NEWDOM: Re: offtopic for NANOG - do not read

Sat Apr 26 16:49:50 UTC 1997

At 01:46 PM 04/26/97 -0500, Karl Denninger wrote:

>On Fri, Apr 25, 1997 at 11:16:39PM -0700, Paul A Vixie wrote:

>> > There's really no reason any of us should be worried about NSI and the
>> > IAHC competing for domain name registries. But NSI is also pushing for
>> > control over the root domain (.) and if things get too heated up over
that
>> > dispute we really could see a partition of the Internet at the DNS level.
>> 
>> This is not a concern.  The DNS software vendors, and the root servers, all
>> follow the IANA.  When IANA says "go", we go.  If NSI says "go somewhere
else"
>> then they become irrelevant, and they become a travesty, and their
gravestone
>> becomes another mile marker on the Internet's road to glory.
>> 
>> This means "." moves to IANA-operated servers as soon as IANA says so.
>> 
>> This means "COM" moves to IANA-approved servers as soon as IANA says so.
>> 
>> This means NSI had best fire all of its lawyers and maybe its
President/CEO.
>> 
>> Internet B-I-G, NSI "little".
>> 
>> The DNS namespace is a public trust, not a corporate asset.  "Get over it."

[ad hominem attack deleted]

>I'd like you to point out the major corporations and public universities who
>will do this.  I'd also like you to immediately return that nice root server
>that NSI has paid for in part or whole, if you really believe this.

NSI has never paid for anything.  NSI has doled out money collected by it
from NSF and from domain name owners.  NSF (i.e. the US taxpayers) and the
COM, NET etc. domain name owners have paid for whatever it is you think NSI
has paid for.

>Anyone trying to take "COM" and point it somewhere else will find that they
>have created a class-action lawsuit with 1,000,000 plaintiffs -- all the
>people who you instantly disconnect that have COM domains.

Wrong.  Nothing is going to get disconnected at such time as the roots get
redirected to NSI's successor.  That successor will have available to it
the COM (and NET, etc.) database and there will be no interruption in service.

Someone is going to be the successor to NSI in administering COM when NSI's
contract runs out.  Whoever that is, NSI is obligated to hand over the
database to them.  NSI was granted a five-year contract with a known
expiration date.  NSI knew that when it signed the contract.  Someone was
administering COM before NSI's contract began, and whoever that was, they
handed over the COM database to NSI when that contract began.  Someone will
be administering COM after NSI's contract ends, and NSI will (indeed, must)
hand over the database to that successor.  

>Anyone trying to STEAL NSI's COM zone (to appropriate it as their own) will 
>likely find themselves on the wrong end of a monstrous lawsuit, not to 
>mention potential felony theft charges.

NSI doesn't own that.  It is owned by its authors, namely the domain name
owners who filled in their domain name registration and update templates.

[second ad hominem attack deleted]