Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Netizens-Digest Volume 1 Number 300
Netizens-Digest Friday, April 30 1999 Volume 01 : Number 300
Netizens Association Discussion List Digest
In this issue:
[netz] Re: [IFWP] Re: Brock Meeks on Internet Governance
[netz] "Cable Operators Expand Education Commitment"
[netz] Splitting the net (was: Announcement of the new TLD association
[netz] Good Questions from Canada concerning ICANN
[netz] Re: [IFWP] Re: Brock Meeks on Internet Governance
[netz] Are the kids alright?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 09:50:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: Greg Skinner <gds@best.com>
Subject: [netz] Re: [IFWP] Re: Brock Meeks on Internet Governance
Ronda Hauben <ronda@panix.com> wrote:
> Greg I don't understand what you are trying to say in your abouve
> statement. What I understand happening in the period when the NSFNET
> allowed commercial traffic onto the NSF backbone wasn't that they
> were allowing an ecommercenet.
That's not what I wrote. I wrote that the NSFnet agreement allowed
NSFnet to communicate with other networks, including "ecommercenets."
> It was that those who didn't fit in with the restrictions imposed by
> the Acceptible Use Policy, i.e. which forbid any form of commercial
> entity to use the NSF backbone
Gordon Cook or someone else may know the exact answer, but I believe
that the agreement specified that no commercial traffic should be
allowed to *transit* the NSFnet backbone, but they could communicate
with commercial providers, etc. as they wished.
> I thought that the Internet principle of making changes that one
> wants for ones own network on an end to end basis, and not to impose
> them on the whole network sets the foundation for how a commercenet
> could function. They could have their own domain name systems
> situation, but that would only function within the commercenet, not
> by taking over the whole of the Internet.
As I have written, anyone who wishes is free to ignore anything that
ICANN is doing. Some people, it seems, are already doing that. ICANN
does not have authority to stop people from setting up their own
registries, registrars, etc. Neither can they stop anyone from
setting up a parallel DNS where they can set up whatever
root-server/TLD hierarchy they wish.
> I would have to think if I have seen examples of how this might work
> -- but for example IBM has its own network. It can do what it wants
> in that network, and can also connect that network outside to the
> Internet. Somehow if IBM wants to do something special in its own
> network, it needs to figure out how to do that internally, not
> impose that requirement on all the other networks of the Internet.
I don't know of anything that any network operator is doing that is
"imposing" a requirement on any other network. From what I have seen,
some sites have extensive firewalling and filtering capabilities that
restrict any "impositions" that someone might make on someone else.
So I don't know what it is you are concerned IBM or some other network
operator might do.
My guess is that the networks you use have made agreements to allow
certain types of traffic from other networks that you might not like.
For example, you might not like getting ads on a search engine, but
the networks you use have allowed their member sites to receive ads.
You should probably contact the net admins for the networks you use
and ask them why they are allowing this traffic.
- --gregbo
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 13:17:26 -0400
From: "P.A. Gantt" <pgantt@icx.net>
Subject: [netz] "Cable Operators Expand Education Commitment"
Source: National Cable Television Association (NCTA) in Washington
Cable Companies Will Connect Public Libraries & Schools To Internet With FREE
High-Speed Cable Services
[Let's not forget the telcos buying cable companies]
http://www.ncta.com/10_01_98.html
Nearly 700 Communities Will Benefit From Initiative By Year-End '99
"...WASHINGTON, DC -- The cable television industry will expand
on its long-standing commitment to provide America's schools
and students with advanced technologies for enhanced learning
opportunities by today pledging to provide public libraries
across the country with free high-speed access to the Internet,
including a free high-speed cable modem..."
Question: What will this do to rates worldwide to
Internet Users not connected by schools and libraries???
Is this ALGore's new vision???
At an interview on Tuesday, March 9, 1999, CNN's Wolf Blitzer
http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/18390.html?wnpg=1
asked Vice President Gore how was he different from challengers, such as
Bill Bradley. "What do you have to bring to this that he doesn't
necessarily bring to this process?"
Mr. Gore replied: "I'll be offering my vision when my campaign begins, and
it'll be comprehensive and sweeping, and I hope that it'll be compelling
enough to draw people toward it.... I've traveled to every part of this
country during the last six years. During my service in the United States
Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet."
Hmmmm
- --
P.A. Gantt, Computer Science Technology Instructor
Electronic Media Design and Support
http://user.icx.net/~pgantt/
[the Internet] could remain what it ought to be:
just a public instrument. There ought to be efforts --
not just talk but real efforts -- to ensure Internet
access, not just for rich people but for everyone.
~~ Noam Chomsky, MIT ~~
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 21:06:57 -0004
From: kerryo@ns.sympatico.ca (Kerry Miller)
Subject: [netz] Splitting the net (was: Announcement of the new TLD association
Karl,
> There is much merit in having disjoint registries. Communities of
> interest can admit only those who are willing to abide by certain
> limitations -- a church might allow its registry system to include
> only those who will promise not to allow porn sites.
>
> I can hear the false wailing of those who will say "this would split
> the net".
>
As ATT moves from wires to content, and as the great american
prudery movement (to make carriers and service providers liable for
what a subscriber says or depicts) gets up steam, its very likely
that this is exactly what will happen.
A body will of course have a choice of connections, from
ChurchFirst! and NewestWorldArdor to Disco_very_Chanel;
communications among co-subscribers will rely on mutual
(dis)trust to meet the contract conditions; comm across the lines
to other "desmesnes" will naturally be transparent, but carry LD
charges (for licensciousness detection): a 'boundary marker' will
tag each message packet so that if it goes beyond the original
client, it can be easily traced. Since all of this will go on within
*corporate agreements, there is no need for messy First
Amendment protections and the like.
Thus there will be first and foremost .att and .mci -- and the rest, a
ragtag and incoherent collection of stalwart .fsp (free-speech
preachers, who will insist that no conditions attach to their traffic).
But Jean and Jennie Public wont have to worry about whats 'out
there' to impact their scruples, because by 2003 no one will know --
or even how to find out -- what all *is out there. By 2008, .fsp will
have to find its own fibre or satellite or pay dearly for a few
channels of POTS, and lo! domestic tranquility shall have come to
cyberspace.
(Hmmm, FS Cybertours -- how the outlaws lived! but thats another
chapter... its time to go and make some more paper.)
kerry
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 00:13:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jay Hauben <jay@dorsai.org>
Subject: [netz] Good Questions from Canada concerning ICANN
Forwarded from the Universal Access - Canada list (UA-C)
UA-C@CCEN.UCCB.NS.CA
Mike Gurstein wrote:
I can't really comment on the Iperdome strategy... I haven't been able to
follow the ICANN developments for the last while as I've been working on
other things.
I am concerned though, that there doesn't appear to be anybody in Canada
who is in a position to be spending the time and intellectual energy
required to follow and sort out the public interest position from a
Canadian perspective on ICANN and related developments. (I don't know the
Canadian representative on the interim ICANN board (Steinberg?), but I
would prefer that he be much more public and vocal on these issues than
he appears to have been to date...so that a broader assessment of these
developments and his own position on these can be observed/reviewed.)
The evidence is that the folks in the Canadian government who are
concerned with this are taking only a very narrow and "commercial"
perspective ie. how this does or does not impact on Canadian short or
medium commercial interests.
My own feeling is that the significance of those Canadian commercial
interests are relatively minor compared to the comparable US interests and
that what is of much greater significance for Canada/Canadians is that the
overall Internet governance strategy/position be such as somehow to
support public service interests and needs both for Canada/Canadians and
for most of the rest of the world.
regs
Mike Gurstein
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 06:16:50 -0400
From: P.A. Gantt <pgantt@icx.net>
To: Michael Gurstein <mgurst@CCEN.UCCB.NS.CA>
Subject: [Fwd: Iperdome Status Report]
Jay Fenello <Jay@iperdome.com> wrote:
Hi Molly,
>http://www.icann.com/dnso/constituency_groups.html
>
>In addition, organizers should send drafts of these
>materials and/or a status report, no later than Monday,
>April 26. All of these materials should be sent to
>msvh@icann.org.
Per request, Iperdome would like to file the
following Constituency Formation Status Report.
For background, on March 16th, I wrote:
>One of the decisions of the ICANN Board was to approve
>a DNSO that featured overlapping constituencies. This
>creates a problem common to all constituencies, namely,
>where do we draw the lines.
>
>For example, Iperdome may desire to join the following
>constituencies, for the following reasons:
>
>ccTLD registries
> Iperdome is the official registry for
> the .per.nu domain, sub-delegated via
> RFC-1591
>
>Commercial and business entities
> Iperdome is a business entity
>
>gTLD registries
> Iperdome is a prospective gTLD registry
>
>ISPs and connectivity providers
> Iperdome is an ISP
>
>Non-commercial domain name holders
> Iperdome's clients are almost exclusively
> non-commercial domain name holders.
>
>Registrars
> Iperdome acts as a registrar for personal
> domain names.
>
>Trademark, intellectual property, anti-counterfeiting interests
> Iperdome is a trademark, and .per(sm) is a
> service mark.
>
>My concern is that certain constituencies are
>attempting to form in private, behind closed
>doors. This could easily result in a biased
>process, one that excludes legitimately
>interested parties.
My concerns were well founded. While there
have been some efforts to have open processes
used in the formation of these constituencies,
for the most part, we see more gaming by the
largest and most powerful stakeholders.
For example, some groups have worked in secret
for over a month, and have only recently (in
the last two days) revealed their direction.
Others have tried to make rules designed to
disenfranchise all but the "right" players.
For example, recognition by Inter-governmental
agencies, or by requiring a response to a
deadline that occurs *before* their plan
is even approved.
Iperdome believes that it, and thousands
of small organizations just like it, have a
legitimate claim to be fairly represented
in the constituencies as defined by ICANN,
regardless of our size, age or financial
resources.
For these reasons, Iperdome plans to review
all submissions to ICANN. Then, in each
separate constituency for which Iperdome
has a legitimate claim to be represented,
we will either:
1) Support one of the existing proposals.
2) Work with similarly situated organizations,
and in the spirit of Open-RSC and the BWG, take
the best features from any of the plans submitted,
and generate a broader consensus document.
For the record, Iperdome claims membership
in the following constituencies:
ccTLD registries
Commercial and business entities
gTLD registries
ISPs and connectivity providers
Registrars
Trademark, intellectual property,
anti-counterfeiting interests
Finally, to facilitate representation
for our clients, Iperdome has formed the
Personal Domain Name Holders Association
(http://www.pdnha.org). The PDNHA claims
membership in the non-commercial domain
name holders constituency, and any other
Individual based constituency that may
be considered.
The PDNHA will also be monitoring the
formation of these constituencies, and
will also:
1) Support one of the existing proposals.
2) Work with similarly situated organizations,
and in the spirit of Open-RSC and the BWG, take
the best features from any of the plans submitted,
and generate a broader consensus document.
Thank you for this opportunity to provide
an update on our efforts, and please let me
know if I can be of further assistance.
Respectfully,
Jay Fenello
President, Iperdome, Inc. http://www.iperdome.com
Executive Director, PDNHA http://www.pdnha.org
- --------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 17:09:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: Greg Skinner <gds@best.com>
Subject: [netz] Re: [IFWP] Re: Brock Meeks on Internet Governance
Bill Lovell <wsl@cerebalaw.com> wrote:
> At 04:54 PM 4/27/99 -0700, Greg Skinner wrote:
>>I've been giving what you have written some thought and I came to the
>>conclusion that the "ecommercenet" you claim people with commercial
>>interests should create exists. It just so happens that as a result
>>of the NSFnet agreements drafted and signed in 1992 that the
>>"ecommercenet" was allowed to communicate with NSFnet (and other
>>networks running TCP/IP) according to a set of agreed-upon policies.
>>A lot of this is documented online; I have found much of it at
>>www.merit.edu,
>So how come a search on that site with key words such as "commerce"
>and "NSF" or even "internet" yields zilch?
The NSFnet agreements did not specify what types of networks NSFnet
was able to communicate with. The agreements allowed NSFnet to
communicate with other networks if it was felt in NSFnet's best
interest to do so. So among those networks were any "ecommercenets"
that elected to communicate with them.
This is the relevant clause of the NSFnet AUP:
(9) Communication incidental to otherwise acceptable use, except for
illegal or specifically unacceptable use.
BTW, there is more literature on their site that specifically
discusses the opening of NSFnet to commercial traffic, such as:
Message: 8663885, 22 lines
Posted: 12:32pm EDT, Fri May 24/91, imported: 12:35pm EDT, Fri May 24/91
Subject: ANS commercial traffic
To: Eric M. Aupperle, ema@merit.edu
Cc: jcavines@nsf.gov, steve@cise.cise.nsf.gov
From: steve@cise.nsf.gov
This is to confirm our agreement on the flow of commercial traffic across
the NSF sponsored gateways to the T3 network.
NSF agrees that ANS may move commercial traffic in both directions across the
NSF sponsored Backbone gateways, providing that:
(1) ANS recovers at least the average cost of the commercial use that
traverses the NSF sponsored gateways.
(2) Excess revenues recovered above costs for this use after tax will be
placed in a pool to be distributed.
(3) An ANS resource allocation committee will be formed with representation
from the participating NSF sponsored gateway management, other network
organizations, the NSF and ANS to distribute those funds with the objective
of further building national and regional infrastructure, and
(4) MERIT and ANS ensures that the attachment and services sponsored by the
NSF under Merit's Cooperative Agreement with the NSF is not diminished.
NSF, MERIT and ANS will agree on the technical means of compliance with the
points outlined above.
I should point out that there was policy regarding advertising in the AUP:
(7) Announcements of new products or services for use in research or
instruction, but not advertising of any kind.
However, this pertained to the NSFnet backbone only. Attaching networks
were free to establish their own AUPs.
The main point I'm trying to make (particularly for Ronda) is that all
these attaching networks used the same name and address space of what
had already existed, so in effect these new networks became part of
the Internet.
- --gregbo
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 22:15:39
From: John Walker <jwalker@networx.on.ca>
Subject: [netz] Are the kids alright?
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
or send an e-mail to jwalker@bestnet.org with
SUBINFO CSSINEWS in the SUBJECT line.
The following is an excerpt from the CSS Internet News. If you are
going to pass this along to other Netizens please ensure that the
complete message is forwarded with all attributes intact.
NOTE: Registrations for the On-line Learning Series of Courses
for May are still being accepted. Information is available at:
http://www.bestnet.org/~jwalker/course.htm
- ------------
Are the kids alright?
Join the discussion
http://www.bestnet.org/~jwalker/educat3.htm
Hard on the heels of the Littleton, Col., massacre, another school
shooting took place in another place where you least expect it --
Taber, Alberta.
What's going on?
Are these just isolated incidents, or symptomatic of a deeper
problem?
How much does access to guns play a role?
Should the role of parents be under attack?
How can we tell if our kids are on the edge of something violent?
No easy questions, or answers
This group is not moderated. The rules: No profanity, no advocacy of
violence or law-breaking, no libel or slander.
- ------------
Also in this issue:
- - Are the kids alright?
Hard on the heels of the Littleton, Col., massacre, another school
shooting took place in another place where you least expect it --
Taber, Alberta. What's going on?
Join the discussion...
- - Teen takes loaded gun, hit list to school
A 13-year-old California boy with a loaded handgun and a hit list of
30 names was arrested at school Thursday - the most serious of
another wave of bomb scares and threats to disrupt schools since the
Colorado massacre.
- - UK's Mirror Weighs Into Free Internet War (UK)
British newspaper publisher Mirror Group Plc on Friday upped the
stakes in the escalating battle to capture Internet market share
with the launch of its free Net access service ic24.
- - Internet Hoaxes prey on the gullible (Canada)
TORONTO (CP) -- Internet users beware!!! There's a new virus that
will erase your hard drive, steal sensitive information and rewrite
your software!!!
- - Who's Community Is It, Anyway? (US)
A while back I used to get really excited about the concept of
'community' on the Net. I saw a community as a marketplace. I saw
money. The first thing that put a dent in this thinking was my
experience with our small community of subscribers at
forkinthehead.com.
- - Backlash: Littleton Tragedy Jolts Internet Future (US)
For every action, there's an equal and opposite reaction. The
Internet pushed us full throttle toward freedom of expression. The
tragic shootings in Littleton may be the catalyst that ignites the
reaction. A Gallup Poll suggests Americans think the Internet shares
almost as much blame for the Littleton tragedy as the availability of
guns. Littleton is one piece of a mounting backlash against a
free-wheeling Web. Consider these recent events:
- - S'pore Network Becomes 1st Asian Partner For Internet2 (Asia)
The Singapore Advanced Research and Education Network (SingAREN)
became the first research network in Asia to connect to the US
Internet2 member universities on both the vBNS and Abilene networks
when Thursday it signed an MoU with the University Corporation for
Advanced Internet Development (UCAID).
- - More Computer Use in Peace Corps (US)
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Most Peace Corps volunteers still don't have a TV
or home phone on their overseas assignments, but a surprisingly
large majority now have ready access to computers and e-mail.
- - Fighting the war on the Web (Balkans)
Imagine if computers and the Internet had existed during World War
II. You would have sat in front of your computer, visited your
favorite media site, entered a chat room or forum, and conversed with
people in London living through the Battle of Britain. Or perhaps
chatted with a neutral Swiss and learned what it was like to live
surrounded by swastikas. You might even have chatted with a German.
- - Cubans Embrace Email, Warily (US/Cuba)
HAVANA -- Cuba remains a country stuck in the past in many respects,
a fact symbolized by the pictures of Havana streets teeming with
meticulously maintained American cars dating from the 1950s. But
modern technology is beginning to make inroads. Email, for example,
recently became available to significant numbers of Cubans for the
first time, although in a trickle, not a flood.
- - Coroner uses Internet to find kin of unclaimed bodies (US)
SAN BERNARDINO, Calif. (AP) -- The San Bernardino County coroner's
office has created what it says is the nation's first Internet
clearinghouse for information on unclaimed bodies in the morgue.
- - New Lists and Journals
* NEW: homeschool mailing list
* Workfare-Fight Mailing List
* NEW : Smoker's Revolt!
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
- -------------------------------
------------------------------
End of Netizens-Digest V1 #300
******************************
