Shutdown of lists on May 30th at 12:01 AM
Karl Denninger
karl at mcs.net
Thu May 29 16:32:49 UTC 1997
On Thu, May 29, 1997 at 10:44:28AM -0400, Philip J. Nesser II wrote:
> Vince Wolodkin supposedly said:
> >
> > Paul A Vixie wrote:
> > >
> > > > P.S. Keep in mind that a Root Name Server Confederation is
> > > > a collection of Root Name Servers. The new ISI/NSI confederation
> > > > that is being built just moved one of its nameservers to the
> > > > control of RIPE and it is located in London, England.
> > >
> > > fiction.
> > >
> > > there are some root name servers.
> > >
> > > then there are some pirates who are trying to coin the "confederation" term.
> >
> > Mr Vixie,
> >
> > I realize your exasperation with certain elements that have arisen in
> > this "new age" of the internet. Many of them ARE in it for the money.
> > Of course, you realize, that this was bound to happen. Any successful
> > non-profit venture will ultimately have people trying to make money off
> > of it. It's not illegal, though piracy is.
> >
> > While you disagree with the "confederation" ideas that Mr. Fleming
> > espouses, calling he and others pirates is rather ridiculous. If you
> > were involved in an IETF proceeding and someone presented an alternate
> > idea, would you call them pirates?
> >
>
> Paul can certainly speak for himself, but I think the issue that most
> people (myself included) have is that these people refuse to work within
> the IETF process. If they want to change things and follow the procedure
> that everyone else has used for years then great, let them try and convince
> people of the validity of their ideas.
>
> If, on the other hand, they refuse to work within the well established
> system and go off into a corner and make grand declarations and try and
> fracture the "rough consensus" model that has kept the net operating for
> years, then they are indeed pirates. I would like to point out that going
> through the IETF process does not mean your ideas will be accepted. More
> ideas and plans are rejected than are accepted.
The IAHC was not done within the IETF process. There is no RFC which was
promoted to either a BCP or Internet Standard defining their work.
That was ENTIRELY a private decision and done outside of the IETF process.
Those who live in glass houses....
> ---> Phil
--
--
Karl Denninger (karl at MCS.Net)| MCSNet - The Finest Internet Connectivity
http://www.mcs.net/~karl | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service
| 99 Analog numbers, 77 ISDN, http://www.mcs.net/
Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| NOW Serving 56kbps DIGITAL on our analog lines!
Fax: [+1 312 803-4929] | 2 FULL DS-3 Internet links; 400Mbps B/W Internal
More information about the NANOG
mailing list