Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Netizens-Digest Volume 1 Number 195
Netizens-Digest Friday, October 30 1998 Volume 01 : Number 195
Netizens Association Discussion List Digest
In this issue:
[netz] Re: Self Appointed Oligarchy
[netz] Re: NTIA Comments on ICANN draft
[netz] Re: NTIA Comments on ICANN draft
[netz] Re: History, not anecdote...
[netz] Re: NTIA Comments on ICANN draft
[netz] Postel Memorial Webcast Set for Nov. 5
[netz] (Fwd) Re: Spam here
[netz] Re: [ifwp] LEGAL EXPERT SLAMS ICANN STRUCTURE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:33:44 -0800 (PST)
From: Greg Skinner <gds@best.com>
Subject: [netz] Re: Self Appointed Oligarchy
Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
> Actually, I think there is another factor which they may be ignoring. There
> is no law saying we *have* to listen or bow down to them. At MHSC, we'd
> *love* to see this process work to consensus. However, we are going to
> build a TLD registry with, or without their imprimatur. We already advocate
> GRS (http://www.bet.com/~philh/grs) and have GRS-based names servers. MHSC
> has signed no contracts with ICANN, we are not obliged to honor them later.
> We already support a whole flock of non-internet nodes and sites. If they
> start assigning gTLDs over our existing ones then we'll simply complain to
> the USG with the same charges that nailed Kashpuref, interference with the
> operation of a pre-existing data network. (yes, I know that selective
> prosecution makes this problematic).
Indeed.
This reminds me of a thread on big-internet several years ago. The
subject was, more or less, what would happen if/when we ran out of IP
addresses? Several individuals noted that if such a thing occurred,
people would just fragment into separate Internets, bridged by
application-level gateways.
This is already happening. There are large, substantial internal,
corporate Internets. There are also substantial commercial nets (AOL,
MSN, etc.). There are even freenets developing of this type.
> On a technical note, such a fragmented name space may actually be a better
> architecture, over the existing monolithic one. The only thing that really
> *has* to be unique is the IP addresses that are published for external
> access. Internal addresses can be covered with either NAT or ip_masq. Many
> organizations are already doing this. I already have switched clusters with
> a /28 sub-net but only show a single ARIN assigned IP address to the
> outside world. A loosely-couple distributed root name system has many
> advantages over the existing architecture.
If/when the IPv4 addresses run out, the autonomous Internets might
still communicate via application relays. Perhaps they will even
offer application-level routing and forwarding. We will see the
modern-day equivalent of sending our email to
...!mit-eddie|mark%cbosgd.uucp@ucbvax.arpa.
> As more ISPs are forced to learn how to do this, ICANN influence will
> diminish. For the last three years the market demand has been building. The
> pent up pressure has been steadily increasing. Thus far, IANA has been
> keeping the lid on it. The opportunity to release the pressure in a
> controlled fashion is passing daily. If they continue the course of the
> past then the whole internet pressure-cooker will explode on all of us. The
> longer it is allowed to build, the worse the explosion will be.
> Alternatively, the controlled pressure relief will be so bad as to be
> virtually indistinguishable from the explosion. The devil's in the
> preparation <grin>..
The irony is that big corporations will still continue to do business
over whatever Internets exist, and some will even get bigger.
Certainly, the telcos will do quite well; perhaps they will even make
more money, as the mechanisms that are put into place will be far less
efficient (in terms of data transfer) than what they would be if we
had a single Internet with scalable data transfer protocols. Router
and switch companies will make money also for similar reasons. And so
on for hardware and software manufacturers, ISPs, etc.
The big losers, however, will be the users who were hoping that the
NREN bill was going to give them an Internet that was easy to learn
and use.
- --gregbo
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:48:08 -0800 (PST)
From: Greg Skinner <gds@best.com>
Subject: [netz] Re: NTIA Comments on ICANN draft
Karl Auerbach wrote:
> A corporation, or rather the board of a corporation, has a duty to the
> corporation and its shareholders to maximize the return on investment.
I know this.
> A corporation has no duty to its customers beyond maximizing its
> ability to extract money from their pocketbooks.
Implicit in this statement is that the corporation must provide some
product or service that would cause customers to give them money.
Corporations are not lending institutions. They make money from
selling products and services; shares are paid to shareholders who
invest because they believe they will profit.
> Indeed, corporations often find that some classes of potential
> customers are more trouble than they are worth and hence avoid doing
> business with them.
And if they avoid doing business with too many of these customers, the
value of the stock will drop. Both customers and shareholders will be
unhappy. Companies in this situation have been known to go out of
business.
> And many corporations are not interested in "happy" customers -- many
> products are designed to lock-in customers to prevent them from
> leaving.
And this is why we discourage monopolies here in the US. We try to
(legally) provide customers with options, so they are not locked in.
> Overall, it isn't a very good thing to assume that because a business
> relationship exists between a customer and a corporation that the
> corporation can then speak on behalf of that customer's interests.
I made no such assumption. I said that businesses represent the
consumer interests of users. I also distinguished this from the
individual users rights.
- --gregbo
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 19:06:13 -0400
From: kerryo@ns.sympatico.ca (Kerry Miller)
Subject: [netz] Re: NTIA Comments on ICANN draft
> >This is why I stressed the importance of reading old RFCs. I think
> >it's particularly important that people who have doubts about the
> >legality or constitutionality of Internet privatization read RFC 1192,
> >which gives the motivation for commercialization of the Internet. Look at
> >the bottom of the RFC and see who the workshop participants were.
>
> Strange that you refer to this RFC as it is about the by invitation only
> meeting held at Harvard in March 1990. There were *no* legitimate reasons
> given to privatize the Internet, and there was *no* public
> discussion at the time of this meeting.
http://info.internet.isi.edu:80/in-notes/rfc/files/rfc1192.txt
RFC 1192 Commercialization of the Internet November 1990
"Offering the NSFNET backbone at no cost to authorized networks both
encourages undisciplined use of the backbone and inhibits private
investment in backbone networks. It constrains the development of a
market for commercial TCP/IP services by diverting an established and
rapidly growing user base to a subsidized resource."
I suspect this is the 'motivation'; however, since it says nothing about the
DNS per se, I imagine at the time they didnt see it as a significant issue.
The thrust of the RFC is towards the privatization that did subsequently
occur, to 'regularize' the traffic via Compuserve and AOL as well as freenet
gateways.
What I find interesting is the following:
"The status of backbone or regional networks within the Internet is
entirely separate from the question of whether network services are
metered and charged on a usage basis. Confusion in this regard stems
from the fact that the low-speed public data networks (SprintNet,
TymNet), which are sometimes seen as competitive to Internet
services, do bill on a connect-time basis. However, these commercial
services use X.25 connection-based packet-switching -- rather than
the connectionless (datagram) TCP/IP packet-switching used on the
Internet. Internet services could conceivably be billed on per-
packet basis, but the accounting overhead would be high and packets
do not contain information about individual users. At bottom, this
is a marketing issue, and there is no evidence of any market for
metered services -- except possibly among very small users. The
private suppliers, Alternet and PSI, both sell "pipes" not packets."
Do the current proposals make any committment whatsoever to keeping
the packet-switching protocol? From an 'economic' pov, isnt the user-pays
principle likely to lead back towards something llike X.25?
kerry
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:31:42 -0800 (PST)
From: Greg Skinner <gds@best.com>
Subject: [netz] Re: History, not anecdote...
Peter Deutsch wrote:
> I agree, but the important element was not (as you seem to
> believe) the communistic control of resources ("from each
> according to their ability, to each according to their
> need") but rather the principle of ownership of private
> property ("Those with title to a resource get to decide
> how to use it"). That, and the fact that all this stuff
> could run on machines that became ever more affordable.
> *That's* the important trend you seem to have missed.
Indeed. What was that old saying (paraphrased): "Usenet follows the
golden rule. Those with the gold make the rules." I seem to recall
this mantra invoked quite often in discussions about which newsgroups
the backbone would carry. Those who ignored the backbone were free to
do so, at their own personal cost -- they could make expensive
long-distance phone calls.
- --gregbo
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:42:26 -0800 (PST)
From: Greg Skinner <gds@best.com>
Subject: [netz] Re: NTIA Comments on ICANN draft
Kerry Miller wrote:
> "Offering the NSFNET backbone at no cost to authorized networks both
> encourages undisciplined use of the backbone and inhibits private
> investment in backbone networks. It constrains the development of a
> market for commercial TCP/IP services by diverting an established and
> rapidly growing user base to a subsidized resource."
>
> I suspect this is the 'motivation'; however, since it says nothing
> about the DNS per se, I imagine at the time they didnt see it as a
> significant issue. The thrust of the RFC is towards the
> privatization that did subsequently occur, to 'regularize' the
> traffic via Compuserve and AOL as well as freenet gateways.
True. DNS was not as significant an issue as it is now because at the
time, conflicts over names could be resolved amicably, and name
branding via DNS was not as common as it is today.
The RFC also says:
The initiative for a National Research and Education Network (NREN)
raises a broader set of policy issues because of the potentially
much larger set of users and diverse expectations concerning the scope
and purpose of the NREN. The decision to restyle what was originally
described as a National Research Network to include education was
an important political and strategic step. However, this move to a
broader purpose and constituency has made it all the more difficult
to limit the community of potential users -- and, by extension, the
market for commercial services. At the regional, and especially
the state level, public networking initiatives may already encompass
economic development, education at all levels, medical and public
health services, and public libraries.
The NREN encompasses many issues, including DNS.
> Do the current proposals make any committment whatsoever to keeping
> the packet-switching protocol? From an 'economic' pov, isnt the user-pays
> principle likely to lead back towards something llike X.25?
As far as I know, this goes beyond the scope of the current proposals.
- --gregbo
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 22:35:58
From: John Walker <jwalker@networx.on.ca>
Subject: [netz] Postel Memorial Webcast Set for Nov. 5
The CSS Internet News (tm) is a daily e-mail publication that
has been providing up to date information to Netizens since 1996.
Subscription information is available at:
http://www.bestnet.org/~jwalker/inews.htm
The following is an excerpt from the 'News
NOTE: Registrations for the On-line Learning Series of Courses
for November are now being accepted. Information is available at:
http://www.bestnet.org/~jwalker/course.htm
- ---------------
Postel Memorial Webcast Set for Nov. 5
By the InternetNews.com Staff
http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/1998/10/2704-postel.html
[October 27, 1998] Netizens around the world will be able to
participate in a memorial for Internet pioneer Jon Postel, who died
Oct. 16 in Los Angeles following heart surgery.
The memorial is set for Nov. 5 at 11 a.m.(PST) at the University of
Southern California's Bovard Auditorium. Internet users can view the
memorial Webcast.
USC President Steven Sample will officiate. Also taking part will be
Ira Magaziner, President Clinton's senior advisor for policy
development and Robert Braden and Herbert Schorr, both from the
Information Sciences Institute at the University of Southern
California. Postel was division director at ISI, where he had worked
since 1977.
As chairman of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, Postel had
been closely working with government officials to ensure a smooth
transition from a government-controlled domain name and Internet
Protocol address system.
Before his death, Postel organized a new group, The Internet
Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, which is currently
organizing to take over IANA's responsibilities.
Related Links:
ICANN Taps Interim Leaders As Transition Begins
http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/1998/10/2702-icann.html
Group Blesses Postel Domain Proposal
http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/1998/10/2102-group.html
http://www.usc.edu/webcast/postel
http://www.isi.edu/
http://www.iana.org/
- -------------
Also in this issue:
- - ICANN Elects Board and Appoints Interim President
NEW YORK, Oct. 26, 1998 -- The Internet Corporation for Assigned
Names and Numbers ("ICANN") today announced that it had elected its
Initial Board and chosen Michael M. Roberts as its Interim President
and Chief Executive Officer at a meeting yesterday.
- - High-Tech Heroes Who Work for the Public Good
It's time -- overdue, actually -- to celebrate some heroes and
heroines of the Information Age.
- - Grove Discusses Health Care, The Net
SAN FRANCISCO -- Intel chairman Andy Grove said Tuesday that the
Internet is on the brink of revolutionizing the health-care
industry.
- - Free Internet access provider folds
An Internet service provider that offered free lifetime service has
itself had a short life.
- - SEC Charges 44 Internet Stock Promoters
[October 28, 1998] The Securities and Exchange Commission Wednesday
filed charges against 44 individuals the agency alleges issued
fraudulent and misleading information about small, unknown companies
over the Internet.
- - Veterans of Falklands War set up 'Virtual Cemetery'
British veterans want to remember the 252 Britains killed in the
1982 Falklands War with a "virtual garden of remembrance" on the
Internet, army surgeon Rick Jolly said on Wednesday.
- - More Sponsors Join BBBOnLine Seal Program
[October 28, 1998] BBBOnLine, a subsidiary of the Council of Better
Business Bureaus Inc., said that two dozen major companies are now
spearheading the creation of a privacy seal program to inspire
confidence in Web consumers.
- - Postel Memorial Webcast Set for Nov. 5
[October 27, 1998] Netizens around the world will be able to
participate in a memorial for Internet pioneer Jon Postel, who died
Oct. 16 in Los Angeles following heart surgery.
- - 'Pay attention class, today's URL is...'
A friend called to ask for some help on a project for an Internet
class she's taking. She had to go to a mapping site and use it to
find the distances for a hypothetical trip. It was a neat site, and a
useful homework assignment. And as I gave her advice on how to
navigate the site, I realized that the Web is quickly becoming a
regular school subject, like math or history.
- - New Lists and Journals
1) The Dream Anvil
2) MOM'S old-fashioned INTERNET GAZETTE
3) Work@Home Parents E-zine
4) Michael Gray, CPA's Bottom Line
5) Peerless Express
6) Weekly WebGrinns!
7) Merle's Mission
8) Outland Ezine
9) Ballet Alert Online
10) Together Time
On-line Learning Series of Courses
http://www.bestnet.org/~jwalker/course.htm
Member: Association for International Business
- -------------------------------
Excerpt from CSS Internet News (tm) ,-~~-.____
For subscription details email / | ' \
jwalker@hwcn.org with ( ) 0
SUBINFO CSSINEWS in the \_/-, ,----'
subject line. ==== //
/ \-'~; /~~~(O)
"On the Internet no one / __/~| / |
knows you're a dog" =( _____| (_________|
http://www.bestnet.org/~jwalker
- -------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 01:12:31 -0400
From: kerryo@ns.sympatico.ca (Kerry Miller)
Subject: [netz] (Fwd) Re: Spam here
- ------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
From: kerryo@ns.sympatico.ca (Kerry Miller)
Organization: hundred flowers publications
To: cybermind@listserv.aol.com,
Date sent: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 16:32:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Spam here
Priority: normal
Rak wrote,
> great ideas mike. (but look out, here comes that inevitable BUT) But, part
> of the reason for being on the net is precisely to have a website, post on
> usenet, add articles to newsgroups, and interact with commercial, social
> and educational sources on the net. I view spam much like the way I view
> today's Chicago Tribune or new York Times. Little news, somewhat
> informative, and spread out through reams of useless adverts. Come to
> think of it, that is why I don;t have a webpage either.
Looking at the evident resignation with which the net-public (and certainly the
public!) awaits the surrender of the entire DNS system to corporate hands, I
wonder if keeping spam off mailing lists was such a good idea. If sub lists
had been kept open, and we had been exposed daily to the slew of bot-mail,
there might be a higher degree of consciousness of what *can - I dont say
will, now - happen when (my guess is, about 2 min after NSF signs off) some
shrewd lawyer realizes that every email address is administrative information,
and therefore a negotiable good.
More constructively, if -what? 2, 3 years ago - we, the public, had been
more widely aware of the need to preserve public space, and obstinately
insisted that commercial traffic form its own list, we might now have a very
strong precedent for net-businesses forming their own domain, and leaving
the rest of the system to a publicly-responsible administration. We might
have been able to carry forward Barlow's vision of the WWW as the
beginnings of global government.
Paul Revere hardly got his lantern lit, this time.
kerry
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 15:02:20 -0500 (EST)
From: Ronda Hauben <ronda@panix.com>
Subject: [netz] Re: [ifwp] LEGAL EXPERT SLAMS ICANN STRUCTURE
Milton Mueller <mueller@syr.edu> wrote:
>Legal Expert Issues Devastating Criticism of New Internet Corporation
>Structure.
>October 30, 1998
>Tamar Frankel, an expert in corporate governance and Chair of the
>International Forum on the White Paper (IFWP), today issued a detailed
>and searching assessment of the proposed articles and bylaws of the
>ICANN corporation.
<...>
>Discussions among ICANN, BWG, and ORSC are underway. The Frankel paper
>also contains a comparative analysis of the different proposals.
At the Oct. 7, 1998 subcommittee hearing of the subcommittees
on technology and basic research, Tamar Frankel was asked to
give her comments on all the proposals.
She didn't then, *not* does she now demonstrate that she
bothered to even read the proposal I submitted.
It is a proposal based on the lessons learned from the
development of the Internet.
The Internet is *not* a corporation and it can't be
governed by any so called form of "corporate governance".
Tamar's comments leave out the users of the Internet.
She is only concerned for corporate interests.
But the Internet has grown up and developed as a users
network as has Usenet an important part of the Internet.
Also the Internet is a unique medium of global
communication. One must understand its unique nature
before trying to create policy or U.S. govt policy
changes that affect the Internet and its users.
This was the decision in the case by the U.S. Federal
District Court in Philadelphia, affirmed by the
Supreme Court in the case involving the Communications
Decency Act.
Tamar should read that decision before she endeavors
to be an expert regarding governance relating to the
Internet.
Ronda
ronda@panix.com
------------------------------
End of Netizens-Digest V1 #195
******************************
