Re: NSI SAYS FCC SHOULD ASSUME INTERNET REGISTRATION FUNCTIONS
On Mon, 21 Apr 1997, Charles R. Hoynowski wrote: If not interested in IAHC/eDNS/etc - hit d now. If I was NSI I would be doing exactly the same thing. No better way to slow things down then to punt it into the US govt arena. This will give NSI monopoly control until the US govt completes its impact papers and congressional hearings and appoints some committees to review the whole matter. All the while, NSI keeps being a monopoly.
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)
_/_/_/_/ _/_/_/_/ _/_/ _/ _/ Charles R. Hoynowski, Net Admin _/ _/_/ _/ _/ _/_/ Etak, Inc., 1430 O'Brien Drive, _/_/_/ _/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/ Menlo Park, CA 94025 _/ _/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ Voice:415-617-4458 Fax:617-0161 _/_/_/_/ _/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ Email: charles@etak.com
Hank Nussbacher IAHC member [the views expressed above belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the other IAHC members]
If not interested in IAHC/eDNS/etc - hit d now... Hank Nussbacher (IAHC member) wrote:
On Mon, 21 Apr 1997, Charles R. Hoynowski wrote:
If I was NSI I would be doing exactly the same thing. No better way to slow things down then to punt it into the US govt arena. This will give NSI monopoly control until the US govt completes its impact papers and congressional hearings and appoints some committees to review the whole matter. All the while, NSI keeps being a monopoly.
Does this stop IAHC from moving forward? How is IAHC planning to respond, or is this just a wait and see proposition to see if the Federal Government steps in? Mike Gaddis Savvis Communications
Mike Gaddis writes:
Does this stop IAHC from moving forward? How is IAHC planning to respond, or is this just a wait and see proposition to see if the Federal Government steps in?
It delays nothing. The MoU was already signed, and the whole thing is moving forward now, regardless. The whole thing is, in fact, no longer in the IAHC's hands, and the IAHC effectively ceases to exist soon. Perry Speaking personally and not in an official capacity
participants (3)
-
Hank Nussbacher
-
mikeg@savvis.com
-
Perry E. Metzger