Keep the agencies of the United States government out of this. This sounds like NSI is trying to wiggle out of participation in CORE. NSI does not like a solution that provides no guarantee that NSI will be one of the new registries. This is Washington politics - SNAFU and FUD. Operators, read the documentation and decide for yourself. http://www.iahc.org/ The IETF COREdb working group is defining a technical solution to "too much bureaucracy." Who thinks the FCC can be less burocratic than a shared database? Do I see any hands? If you agree with the IAHC solution then show your support and advocate that your company sign the MoU. --- On Mon, 21 Apr 1997 23:50:18 -0700 "Charles R. Hoynowski" <charles@etak.com> wrote:
NSI SAYS FCC SHOULD ASSUME INTERNET REGISTRATION FUNCTIONS Network Solutions Inc., which currently registers all top-level domain names under contract to the National Science Foundation, has suggested that the Federal Communications Commission temporarily assume that function until an international legal authority can be created to manage the system. The transition period would allow for public comment on the plan in order to incorporate any new processes or structures deemed necessary. The plan is in contrast to an earlier proposal announced by the Internet International Ad Hoc Commission to create seven new shard generic top-level domains to be administered by 28 new registrars. NSI's president says the IAHC plan risks Internet instability, creates "too much bureaucracy," and will contribute to increased domain name legal disputes. (BNA Daily Report for Executives 16 Apr 97)
---------------End of Original Message----------------- -- From: Joseph T. Klein, Titania Corporation http://www.titania.net E-mail: jtk@titania.net Sent: 10:07:06 CST/CDT 04/22/97 If the Internet stumbles, it will not be because we lack for technology, vision, or motivation. It will be because we cannot set a direction and march collectively into the future. -- http://info.isoc.org/internet-history/#Future