Re: DNS: defining "official" domains

Re: DNS: defining "official" domains

From: Adam Todd <at§ah.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 13:00:57 +1000
>>3.  What RSC is run by a single individual?  None to my knowledge?
>>
>
>Who else, specifically, runs your RSC along with you, Adam? Names, email
>addresses, bio's please. 

You have to be kidding.  What so you can harass them also?  Gosh anyone
would think I was a fool.

I think you'll need to send me a signed NDA before I discussed anything in
a public forum about other members.  I'm more than happy to, and I
encourage members to build relationships, but I'm not going to fling
contact details into the air so people like Rick and so on can harass them
as they do me.

Sorry.  No.  

If the harassment drops off, i'll be more than willing to make the data
public as I'd much rather prefer it was.  But I'm not going to allow ANYONE
who I take any form of responsibility for, to be harassed.

If you can't understand that, you're less of a person than I thought.

>>4.  RSC's do not add TLDs on a whim without consultation with their members.
>
>Who did you consult with before creating .POKEY in your private universe?

Mr. Pokey Jnr, himself, two other RSCs, my business assosiates, my business
partner, several of the AURSC members.

Everyone seemed pretty pleased withthe idea.

>Who specifically? Or was it just you, on a whim, without consultation?

Specifically?  SO you can harasse them.  Sorry.  No.  I use to have
corporate refereances on my web pages.  I've removed them because I got
omplaints they were being harassed.  I'm not going to subject anyone to
that.  

The same reason I ask people to support me in private, not public.  At
least for now.  Eventually when you wankers get your brains screwed on and
stop calling everyone you don't agree with names (just like I have, because
I'm sure you now understand me and I'm not speaking over your head) then
maybe without harassment a far more open discussion can be taken.

Certainly you and your cohorts have shown that my opinion and those of
others concerned that DISAGREE with ADNA and your many processes don't
warrant a fair hearing.  You have CREATED a new list and left us off. 

When YOU OPEN your list - I'll open mine.

Until then.  You can join the AURSC Discussion list.

>Looking at your web site, you're actually proud of having created .POKEY!
>Good grief!

Yes, rather :)  It was a bit of a coupe actually.  Another RSC whinned
terribly that I'd come up with the idea first.  But they supported it.
Being that I lodged the first claim.

Gosh you guys in here are really a long way behind aren't you.  Talking
about .POKEY 4 mnths after it's all happened.

>>Firstly your claim of 99% is really way off mark.  You've ot no evidence to
>>suggest such, but I have evidence to suggest a higher percentage actually
>>do use Alternatives.
>
>Show us your conclusive evidence then. Put up or shut up. 

Sorry, the material is commercial in confidence.  I don't trust you, so I'm
not providing the infromation.  Send me a Letter of Credit for $10,000 and
an NDA stating you won't disclose the information to anyone for five years
and I'll personally fly down and bring it with me.

You put up or Shut up.

>>Now the IRSC is recognised also, it simply adds more weight.
>
>Recognised by precisely whom? Where is that recognition documented
>publically?  What exactly do you mean by the word "recognition"?

Lets see.  Last week, AHNET and AURSC made lead in a congressional hearing,
NSI recognise it's operation.  

Hell why am I even bothering to justify any of this.

It's commercial.  I don't have to justify anything to anyone who is only
preparing to harass the operation.

>>Your no longer providing full internet access.  You are in fact censoring
>>the access the user has to suite your own political motivations.
>>
>>Shame really.
>
>No, we are just being rational.

That I doubt.

>I don't overlay other non-official root
>servers into my customers' namespace either because they appreciate
>predictable outcomes from their DNS queries.

So you are now claiming that mby using AURSC you will obtain UNPREDICTABLE
OUTCOMES.

That's a pretty strong statement. I'll pass that to my attorney and see
what he has to say.  Making a claim against a "product" you have not used,
or tested, is a pretty serious offence under the Trade Practices Act.

>What makes yours so special? You aren't unique, you aren't even original. 

Makes my what so special?

>>All servers visible on the public internet are for use by the public.  And
>>Significant numbers are using alternatives, you just don't want to believe
>it.
>
>No, I want you to prove your point with hard evidence, or stop making the
>claims.

So you are prepared to make claims without any kind of testing or technical
evidence.  Ouch.  I hope you have a good budget.  

>>And a noun is spelt with a capital letter.
>
>You, of all people, are criticising the writing style of others? You, the

No, I just sent you a correction.  People take offence to the name being
spelt with a lower case letter.

>one that is ledgendary for mis-spellings and for refusing to care about
>them? This pot sure is calling the kettle black, now isn't it, Adam? 

Nope. I haven't in any fashion corrected any other error you have made, nor
have I commented on any.

>>Simon, I use to have a lot of respect for you, but now I see you're like
>>many of the twonks who just wish to badger and mislead.
>
>That's fine - now our opinions about each other are identical. I'd already
>formed that opinion about you. 

I'd hoped not to have formed the opinion, but I suppose it makes the nest
step easier and I'll feel far less guilty.

>>A single individual?  I don't know of any Root Server Confederation that is
>>a single individual.  Are you - yet again - trying to mislead people?
>
>Who, precisely, runs AURSC along with you? Noone else ever posts to this
>list claiming that they do. Who specifically, Adam? Or are they a secret?

No wonder.  Considering most people can't cope with a basic volume of
email, you expect me to allow others to endure what I endure?

You guys gang up on me 20 to 1 and I cope quite well.  

None of you have EVER tried to suggestions I make to allow you to TRY for
yourself.  You just badger and hinder and make false claims - endlessly.
Asking the same questions, to which I provide the same replies, constantly
expanding them.

You think that by having 20 of you independantly hound me, I'll weaken,
loose pace with the activites and go away.

<sigh>  You really don't know me do you.  

You all hoped I'd give up and go away, but it hasn't happened.  No matter
how hard you try, you can't get rid of me, because, fortunately, the truth
always bounced back when you least expect it.

>What is the management structure of the resulting set of people?

Fairly simple. Everyone has a vote.  I have a veto if I feel things really
aren't right allowing me to hold the current issue and star fresh debate.
Bit like Parliment really.

In general I don't vote at all, because I tend to let people guide
themselves by majority. By abstaining, I'm not causing an influence to
those who might hold my opinion above their own.

It's amazing watching a community group all look at you when a vote is
called, wondering if they should vote the same way.  I just sit silent and
let them all work it out for themselves.

>How did that management structure approve ".POKEY"?

In the same way it approves any other TLD.

1.  Applicant submits request.

2.  I assess the initial application for merit.

3.  A policy is requested if not already provided.

4.  I assess the policy.  Suggest adjustments and improvements if required.

5.  I submit the application and Policy to the members via a private mail
list.

6.  Members comment over a 7 - 14 day period.

7.  After that period, the decision to accept the application will be made.

8.  If I think the membership is wrong, I'll call for a discussion on why
    they feel the TLD should be entered.  I might just do this for the hell
    of it too, just to see if people are on their toes.

9.  The data is loaded.

10. The TLD is activated.

Simple.

Any policy changes need to be submitted to AURSC by the TLD administrator
to ensure the policy is still in line with AURSC policies.

>>I haven't come across a single individual in that position yet.  Certainly
>>no TLD's have been created as a joke or on a whim.
>
>Not even .POKEY?

Certainly not a joke.  It was taken VERY VERY seriously.  And there was no
whim about it either.  four days of careful deliberation went into the
concept first.

I know you and many of the others find it very hard to cope with me.  I
know I think hundreds of times faster than most other people, I know my IQ
is very high, I try to hide that by allowing subtle suggestions and
direction rather than forced decision.  I know I'm almost always (99% of
the time) very correct or close enough not to consider my judgement to be
wrong.

Most people find it hard to cope with that.  I can't help it if I was
labeled a genius and people tried to hid that from me - till it was too late.

>>Yes it is.  Aren't you just glad AURSC has more than 4 people responsible
>>for it.
>
>And the other three are? 

NDA please.



THE DOMAIN NAME HANDBOOK                   http://www.domainhandbook.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The advice offered in this email is not considered professional advice,
or it would be accompanied by an invoice. No permission is granted for 
republication of comments, without written consent.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Business Development, Technology Domain Registration and Network Advisory
Telstra Convey Member (not employee)	  AURSC    http://www.aursc.ah.net
Adam Todd                                 Personal http://adamtodd.ah.net  
at&#167;aus  or  at@ah.net				   http://adam.says.sheesh
Phone +61 2 9729 0565                     Network  http://www.ah.net
AU Internet News  		http://www.ah.net/lists/lwgate/INTERNET/
AU Internet User Mail List	http://www.ah.net/lists/lwgate/OZ-USER/
INTERNATIONAL ROOT SERVER CONFEDERATION MEMBER     http://www.i.rsc
Received on Sat Jun 20 1998 - 14:07:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Thu Oct 02 2014 - 04:00:13 UTC