ICANN Draws Fire Over Proposed Charges

bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com
Mon Jul 5 18:15:24 UTC 1999

> On Mon, 5 Jul 1999 bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB19990705S0003
> > > 
> > > I hope that the root servers are not turned over to this ICANN
> > > group. I believe this to be a disaster in waiting and will not remedy
> > > the problem as it exists.
> > > 
> > > Henry
> > 
> > 	As I understand it, the root servers will stay put, 
> > where they are and operated by the current group of operators.
> That is not entirely true. 

	I'd be interested in your thoughts on why you think 
	that there will be a change in the root server
	operators or placement of servers.  As an operator
	I've been paying attention to this and think I understand
	whats going on.

> > Methinks the reporter here has a serious misunderstanding of
> > the issues. As to the "problem that exists", I can only hope that
> > you are right and we only have a single "problem".
> I didn't see the reporter injecting commentary in the article, instead
> sticking to objective facts and quotations, so I am curious as to why you
> believe they have a "serious misunderstanding" of the issues.

	mixing a proposed domain registration fee and coordination of
	root servers seem to be orthaginal issues. While the
	"objective facts and quotations" may be accurate, they
	may not have any relevence to each other. Looks a lot
	like a hash to me... 

> /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
> Patrick Greenwell                Telocity              http://www.telocity.com
> (408) 863-6617 v	          (tinc)               (408) 777-1451 f
>                  "This is our time. It will not come again."
> \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/


More information about the NANOG mailing list