Re: Network Solutions on TV
At 10:03 11/16/98 -0800, you wrote:
This actually raises an operational concern. A little traceroute will show you that www.networksolutions.com and the worldnic stuff are down the same pipes as the internic.net stuff. With the DNS problems of the past few days, one has to ask, would "internic" activities have worked just fine if Network Solutions had not been using some {small,large} amount of the bandwidth for their other commercial activities.
Not that I hold out any hope of the two activities using separate facilities, but it would be nice.
Such seperation is mandated by the latest Amendment to the Cooperative Agreement between the U.S. Government and NSI. However it doesn't have to occur for several months still.
I'm afraid I can't find that provision in any amendment to the Cooperative Agreement as posted at http://rs.internic.net/nsf/agreement/. However, Amendment 11 (7 Oct 98) is interesting because it mandates that the specifications and milestones for the Shared Registry System be given to the USG by 1 Nov 98 and that all the data accrued by NSI in it's registration process be turned over to the USG by 7 Nov 98. Have these provisions been effected? Has the SRS been planned out yet? NSI? Spammers should be investigated by Ken Starr! Dean Robb PC-EASY computer services (757) 495-EASY [3279]
On Mon, 16 Nov 1998, Dean Robb wrote:
Such seperation is mandated by the latest Amendment to the Cooperative Agreement between the U.S. Government and NSI. However it doesn't have to occur for several months still.
I'm afraid I can't find that provision in any amendment to the Cooperative Agreement as posted at http://rs.internic.net/nsf/agreement/.
From: http://rs.internic.net/nsf/agreement/amendment11.html Separation of Registry/Registrar Services: Following the Phase 1 deployment of the Shared Registration System, NSI shall make a certification to the USG every six months designed to demonstrate by means of objective criteria, which shall be agreed upon between USG and NSI, that NSI is providing all licensed Accredited Registrars with equal access to its registry services. NSI also will by February 1, 1999, employ appropriate safeguards, approved by the USG, to ensure that revenues and assets of the registry are not utilized to financially advantage NSI's registrar activities to the detriment of other registrars. /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ Patrick Greenwell (800) 299-1288 v CTO (925) 377-1212 v NameSecure (925) 377-1414 f Coming to the ISPF-II? The Forum for ISPs by ISPs http://www.ispf.com \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
At 18:46 11/16/98 -0800, you wrote:
On Mon, 16 Nov 1998, Dean Robb wrote:
Such seperation is mandated by the latest Amendment to the Cooperative Agreement between the U.S. Government and NSI. However it doesn't have to occur for several months still.
I'm afraid I can't find that provision in any amendment to the Cooperative Agreement as posted at http://rs.internic.net/nsf/agreement/.
From: http://rs.internic.net/nsf/agreement/amendment11.html
Separation of Registry/Registrar Services:
Following the Phase 1 deployment of the Shared Registration System, NSI shall make a certification to the USG every six months designed to demonstrate by means of objective criteria, which shall be agreed upon between USG and NSI, that NSI is providing all licensed Accredited Registrars with equal access to its registry services. NSI also will by February 1, 1999, employ appropriate safeguards, approved by the USG, to ensure that revenues and assets of the registry are not utilized to financially advantage NSI's registrar activities to the detriment of other registrars.
I read this as a requirement that NSI not lock any alternative registrars out, nor can they use the registry (or it's database) for unfair advantage. I don't see how this equates to a requirement that WorldNIC, InterNIC and NSI data flow through different pipes...which was the point made by the original poster. Spammers should be investigated by Ken Starr! Dean Robb PC-EASY computer services (757) 495-EASY [3279]
On Mon, 16 Nov 1998, Dean Robb wrote:
Separation of Registry/Registrar Services:
Following the Phase 1 deployment of the Shared Registration System, NSI shall make a certification to the USG every six months designed to demonstrate by means of objective criteria, which shall be agreed upon between USG and NSI, that NSI is providing all licensed Accredited Registrars with equal access to its registry services. NSI also will by February 1, 1999, employ appropriate safeguards, approved by the USG, to ensure that revenues and assets of the registry are not utilized to financially advantage NSI's registrar activities to the detriment of other registrars.
I read this as a requirement that NSI not lock any alternative registrars out, nor can they use the registry (or it's database) for unfair advantage.
I had a discussion about this with Ira Magaziner, and he assured me that NSIs registry would have to be divested of the registrar functions under this agreement. I think the phrase " ... assests of the registry not be utilized ... " addresses your concern (and mine.) Such assests would seem to me to include office space, connectivity, etc. /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ Patrick Greenwell (800) 299-1288 v CTO (925) 377-1212 v NameSecure (925) 377-1414 f Coming to the ISPF-II? The Forum for ISPs by ISPs http://www.ispf.com \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
participants (2)
-
Dean Robb -
Patrick Greenwell