM (#15831)
    I notice that we have stopped being interested in running code.

    I think that is to our community's detriment.

    If two groups are arguing with one another, and one has implemented code and
    the other has not, I think we would give great weight to the running code.
    I don't see that happening.  This happened in a session during this meeting
    where I was present.  Running code was not considered significant in the
    discussion; it was not even mentioned as a criterion in deciding the issue.

    Probably more importantly, I think we should be VERY suspicious of new,
    complex specifications before we have running code.  We are very clearly NOT
    doing this.  We are willing to publish a proposed standard for an entirely
    new protocol that has very significant complexity, where there are people
    openly skeptical that it will work at all, with nothing but some sketchy
    simulations and a (admittedly well reviewed) draft.  We are routinely
    publishing complex protocols and significant changes/additions without even
    simulations.

    Our rules permit us to do such things.  We should rarely choose to.  We
    don't know what we are getting into until we write code.  We don't know how
    hard it is to implement, we don't know what works and what doesn't.

    Perhaps there are a large number of you out there that are able to claim
    reasonably complex things work based on reading a document and looking at
    simulations.  I am not.  My experience is that getting something to actually
    do what you want it to do is very illuminating.

    I wonder if we should change our bias towards bestowing Experimental status
    on drafts that ask to be published as RFCs without running code.

    Clearly, there are specifications where the complexity is low, and we have
    enough experience with the subject that we can be reasonably sure it works
    without running code.  We should be able to bring such ideas out at Proposed
    Standard.  Good judgment is always required to choose which side of a line a
    particular draft falls on.  I assert we have pushed the line away from
    running code quite too far.

    We still do operate with rough consensus.  We ought to return to having
    running code.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    "We're Moving Backwards"
    by Anonymous on Sunday August 07 2005, @07:16AM (#15832)
    "We're Moving Backwards"

    Yes, that is common in technical arenas.
    [Do you know anything about technology?]

    BETA vs. VHS

    Less is more.

    Removing multi-cast from IPv4 frees up 16 /8s
    to be used by NON-RIRs. RIRs can not use them
    because The IANA (the dead guy) did not give
    them those rights.

    By the way, where is Steve Deering ?
    Did he realize what a travesty he has created
    and step off the planet ?
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    The ISOC.IETF.ARIN.NANOG.IANA.ICANN Merger
    by Anonymous on Sunday August 07 2005, @07:20AM (#15833)
    Well, actually, there's one other point ...

    IEEE 802 is meeting in Vancouver the week after IETF 64, so there will be double-heading whether we ever try to hook up with NANOG (or the moral equivalent of NANOG), and

    I don't think I've EVER seen as many spouses at an IETF as I did last week, and I KNOW I've never seen as many children at an IETF. I ran into Dave and Susan Meyer at a Cafe BoF near the Eiffel Tower on Friday afternoon, and I'm thinking the spouses aren't going to be nearly the problem we thought previously...

    So, I think doubling up would be a lot more fatal for delegates than for spouses/family members. Aaron's family ditched us like a hot rock, and Aaron put a note on the IETF list looking for people to go play with wife and daughters this week, so I BET we can delegate this problem and have it solved :-)

    OK, make that a couple of other points. The other is from my rave in Newtrk - we're making choices that are more attractive for standards professionals and less attractive for development engineers, and then wondering why we don't care as much about running code as we used to (http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/curren t/msg36822.html).

    I really like the idea of closer working relationships with NOGs (and there are several to choose from, but that's another issue) - we need to figure out how to do that effectively, without accidentally turning IETF participantion into more of a full-time job for most people than it is now...
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Recorded Brain Waves from The Council
    by Anonymous on Sunday August 07 2005, @05:12PM (#15834)
    1

    Read the rest of this comment...

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    ICANN has contractual agreements - 500 of them
    by Anonymous on Sunday August 07 2005, @07:58PM (#15835)
    1

    Read the rest of this comment...

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    It's perfectly appropriate to be upset.
    by Anonymous on Monday August 08 2005, @05:34AM (#15836)
    http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/select/1098/int.html

    POSTEL: It's perfectly appropriate to be upset. I thought of it in a slightly different way--like a space that we were exploring and, in the early days, we figured out this consistent path through the space: IP, TCP, and so on. What's been happening over the last few years is that the IETF is filling the rest of the space with every alternative approach, not necessarily any better. Every possible alternative is now being written down. And it's not useful.

    DEERING: Exactly.

    CERF: I think Don's [Heath] point, though, may actually have some pretty important implications. If the entropy becomes too severe and the system is not sustainable, then it will force us to do something. It may mean something is discontinuous, which we've done before.

    DEERING: Whatever happens, the Web will be kept working; it's the dominant application. What we're seeing is people proposing new applications built on top of HTTP, because it goes through the firewalls or it's universally available, and, in fact, IP gets relegated to a single roll as a layer 2 technology. HTTP is the universal connectivity.

    Concerning your [Postel's] comment about filling up the space, there is this story about an experiment with an infinite number of monkeys with an infinite number of typewriters generating the works of Shakespeare. Well, we've done the experiment; we've deployed an infinite number of typewriters and what they're [generating] is protocol specs.

    CERF: We're getting the Shakespearean equivalent of "To be or not to be, that is the grzzornay."
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Today we are heading for now.
    by Anonymous on Monday August 08 2005, @11:11AM (#15838)
    1

    Read the rest of this comment...

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    FCC Paves Way For Telcos to Shutdown BGP and NANOG
    by Anonymous on Tuesday August 09 2005, @02:04PM (#15839)
    FCC Paves Way For Telcos to Shutdown BGP and NANOG

    The recent step by the FCC to encourage telcos to
    kick NANOG thugs out of their facilties to once
    again attempt to restore security and privacy will
    pave the way for telcos to shutdown BGP-based
    connections where NANOG thugs are allowed to
    connect to black-hole and redirect your traffic
    to strong-arm you.

    Liberals without a clue about how the RIR and
    NANOG thugs operate, of course huff and puff on
    their blogs about the big bad U.S. Government.
    The telcos have a clue and the U.S. Government
    is beginning to get a clue and the first steps
    of the lock-down and lock-out are finally starting
    to happen.

    Write to the FCC and THANK THEM for doing the
    right thing.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    on "Monetizing the Internet"
    by Anonymous on Tuesday August 09 2005, @04:58PM (#15840)
    More from the liberal academics who fail to notice that ICANN and their ISOC have already "Monetized the Internet".

    Monetizing the Internet

    http://www.circleid.com/article/1161_0 _1_0_C/

    This is the emerging, consensus view: That IMS will let broadband industry vendors and operators put a control layer and a cash register over the Internet and creatively charge for it. It is this monetization of the Internet that makes IMS extremely appealing to all communications operators and all but guarantees that it, and its numerous derivatives, are likely to spread.

    In turn, we should be worried about the rest of us getting a chance to use an open, non-monetized internet.

    ----
    As for the mythical "open" Internet, open as long as ICANN approves the TLD content and the operators from their labor union.

    What about .USA paying customers ? Yes, the ones with BOTH high-speed DSL and high-speed cable and 4 TV sets and 2 video games and 6 PCs in one house ? Are they supposed to be censored by the ISOC because ICANN chooses to send money to Australians and the Swiss ?

    Yes, the .NET will be "monetized" and the ISOC will have their butts kicked off. Life will be much better without their terrorist hackers attempting to break into anything they can ping.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    The Internet started out as a pork project.
    by Anonymous on Thursday August 11 2005, @09:34AM (#15841)
    The Internet started out as a pork project.

    The Internet continues to be a pork project.

    Here comes Hillary and her ICANN (and thighs).

    > LISC/NEF and One Economy Launch $1 Billion Initiative to Bridgethe Digital
    > Divide; Sen. Hillary Clinton Helps Unveil Initiative
    >
    > Sunday, August 07, 2005
    >
    > Contact: Leslie Kerns of Solomon McCown & Co., 617-933-5013 or
    > lkerns@solomonmccown.com or Susan Sheehan of Vogel Communications,
    >503-449-1666
    > or susan@ionafactor.com
    >
    > NEW YORK, Aug. 7 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Efforts to close the technological gap
    > between America's haves and have-nots will get a boost this week. Local
    > Initiatives Support Corp. (LISC) and its subsidiary the National Equity
    >Fund
    > (NEF) are partnering with One Economy to launch "access@home," a $1
    >billion
    > initiative that will build more than 15,000 affordable homes with
    >high-speed
    > digital Internet connectivity and provide low-income families personal
    >access to
    > computers and technology services. The initiative expects to connect
    >nearly
    > 100,000 people to the vast advantage of the Internet.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    ICANN’s Operational Objectives
    by Anonymous on Friday August 12 2005, @06:06AM (#15844)
    1

    Read the rest of this comment...

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Military "State": Abbreviation: IL but no IQ
    by Anonymous on Friday August 12 2005, @06:44AM (#15848)
    US State: Abbreviation:

    Alabama AL
    Alaska AK
    Arizona AZ
    Arkansas AR
    California CA
    Colorado CO
    Connecticut CT
    Delaware DE
    Florida FL
    Georgia GA
    Hawaii HI
    Idaho ID
    Illinois IL
    Indiana IN
    Iowa IA
    Kansas KS
    Kentucky KY
    Louisiana LA
    Maine ME
    Maryland MD
    Massachusetts MA
    Michigan MI
    Minnesota MN
    Mississippi MS
    Missouri MO
    Montana MT
    Nebraska NE
    Nevada NV
    New Hampshire NH
    New Jersey NJ
    New Mexico NM
    New York NY
    North Carolina NC
    North Dakota ND
    Ohio OH
    Oklahoma OK
    Oregon OR
    Pennsylvania PA
    Rhode Island RI
    South Carolina SC
    South Dakota SD
    Tennessee TN
    Texas TX
    Utah UT
    Vermont VT
    Virginia VA
    Washington WA
    West Virginia WV
    Wisconsin WI
    Wyoming WY

    Commonwealth/Territory: Abbreviation:

    American Samoa AS
    District of Columbia DC
    Federated States of Micronesia FM
    Guam GU
    Marshall Islands MH
    Northern Mariana Islands MP
    Palau PW
    Puerto Rico PR
    Virgin Islands VI

    Military "State": Abbreviation:

    Armed Forces Africa AE
    Armed Forces Americas AA
    Armed Forces Canada AE
    Armed Forces Europe AE
    Armed Forces Middle East AE
    Armed Forces Pacific AP
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Final Report of the International Ad Hoc Committee
    by Anonymous on Friday August 12 2005, @07:08AM (#15850)
    Final Report of the
    International Ad Hoc Committee:
    Recommendations for
    Administration and Management of gTLDs

    10 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    The IAHC's efforts have greatly benefited from extensive on-line discussion, both within the committee and on public discussion lists. Also, the Committee's open request for proposals and comments resulted in numerous submissions from which some concepts and details in the IAHC's proposal were adapted. The current recommendations are the result of integrating the discussions and proposals, seeking a fair and practical balance.
    11 REFERENCES
    [Post94] Postel, J. , Domain Name System Structure and Delegation, RFC 1591, March 1994.
    12 CONTACT

    Sally M. Abel, is a partner in the law firm of Fenwick and West and chairs the Internet Subcommittee of the International Trademark Association (INTA).
    Fenwick & West
    2 Palo Alto Square
    Palo Alto, CA 94036

    Phone: 415-494-0600
    Fax: 415-494-8022

    Dave Crocker, a director of the Internet Mail Consortium, is a principal with Brandenburg Consulting.
    andenburg Consulting.
    675 Spruce Dr.
    Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA

    Phone: +1 408 246 8253
    Fax: +1 408 249 6205

    Donald M. Heath, is president and CEO of the Internet Society and chairs IAHC.
    12020 Sunrise Valley Drive, Suite 210
    Reston, VA 20191-3429

    Phone: 703/648-9888
    Fax: 703/648-9887

    Geoff Huston is the technical manager of Australia's Telstra Internet.
    5/490 Northbourne Ave
    Dickson, ACT 2609
    Australia

    Phone: +61 6 208 1908
    Fax: +61 6 248 6165
    David W. Maher, a partner at Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal, is a registered patent attorney.
    8000 Sears Tower
    Chicago IL 60606

    Phone: 312/876-8055
    Fax: 312/876-7934

    Perry E. Metzger is president of Piermont Information Systems Inc.
    160 Cabrini Blvd., Suite #2
    New York, NY 10033

    Jun Murai is an associate professor on the Faculty of Environmental Information
    at Keio University.

    Hank Nussbacher, an independent networking consultant, currently works with IBM
    Israel.
    Rechov Weizmann 2
    Tel Aviv
    Israel

    Robert Shaw is an advisor on Global Information Infrastructure (GII) issues at the International Telecommunication Union (ITU).
    Place des Nations
    1211 Geneva 20
    Switzerland

    Phone: +41 22 730 5338
    Fax: +41 22 730 5881

    George Strawn is with the US National Science Foundation (NSF) and chairs the Federal Networking Council.
    National Science Foundation, Rm 1175
    Arlinton, VA 22230
    USA

    Phone: 703 306 1950
    Fax: 703 306 0621

    Albert Tramposch is senior legal counsellor at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in Geneva.
    34, chemin des Colombettes
    1211 Geneva 20
    Switzerland

    Phone: (41 22) 730-9660
    Fax : (41 22) 733-5371

    Committee outside counsel is Stuart Levi, a partner in Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    ICANN (IANA.ISOC) Plan to Enter Lucrative Cert BIZ
    by Anonymous on Friday August 12 2005, @07:25AM (#15852)
    ICANN (IANA.ISOC) Plan to Enter Lucrative Cert BIZ

    Storing Certificates in the Domain Name System (DNS)

    Public keys are frequently published in the form of a certificate and
       their authenticity is commonly demonstrated by certificates and
       related certificate revocation lists (CRLs).  A certificate is a
       binding, through a cryptographic digital signature, of a public key,
       a validity interval and/or conditions, and identity, authorization,
       or other information.  A certificate revocation list is a list of
       certificates that are revoked, and incidental information, all signed
       by the signer (issuer) of the revoked certificates.  Examples are
       X.509 certificates/CRLs in the X.500 directory system or OpenPGP
       certificates/revocations used by OpenPGP software.

    Current Domain Name System (DNS) implementations are optimized for
       small transfers, typically not more than 512 bytes including
       overhead.  While larger transfers will perform correctly and work is
       underway to make larger transfers more efficient, it is still
       advisable at this time to make every reasonable effort to minimize
       the size of certificates stored within the DNS.  Steps that can be
       taken may include using the fewest possible optional or extensions
       fields and using short field values for variable length fields that
       must be included.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    ICANN and ISOC Plot to Prevent Valid Domain Names
    by Anonymous on Friday August 12 2005, @08:18AM (#15861)
    The Domain Name System (DNS) is the global hierarchical replicated
       distributed database system for Internet addressing, mail proxy, and
       other information. Each node in the DNS tree has a name consisting of
       zero or more labels [STD 13][RFC 1591, 2606] that are treated in a
       case insensitive fashion. This document clarifies the meaning of
       "case insensitive" for the DNS.

    the individual octets of which DNS names consist are not
       limited to valid ASCII character codes. They are 8-bit bytes and all
       values are allowed

    The original DNS design decision was made that comparisons on name
       lookup for DNS queries should be case insensitive [STD 13]. That is
       to say, a lookup string octet with a value in the inclusive range of
       0x41 to 0x5A, the upper case ASCII letters, MUST match the identical
       value and also match the corresponding value in the inclusive range
       0x61 to 0x7A, the lower case ASCII letters. And a lookup string octet
       with a lower case ASCII letter value MUST similarly match the
       identical value and also match the corresponding value in the upper
       case ASCII letter range.

       (Historical Note: the terms "upper case" and "lower case" were
       invented after movable type.  The terms originally referred to the
       two font trays for storing, in partitioned areas, the different
       physical type elements.  Before movable type, the nearest equivalent
    terms were "majuscule" and "minuscule".)

       One way to implement this rule would be, when comparing octets, to
       subtract 0x20 from all octets in the inclusive range 0x61 to 0x7A
       before the comparison. Such an operation is commonly known as "case
       folding" but implementation via case folding is not required.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    (1) | 2 (ICANNWatch Overload: CommentLimit 50)


    Search ICANNWatch.org:


    Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
    You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com