ICANN Public Forum Real-Time Discussion Log June 3, 2001 - Stockholm, Sweden

Nickname - Message
<BenEdelman> (Sat, June 02, 2001 at 12:51) Good morning, folks.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:14) Hi Rebecca. How's the schedule? On time?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:18) hi
<Dassa> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:20) Hi
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:24) Hi all
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:24) Ben - have you had any luck with Network improvements since yesterday?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:24) hi Leah
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:25) When will we be able to get the feed? Anyone know?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:25) I keep hitting "refresh"... but nothing yet
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:28) brb
<Dassa> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:30) Cutting it fine if the meeting is on time
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:31) yesterday they were 10 - 15 minutes late
<Dassa> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:33) Looks like a repeat then.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:35) the link just went up!
<Dassa> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:35) Yep :)
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:36) Webcast is going now
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:38) Hi
<NobuoSakiyama> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:39) Hi
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:39) Hi
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:39) The Author speaks
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:40) Nice mention for ICANNWatch :)
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:41) recognition
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:42) a new constituency ripe for co-option by ICANN-- the ICANN
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:42) hi Gary
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:43) Scrutiniser SO
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:43) hey
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:44) How much does he earn? (over $200 K?)
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:45) The staff salaries are ridiculous!
<RebeccaNesson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:45) Stuart Lynn's president report is linked off the agenda for this meeting and is available at <http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/stockholm/archive/lynn-presreport.html>
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:45) Who else do you think had drafting input to his alt root position paper?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:45) Joe Sims, Louis Touton and VeriSign
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:46) it was probably ghost writ by Kent Crispin
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:46) they are coming back in ??? Didn't they split yesterday ?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:47) There must be earlier drafts around-- it must have gone to some board members and other staff before posting
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:47) Why?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:47) the CCtlds will never go along with this.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:48) VeriSign agreements were signed even though 90% of the public objected
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:49) hahahhahaha ! I hope the CCtlds tell them to get stuffed
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:49) root server recognition is the only agreement required here, technical cooperation and thats it
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:50) The CCtlds are going to be a major sticking point. They aren't going to agree with any of this. Why should they pay? What does ICANN do for them?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:52) They are planning to try to get 5 CCtlds per month ?!?!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:52) It will never happen
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:52) ICANN is just one internet corporation for names-- there are several other
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:53) ICANN = Internet Corporation Against New Names
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:53) :)
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:53) internet communities/networks that can do all this much cheaper and more participatorily
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:53) absolutely right Len
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:54) What was your acronym on the public comment board again Kendall?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:54) I still don't understand why ICANN needs 3.3 million dollars to do this job
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:54) ICANN = Internet Corruption Ad Nauseum for NSI
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:55) If all the tlda mob and others had a budget for webcast and chat and scribe --and paid to meet like these bods-- it would be fantastically productive
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:56) That is the cheap part Len.. it's the Pres. and Vice Pres. salary that costs so much
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:56) Yes, NSA, ask Esther or Vint or Lynn about the short history from USG mil to CISA to SAIC to NSI to Verisigne-- no ownder they cant let go (echelon ring a bell?)
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:57) correction NSA should have been NSI, and ownder whould be wonder
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:58) does anyone have the URL for the RIR agreements?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:58) the veep speaks
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:58) get ready for some Toutonology
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:59) 1+1 = 3
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:59) Ben, Rebecca, the scribe links have a trailing ] which gets included (on mine anyway) leading to error 404s
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 02:59) Whenever the bylaws get in the way, ICANN just changes them! No problem!
<RebeccaNesson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:00) Louis Touton's Vice President's report is linked off the agenda for this meeting and is available at <http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/stockholm/archive/touton-vpreport.html>
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:01) Rebecca, your just posted link here has the same problem, a trailing > incl. in link
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:01) Tim Berners-Lee is on the panel
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:02) the semantic ICANN?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:02) verisign agreements were completed agains the will of the people
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:02) the machine-readable ICANN
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:03) hello all
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:03) No one but VeriSign and ICANN agreed to the agreement. Go read the forum. Everyone else was totally against the VeriSign agreement
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:03) welcome Sotiris you were in fine form yesterday
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:03) hi Sotiris
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:03) Hi Kendall
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:03) have i missed much aside from Toutonology?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:03) the President spoke...
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:03) thanks Len.. lrt's see what happens today! :-)
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:03) the Great Author
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:03) let's
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:04) Deborah, Hi!
<Deborah> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:04) Hello
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:04) hello Leah
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:04) Nobuo hello
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:04) Everyone is STILL against the VeriSign agreements (except Louis)
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:04) I wonder how much VeriSign stock he got in exchange for the deal?
<lextext> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:05) The video looks better today.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:05) everyone, Deborah is a new addition to the club.. she's a friend of mine who's fallen victim to my outreach efforts!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:05) hi Deborah...welcome
<Deborah> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:05) Hello Kendall, thank you
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:05) are they going to be taking comments this time round?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:05) The rest of the world is so lucky that all these clever americans are showing us how to do things, they are so kind and concerned for our wellbeing
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:05) hi James.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:05) yes... it's public comment day
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:06) hi
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:06) so why is Louis speaking?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:06) hi James
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:06) has anyone submitted any questions/comments?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:06) why were esther and vint filibustering precious time away with waffle yesterday?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:06) I will submit my question from yesterday, again.. see what happens.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:07) what about the RealNmaes dude!! what the hell was that?!?!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:07) RealNames
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:07) do it... the agenda says "Q&A/discussion" in about 3 places and the last hour is "open mic"
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:07) ok, I'm submitting the following question:
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:08) He wasted some good time on a tirade
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:08) Considering the amount of money generated and exchanged within the domain name market, will the ontological status of domain names be legally established in the near future? Are domain names property or not? If so, what kind of property, and whose?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:08) but who is the chairman gatekeeping Q&A
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:08) good question
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:08) Ben or Rebecca... will there be public questions from this chat room?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:08) done
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:09) tld recognition agreements is a quick implementation option
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:09) in other words "We moved forward with out theft of .BIZ"
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:09) our theft that is...
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:09) e.g. ICANN agrees to recognise .humanrights and vice versa all cooperative like
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:10) only under verisign control
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:10) and only if VeriSign makes all the money
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:10) ah the old USGmil/SAIC/NSI/Verisign string
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:10) Verisign, afilias, and neulevel
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:10) the unholy trinity?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:10) Len, are you in OZ?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:11) CIA is hidden in that string too of course
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:11) No, Stockholm like you
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:11) hehe
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:11) physically
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:11) are you in Stockholm Sotiris?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:12) only virtually, Ken.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:12) Muahahahahhaha !
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:12) Kendall, it's time for another cartoon on ICANNstage..
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:12) I'm working on it.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:12) good.
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:12) have you seen the Masters of the Univers site or whatever it is called linking off the public comment posts?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:13) no, what's the link?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:13) freidrich ?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:13) landrush!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:13) special programs.. designed.. fair... schemes
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:13) no .. hang on brb
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:13) listen to Louis go!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:14) Leah, i can't believe the US Gov is allowing them to railroad you out of business
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:14) Deborah, Leah runs the original .BIZ registry..
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:14) go to Public Comments, alt root forum (called /unique-root ha!) and look for the only posts from someone like Masters of the Universe-- come back with the url, go
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:14) Sotiris, I'm not at all surprised, but who said it would make us go out of business?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:14) Here's the URL http://www.geocities.com/MastersofCorruption
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:15) well, with the colliders in place, will you not be segrgated from the a-root?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:15) by whom, sotiris? We have never been IN the USG root
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:16) will your .biz TLD resolve in the same browser as the neuLevel .biz?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:16) If other roots want to carry the ICANN collider, they have the right to do so, but will have the reputation of carrying colliders
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:17) It's not the browser, it's the root you resolve
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:17) yes, but it ends up in the browser
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:17) if you resolve The PacificRoot you will see our .biz. If you resolve the ICANN root you will see the Neulevel .biz
<Dassa> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:17) Have the other roots made a decision on if they will carry the ICANN .biz or not?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:18) just lost the primary feed
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:18) I had tech problems for the second session yesterday-- anything in particular to look for in the archives of yesterday afternoon?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:18) I think most will
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:19) Dassa, Some will continue to carry the original .biz. I can't tell you which ones will carry the collider
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:19) Darryl, are you in Stockholm?
<Dassa> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:19) No Sotiris.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:19) The pacificroot will carry the original. I have not spoken with all of the others and don't know if they have made their decisions. We also still don't know what commerce will do
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:20) Is anyone here actually sitting in the venue (apart from Ben and Rebecca, who are busy)
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:20) Loans are a way for companies to hold ICANN hostage
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:20) Dassa, do you happen to have the URL for the RIR agreements?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:20) Leah, supposing I've changed my DNS settings and I'm resolving both roots currently, yours and ICANN's .com, .net, .org... will I continue to resolve your root, or will the colliders overide it?
<Dassa> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:20) Sorry, no Leah
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:21) Sotiris, I don't know how you are resolving both roots
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:22) If you resolve thePacificRoot (ARNI does not run a root) you will see .com/net/org and all the cctlds anyway. The only collider is .biz at the moment
<AmandaMoger> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:22) I am running the cameras in the meeting.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:22) well, I am not resolving both roots.. there's really only one root with branchings, yours is one possible branch.. will i continue to see your domains when the neulevel .biz goes live?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:23) Welcome back Kendall
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:23) thanks.. I was having some problems so I reconnected
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:23) any highlights and must-sees from yesterday afternoon sesh?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:23) If you resolve the PacificRoot, you will see our.biz. That is all I can tell you. I'm not that wonderful with multibind
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:24) I see.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:24) I believe, Sotiris, that we will also have a plug in available and other things are in the planning stage
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:24) so, ultimately we're looking at who will fall in line with the ICANN agenda...
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:24) ala New Net?
<Dassa> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:25) Interesting the NC decided the issue of other roots was outside the scope for the DNSO yesterday.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:25) I saw that darryl..
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:25) wow... I misssed that. I'll check the archive
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:25) that has been the party line for awhile in the GA list
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:26) Amanda, is it possible to mix in all cameras rather than just the fixed podium feed on the vido/scribe channel?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:26) lost the feed again
<Dassa> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:27) Leah, re RIR - http://www.icann.org/stockholm/emerging-rir-topic.htm
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:27) Yeah, Kendall. They first voted to discuss it. Then they took a five minute coffee break and reversed it. Tacky
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:27) when are we going to get to the public comment segment, Ben?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:28) Leah, got a rough time for the coffebreak reversal yesterday?
<RebeccaNesson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:28) Sotiris, you can take a look at the agenda, available at <http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/stockholm/archive/agenda-pf-060301.html> to get an idea of when the board will be taking public comments.
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:29) ah but which ones?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:29) does "Q&A/discussion" mean public comments?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:29) Len, I'm not really certain. I was a zombie by then. It seems like it might have been around two hours into the NC meeting
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:30) REBECCA -- does "Q&A/discussion" mean public comments?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:30) Dassa, that is the emerging RIR's. There is an agreement that has been proposed for current RIR's
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:31) brb
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:31) Vint! the epicure
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:31) This is what burns up time... stupid jokes by Board Members
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:31) no kidding! pardon the pun..
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:32) Sotiris is fully awake now and getting witty
<RebeccaNesson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:32) Kendall, I am not sure whether Q&A/discussion means board comment or public comment.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:32) Len, i'm struggling to stay awake here mate.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:33) they can come to my house
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:33) How much would it cost to run an always-on 24/7 webcast where the venue is a virtual
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:33) meeting point
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:34) Then the non-ICANN internet groups can provide continuous forum and consensus creation on an ongoing basis
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:34) without leaving home
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:34) If they come to Canada, I'll be more than happy to show Vint around..
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:35) ;-)
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:35) or the office (or the home-office)
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:35) BEN or REBECCA -- today's session is called the "Public Forum". But, if "Q&A/discussion" does not mean public comments than there is only 1 hr for "open mic" at the very end! When do we get to the "Public" portion ??
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:35) good question kendall, post it.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:35) ask the board.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:36) seems ridiculous that this is being termed as Public Comment.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:36) audit committee report?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:36) is this relevant?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:36) Kendall, this appalled me in Melbourne-- I was astounded that the bulk of the time in Public Forum was taken up by dreary spirit-sapping reports adn presentations which filibustered any discusion of issues
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:37) its the ersatz performance all over again.. sigh.
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:37) public=mostlyamericanwhitemales speaking, forum=restofus listen
<RebeccaNesson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:38) Kendall, the Board and the ICANN staff are responsible for the agenda for this meeting--which is called the "Public Forum", incidentially. The agenda for this meeting has been posted on the ICANN website for quite a while.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:38) remember the NC meeting in Melbourne? "We have run out of time... I'm terribly sorry there won't be time for public comments"
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:38) shouldnt s public forum set its own agenda at the forum?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:38) ladies and gentlemen, I am currently working on a charter draft for the Individual's Constituency proposal I hope to help get off the ground, we're involved in a yahoo-groups list currently, but we're interested in any and all input from anyone who is not a member of our 100+ group.
<RebeccaNesson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:38) Jun Murai's Root Server report is linked off the agenda and is available at <http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/stockholm/archive/murai-rssac.html>
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:39) Kendall administers the yahoo-groups list, and anyone interested insubscribing can talk to him
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:39) Bottoms up forum process would start with questions from floor and on line and then set rough time allotments for discussion-- leaving reports and speches to the end if there is any time left
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:40) this is not bottom-up.. it's bottom's up! cheers!
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:40) Re: NC on alt roots, It's Item IV, about halfways down, here: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/stockholm/archive/scribe-nc-060201.html
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:41) at present, in the top down forum process, there is real pressure to only raise one short topic, which is fielded by the celebs with very polite but deadly gatekeeping by vint
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:41) Len, what's the scoop on the Australian court case against ICANN?
<Deborah> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:41) As a new observer, it seems to me that we are simply snooping.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:41) If you want to join the group Sotiris was talking about you can go here http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wg-review
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:41) there is NO FOLLOWUP DISCUSSION ALLOWED and it is actively discoruaged to get thru the reports
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:41) Deborah.. unfortunately that is mostly the case with ICANN
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:42) See also item X on my link above re: IDN, this'll blow up real good in future
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:42) Louis Touton had a great quote from Nov. 2000 - "Again you are here to observe not to participate"
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:42) Deborah, we're hoping we get the odd word in here and there..
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:42) it happens, rarely, but it has happened..
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:42) not that they've listened...
<Deborah> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:43) Keep trying Sotiris
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:43) The funny part is that ICANN claims to be "open and transparent"
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:43) but eventually, when enough of us get together and collaborate, they will have no choice but to listen
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:43) yes, a few crumbs for us powerless peons from the affluent white american males and associates
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:43) and also a "bottoms up" consensus organization
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:43) cheers!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:43) James, how are the multilinguals coming?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:44) I'm having network congestion on the secondary REAL video feed
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:44) James?
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:44) have some dispute but coming
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:45) Netsol is selling multilinguals and they don't even resolve yet.. how do you feel about that?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:46) At every public forum I have attended lately, all participants sit in a circle if possible and everyone has a right to speak-- its is interactive, keeps you awake and is more empowereing than sitting listening in homage to these knd clever podiumites
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:46) ha! podiumites!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:46) this is for their benefit - not ours. they get a nice vacation in Stockholm
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:47) so james, the testbed multilinguals... what's the deal, are they ever going to resolve or is Netsol selling pipedreams?
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:47) they will resolve
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:47) when?
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:47) but i guess deployment takes time
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:47) approx. how long would you estimate?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:48) Is anyone in the IRC present in Stockholm?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:48) I reckon a 24/7 webcast/scribe/chat with archive with a Virtual Venue would work a million times better than kind clever americans visiting foreing countries like quais-missionaries (albeit well remunerated by corporations and US government)
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:48) hard to say...anything between 2 to 6 months
<BenEdelman> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:48) I've gotten a couple questions via email about when public comments will be taken in this forum.
<BenEdelman> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:48) I thought it might be helpful to clear this up here, for everyone.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:48) ok
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:48) yet, they've been selling multinligual registrations for almost a year!
<BenEdelman> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:49) The page to look at is http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/stockholm/archive/agenda-pf-060301.html
<BenEdelman> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:49) It is my understanding that every time that page says "Q&A/discussion" ...
<BenEdelman> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:49) ... public comments will be taken from the microphone & webcast audience.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:49) for only one hour, Ben?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:49) no...
<BenEdelman> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:49) In each such comment session, comments should be restricted to the substantive topics immediately before that public comment period.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:50) there are Q&A sections throughout the day
<BenEdelman> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:50) (i.e. comments about ASO in the 11:30 comment period)
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:50) Super Karl!
<BenEdelman> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:50) There's also an Open Mic at the end of the day when comments on any subject are in order.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:50) ben would the ontological staus and definition of domain names not qulalify as relevant?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:50) Thank you Ben...
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:50) woops
<BenEdelman> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:50) All told, there will be well more than an hour of public comments, Sotiris, just as at prior meetings.
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:50) Did this Public FOrum, being the participants assembled online and off, appoint vint to chair it and decide to have endless reports with strict control over public participation?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:50) spelling.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:50) prior meetings?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:51) Ben, the public comment was done away with at the last meeting!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:51) I didn't understand the term "Q&A/discussion" in the agenda
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:51) Good question Karl!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:51) good question karl!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:51) Is that Katoh?
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:51) nope..karl
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:52) I know Karl, who's the respondent?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:52) James are you present in stockholm?
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:52) jun murai
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:52) ah, Murai,
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:52) ok
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:53) Is Joop Teernstra in Stockholm?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:53) have I mentioned that I really like Karl ?!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:53) bravo Karl!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:53) no Vint!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:53) it's not ok!
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:53) karl is quite sick of it btw...one person rebel dont make much diff
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:53) how do you like that?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:54) Toutonology 101
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:54) oh no, not Louis again.. is this public comment or the Louis Touton show?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:54) Hi Joop
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:54) Hi Ken
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:54) Joop, are you in stockholm?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:54) hi joop
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:54) Hi all
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:55) No, I did not have the time/funds
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:55) are any idnoers there?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:55) Kendall, I missed Karl's stuff about the rootzone availabiltiy. :( can you tell me what he asked?
<RebeccaNesson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:55) Paul Twomey's GAC Communique is linked off the agenda for this meeting and is available at <http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/stockholm/archive/gac-communique.html>
<CraigNg> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:55) Ben - link is not working
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:56) to make the next meeting and present an IC in accordance with the RFP of the Names Council task force :-)
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:56) ben, link down
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:56) yes Joop.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:56) He wanted to know who was going to pay for it Leah
<RebeccaNesson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:56) Which link are you having trouble with?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:56) we're all hoping to realize it.
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:56) The links on both scribe and here have a trailing ] or > that needs to be snipped
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:56) I'm still working on the draft charter..
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:57) but I'm head over heels sweet on Deborah, and i'm so distracted that it might take some time still... :-)
<Deborah> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:57) Sotiris, we have understanding once again
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:57) be patient,
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:57) it'll be worth it.
<RebeccaNesson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:58) In general, you will often not be able to follow the links directly from the irc chat simply because of IRC. The url is live and the page is linked off the agenda for this meeting. If we have a bad link on one of the webpages, please let me know.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:58) oh... hi Deb.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:58) :-)
<Deborah> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:58) stay on track Sam
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:58) yes, yes..
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:58) Karl also asked about zone transfers - he mentioned that this would come up during alt roots discussion and mentioned that they would be concerned
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:59) That is what I missed KD
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:59) when is the .eu meeting in France?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:59) I think they vote on it in July Sotiris
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 03:59) critical vote..
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:00) Then the member states have to approve it
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:00) that will be interesting.
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:00) Ah the twomey speaks, friend to america
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:00) Len, where would we be without the US?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:00) In a better world?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:01) Kendall!! you're a massachussets boy!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:01) I'm shocked.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:01) I don't run the show... I just live here.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:01) God bless America! She needs it..
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:01) Uh, Oh, better listen to "president" Twomey
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:01) thanx Joop
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:02) Just what we don't need -- Sunrise Periods
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:02) quiz time
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:02) great.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:02) which means that the corporations will swallow up any domains that mey be marketable..
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:02) Rebecca, re links: All show as having a leading '[' and trailing ']' for scribe or '<' and '>' for chat. The leading brackets aren't 'blue' clickable, the trailing ones are. This is true of all links I've seen.
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:03) quizmaster
<RebeccaNesson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:04) Gary, as I said before, it will often not be possible to follow the links directly out of the chat. The urls are given for your reference in the chat. To visit the urls, it will be easiest for you to visit the urls by following the links from the meeting agenda for this meeting.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:04) everybody and his mother's uncle will be claiming intellectual property that they really have no actual claim to.. as there has been no definition of the ontological status of Domain names..
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:04) After they discuss it "offline" the public should have time to review their work
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:04) in an ideal world, Kendall.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:04) ahead of schedule?
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:05) Rebecca, I just trim the > or ], but is that a bug?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:05) do you use mIRC Gary?
<Dassa> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:05) 30 minutes for a coffee break. Good working conditions.
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:05) I'm using the java popups
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:06) o good, public forum informal in the coffeebreak
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:06) You may consider a stand-alone program.. I have found that it performs much better
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:06) amanda, how about panning round the room now please
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:06) I'm using mIRC 5.82 and the links are clickable in Scribe and Chat
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:07) I like the clock on the screen... is that your handy work Ben?
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:07) I wouldn't be surprised, having known the mIRC author for about 12 years. :)
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:07) why not a roving camera during breaks so us online can get the full picture? just a suggestion
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:07) It is an excellent program. I highly recommend it for ICANN meetings
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:08) 26.45 to go
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:08) Attach a camera to Louis Touton!
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:08) and a wire
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:08) helmet cam
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:08) let's here what REALLY happens out in the hallway
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:08) hear that is
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:09) Breaktime humor: Today's wacky domain news: http://gator-pump.com/ hereinafter wants to be known as http://gatorpump.com/
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:10) why?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:10) they don't like DLDs? (Dash Level Domains)
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:10) Dunno, they'll lose hits on some search engines. I just monitor new submissions having to do with domains.
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:11) And at today's prices why not keep both and do a redirect?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:11) good point
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:11) What we have there is failure to grasp the concept
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:11) it's hard to get people to changee bookmarks
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:12) Anyone submit any good questions?
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:12) Right, and some search engines will be months respidering
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:12) I submitted this one: Where is the money for Public Elections or Membership At Large in the proposed budget?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:13) If we cant have a roving camera, can we have some folks on the floor come to Ben's keyboard to fill us in on the vibe and answer online queries about floor/people movements whatever
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:13) In other news singer Bobby Vinton has demanded that ICANN cease using Vinton Cerf as chairman and turn him over to the singer immediately as his name is confusingly similar.
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:13) The real time discussion needs a "runner" on the floor AS OF RIGHT
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:13) Like a side-line correspondent Len?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:14) Well, ben and revbecca and amanda are flatchat, but there must be some Observers there whou would like to sit at a keyboard and contribute (NOT MODERATE!)
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:14) Reporter: So, Vint, you just took over the Internet ... now what do you want to do? Vint: "I want to go to Disney Land"
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:15) heh heh
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:15) outer space the new fontier etc
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:16) The camera moved!
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:16) bravo amanda
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:16) Thank you Amanda
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:16) lighting is a problem
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:17) do that again one more time please
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:18) Does anyone have any opinions on the New Regional Internet Registries ?
<AmandaMoger> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:19) You're welcome.
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:20) How hard would it be to take the camera off the stand and wal around capturing live or dleayed footage?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:20) the wire could cause problems
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:20) don't want to trip anyone
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:21) Say you walked around with camera for five minutes, then rewound it, then played it back you would still have 3.40 left of theis break
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:21) untethered, pre-recorded footage?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:25) also useful as evidnece from ICANN's own records in the Coming Legal Troubles About To Engulf ICANN
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:25) evidence
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:26) what do you mean? the CCtlds? the alt roots?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:26) battery operated digital videocamera-- they sell them now you know
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:26) LOL... yes I've heard of such thing. :)
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:30) Kendall, how do you assess the influence of USGmil/CIA now in ICANN-- clearly the
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:31) results so far with ICANN are not against the USGmil/CIA interests!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:32) I haven't thought about it really. I know the US Gov't seems to "rubber stamp" anything ICANN gives them. But, I don't know much about the military or CIA involvment.
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:32) Additionally, it is clear that many ICANNites agree with the USGmil/CIA agenda.
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:33) Well, it is never spoken about but it is the most obvious Invisible Thread thru all
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:33) this ICANN inertia (like watching South Africa trying to keep apartheid
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:33) ahead of schedule?!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:33) woops
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:33) Yup, ICANN is a wholly owned subsiduary of Eschelon
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:33) but get away with just talking about how difficult it was for 20 years
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:34) It seems to me the the US military has networks and communication systems way beyond the net that we use. They have no dependence on ICANN.. but, you raise a good point.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:34) deborah, you there?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:34) Well, Gary, Echelon does exist you know. Lots of people are paid a lot of money in Virginia to work out tactics and positions on american interests
<Deborah> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:34) Yes I'm still here
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:35) The powers that be can't control all net traffic, therefore they go for controlling the gateways, one of them being ICANN
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:35) I know Eschelon exists.
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:35) Whoever controls internet addressing controls the internet, so CIA/USGmil not want to lose control or worlse let some others share control
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:36) Ya, that's the real subtext of what we're watching
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:36) ICANN is just basically the american intranet the rest of the world is allowed to use on conditions
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:36) true
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:36) What are you peple on?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:36) But there is already a China intranet and Mulinational Corporations all have huge intranets behind firewalls
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:36) Have you seen the Theregister story about Echelon's "trigger words"? http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/19347.html
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:37) And the american intranet folks are now trying to stop ordiary people particiapating on their own intranets
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:37) I'm driking cranberry juice Peter... anyone else on something good?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:37) end of rant for now
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:38) Steinlager :-)
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:38) the very orderly public forum
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:38) are we on -3:31 ?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:38) Yes Kendall, and there has been a lot on carnivore too lately
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:39) ninth cup of java for me bzzzt! Just cuz I'm stoned doesn't mean you should take me for granite :)
<RebeccaNesson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:39) Brian Moore's Protocol Supporting Organization report is linked off the agenda for this meeting and is available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/stockholm/archive/moore-pso.html
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:40) hey gary, that was funny
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:40) where did joop go?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:41) anyone going to nominate me?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:41) hehehe
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:41) You can nominate yourself!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:42) I'm not a member of the protocol Support organization
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:42) oh well
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:42) Tim Berners-Lee is always a good choice
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:42) how can I compete against Tim-Berners lee anyway?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:42) the net is his baby.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:43) how many of us can say "I create the web"
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:43) nice thing to have on your CV
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:43) no doubt
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:44) so, how many more presentations before the public comment period?
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:44) And Tim has been critical of commercial interests taking over the net. Read his book
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:44) there is one at the end of this presentation ?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:44) no.. sorry next presentation
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:44) really gary?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:44) which book?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:44) I read "weaving the web"
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:45) me too!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:45) is that the one gary?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:45) I don't recall such a discussion, but it's been a little while
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:47) Hans!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:47) here he comes!
<RebeccaNesson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:47) Hans Peter Holen's Address Supporting Organization report is linked off the agenda for this meeting and is available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/stockholm/archive/holen-aso.html
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:50) 2099?
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:50) Sorry, have forgotten name of Tims book, it's recent, and very good
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:50) Weaving the Web
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:50) I have that one.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:52) BTW, did everyone get a load of Esther Dyson's stance yesterday? it sounded like she never left the post of ICANN Chair..
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:52) He explains how and why different stakeholders can get along
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:52) http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/006251587X
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:52) Ether, er Esther, put me to sleep
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:52) yes gary, but I didn't get the sense he was hostile to big business interests..
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:53) she droned on and on but didn't say much
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:53) That's what I mean, Tim is trying to build bridges
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:53) pay attention to this RIR stuff
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:53) well, that's encouraging
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:53) yes, Leah
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:53) This is the hold on the net - much more so than names
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:55) IPv6 solves address consumption
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:55) for the next decade or two at least..
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:56) why not vint?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:56) open it up!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:56) any questions on RIR issues?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:57) no one understands it
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:57) 1/2 hour ahead = more "open mic" time ?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:57) letterman show stuff
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:59) I like YJ Park... she speaks out!
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:59) I can never understand her
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 04:59) Kendall, she was the one who turned the vote yesterday
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:01) is this the coffeebreak incident yesterday
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:02) We need an individual's constituency!
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:02) Yes. That is why the NCDNHC must stick to organizations!
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:04) you can understand her once u know her agenda
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:04) No money for At Large... but plenty for higher salaries for staff
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:04) Hi Joop - you still into this punishment eh?
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:05) Hi peter, Yes. Once I start something it takes a lot to make me stop before success is achieved.
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:05) I do believe success can be achieved.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:06) Seriously.. if you don't know someone is infringing on your TM for 3 years... you don't deserve to take someone's name
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:06) exactly
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:07) I think this is an excellent stipulation by Milton
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:07) Agree
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:07) VeriSign (NetSol) should not automatically side with big-business and pull the plug on your name until you have been PROVEN to be a squatter. (ie: innocent until proven guilty)
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:08) however, i think my registrars policy is sound with respect to panel providers.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:08) procedure should stop the moment there is a court filing also
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:08) they stipulate that the registrant has choice of juridiction
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:08) jurisdiction
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:08) Peter, you are a registrar, what do you think about Milton's proposal?
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:09) Sounds reasonable to me
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:09) which registrar peter?
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:09) May your business prosper :-)
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:09) 2day.com - we are not operational yet
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:09) good luck.
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:09) as a registrar that is :-)
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:09) of course.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:10) have you been accrdited?
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:10) Hi everyone
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:10) hi Joe
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:10) GOOD QUESTION !
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:10) Yes, have been for over 12 months
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:10) Why does it take so long to add a TLD to the root ?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:10) yes good question from Milton.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:10) why is Amadeu playing cute?
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:10) Give Louis a few beers and its easy -no?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:10) 2 minutes at the commandline should do just fine
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:11) Because it takes ICANn that long to add all their restrictions and restraint of trade
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:11) Abril is sertyting a trap for Milton
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:11) Don't get Amadeu started... he'll never stop talking
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:11) yes he is. why?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:11) Here comes the IP intrests.
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:12) He is anti-democratic, in my view
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:12) I sensed that, and the barcelona.com thing looms largely..
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:12) Sheesh!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:13) the percentage of "reverse domain hijack" are EXTREMELY low
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:13) Note the scribe note: Amadeu is concerned that individuals can't join the NCDNHC. Why: ?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:13) exactly, why?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:13) He is protecting his big-business pals
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:14) does he think Individual's require some kind of representation? or that they should be pigeon-holed in the NCDNHC?
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:14) Once they are spin into the non-comm, they have no longer a case to formn an independent (com, small biz AND noncom) constituency
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:14) Karl to the rescue!
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:14) Note that he also tried to spead the myth that the IP constituency is open to individuals
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:15) I'd like to join the IP constituency.. :)
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:15) they're trying to make the NCDNHC the catch-all constituency
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:15) Kendall: Mikki Barry tried
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:15) They would love me!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:16) ha! kendall, you and the ICANNStage cartoons
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:16) sotiris: you should subscribe to their ML and then you realize how much they are on the ropes
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:16) Good question from Karl!
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:16) how much money do these people need?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:16) yes, but yesterday, Gomes said they should approach the NC again..
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:16) too much is never enough for ICANN
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:17) 30,000
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:17) in dues
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:18) Notice how Vint is getting quite good at shutting people down and moving to the next topic?
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:18) Thats his job
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:18) he's mastered that.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:18) He's been good at it. In Melbourne he shut out Karl several times
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:18) oh no, not Swineheart!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:19) his favorit is let's "take it offline"
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:19) she's oblivious to the rest of the world around her..
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:19) Too much is taken off line
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:19) the BC is full of S...T
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:19) problem is that it never makes it back "online" again
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:19) now they're concerned with the consumers!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:20) and stability!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:20) The heart of the swine
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:20) and competition?
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:20) Like I said yesterday, the US has been remiss in UN payments for years. Should they lose voting rights?
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:20) The BC is presented by paid employees. The election process within the BC is a laugh
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:20) are they kidding, or what?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:20) "global uniqueness"!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:20) what a crock!
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:20) american business supports an american intranet--
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:21) Go get her Karl!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:21) isolationism is looming
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:21) go karl1
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:21) Go Karl!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:21) How many are there Theresa ??
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:21) Think about it sotiris. Uniqueness is a goal we all have...
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:21) there are none!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:21) she's lying.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:21) It doesn't mean a single system
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:21) I think Jefsey is the only small biz individual BC member
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:21) oh I agree leah..
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:21) yes Joop, but jefsey is not small business
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:22) He want to be the Chair of a small biz faction in the BC
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:22) who does Jefsey represent?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:22) swinheart shows the position of almost desperation that the USGmil/CIA have now-- only scare tactcs left
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:23) UTEL is his company as far as i know.. but he's ex-french naval intelligence
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:23) kendall: Jefsey represents himself and his business plan
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:23) Karl is standing up for us again! "
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:23) awwww geeeee, customers might ask why they can't see .here
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:23) I like Karls' insistence
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:23) as do i.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:24) Karl Auerbach: "voice of the people"
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:24) but vint is shooting him down, consistently.
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:24) Amadeu still trying
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:24) what's Amadeu driving at?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:24) he's transparent.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:25) here we go, the hirelings.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:25) Vint and Amadeu: "Shutup Karl, we don't like individuals remember!"
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:25) none!
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:25) Yoohoo, lets all join the IP
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:25) oh really?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:25) barf
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:25) they can be members -- but they can't vote or say anything
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:25) what a crock.. cause you can't vote!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:25) exactly
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:26) but you can give it legitimacy-- then it can be said that individuals etc
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:26) Just like the ICANN forums
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:26) Just read the American IP lawyers lobby statement about the need for an Individuals Const. and about the need for an @ large membership
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:26) yup
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:26) where is it posted Joop?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:26) oh they hate the alts
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:27) boo hoo
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:27) no kidding.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:27) consumer confidence?!?!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:27) since when do they care about consumers!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:27) They need consumers to buy things so they can protect their labels
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:27) awww
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:27) sotiris: I think you can find it through the IP constit pages
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:28) "all your marks are belong to us"
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:28) on songbird?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:28) oh please Vint.
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:28) define stability, good
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:28) yes, that's where they flock together :-)
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:28) good question karl!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:28) hahah Joop!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:28) all the songbirds..
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:28) IPC supports cctlds, is there backroom deal for them to get onside with UDRP
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:28) Thats not the Grant Forsyth we know is it Joop?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:28) who provides the technical aspects? Kent Crispin?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:28) technician testimony
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:29) naturally. and not Mueller, Froomkin, Higgs
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:29) oh please Vint!
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:29) or newnet
<MarciaLArbott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:29) omg
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:29) let the hireling try to answer!
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:29) Did Lynn footnote which tech experts advised him or he relied on?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:29) Not to put words in your mouth... but here I go anyway
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:30) Peter: Grant has not spoken yet. To me he's now an NC rep sitting there as an employee of his employer.
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:30) Yes, lynn footnoted Crispin and others
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:30) the stability arguments are a bunch of BS
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:30) GREAT KARL!
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:30) It was referred to as a technical person :-(
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:30) take it offline?!?!?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:30) take it offline again
<MarciaLArbott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:30) yep
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:30) oh boy
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:30) here we go..
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:31) he repeated this line yesterday
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:31) it's chuck Gomes and his unholy trinity
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:31) take it off line again. Just duck the issue as usual
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:31) duck the issue and let VeriSign or the lackeys speak
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:31) Deborah, can you see their haughtiness?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:32) pride before the fall..
<Deborah> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:32) I certainly can
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:32) Peter: I'd rather not give my opinion in public about personal competence. Did you see what happened to Russell Brow'n biz. (soory off-topic)
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:32) Chuck is 6 month interim chair so he'll be there in perpetuity
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:32) hahahahah
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:32) gary, you're a real wit!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:32) he will follow Hans K's fine example
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:32) well halfways :)
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:33) Amadeu is now 120 kilos?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:33) I think not
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:33) is that what he said?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:33) more like 250
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:33) Has anyone given any thought to what will happen if the USG gives complete control of the root to ICANN and removes oversight?
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:33) So verisign rep talks to affilias rep and that isn't talking to yourself? say what?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:33) a consituency with 1 member that now has 3 members, but no new charter..
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:34) what a terrible thought Leah
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:34) Think about it, though...
<MarciaLArbott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:34) it's not if, it's when
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:34) There would be no anti-trust protection...
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:34) Leah, some cctlds would go nuclear
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:34) If they removed VeriSign from the picture, removed the board squatters, and held public elections I would think about it
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:34) Higgs has a good diagram showing stability and instability -- see his post on Public Comment / alt root linking to full paper
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:34) I think the cctlds smell it coming
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:34) It would be a totally private enterprise, subject to the same laws we have to live with
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:35) and they're making their move.
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:35) which is why it won't happen
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:35) They would have to survive by contracts and no other support
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:35) exactly
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:35) and subject to all kinds of lawsuits
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:35) and be subject to anti-trust, restraint of trade, etc
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:35) offline, of course!
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:35) of course
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:35) that's right Gary
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:35) thanks for nothing Chuck
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:36) Higgs has a good diagram on internet stability and instability-- colliders being unstable
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:36) Chuck is a lackey
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:36) who's the redhead?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:36) Uh huh, the ones responsible for stability are going to break the DNS
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:36) kendall: almost everybody is, except the non-coms and the individuals
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:37) and we're not going away any time soon, eh joop?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:37) although i'm sure the lackeys wish we would.
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:37) Leah they will keep ICANN in this weird grey area where it neither has govt oversight or public pressures
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:38) Gov't wants to divest itself of the root.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:38) VeriSign doesn't want to give it up
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:38) It's a headache they don't want
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:38) Soooo, now what is going to happen to those 3 newly open NC seats ??
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:38) They won't have a choice
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:38) "protect our monopoly at all costs"
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:38) good question joop
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:39) Ken Stubbs will fill all 3 of them Joop
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:39) Peter de Blanc had maintained that the cctld's would still remain a presence in the dnso, whatever happend to peter?
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:39) If the USG gives it up they'll have to legislate a new unique grey area or eventually the points Froomkin raises in his paper will bite them
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:39) something will bite no matter what they do
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:39) whre is professor froomkin anyway?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:40) they are painting themselves into a corner
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:40) Vint can't tell her to take it offline!
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:40) 'She' is a woman :-)
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:40) and cctld rep
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:41) how could you tell? :)
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:41) my connection seems to be stuffed
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:41) vint's patience is wearing thin, but these people are the ace in the net hole
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:43) translation: CCtlds tell ICANN to "get stuffed"
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:44) Vint is kissing some butt... "please stay!"
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:45) Dont worry Vint, you will still hear from ccTLD's
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:45) Louis reads from the "Book of Touton"
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:46) Not surprisingly, the bylaws make changing the bylaws time intesive for staff and lawyers
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:47) intensive
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:47) JDRP gets an hourly fee no?
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:48) huge retainer plus huge hourly fee I imagine
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:49) But where is the individual's constituency Amadeu ?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:49) Or should we just join the IP constituency instead?
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:50) Listen Amadeu - if ccTLD's say it doesnt work for them, then thats how it is
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:50) take it offline Amadeu
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:50) LOL
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:50) Vint seems happy to hear this rant
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:51) sure... Vint has "selective hearing"
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:51) hi Patrick
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:51) This reminds me of the supposedly recused Amadeu going on for much more than 3 minutes against the union proposal at mdr2k
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:51) Hi folks
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:51) hi patrick
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:51) hi Patrick
<Dassa> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:51) Hi Patrick
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:52) Karl gets right to the point!
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:52) Wow.. . so many friends !!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:52) "how big of a chunk do you want?"
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:52) but size does matter
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:52) What's happening ?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:52) the CCtlds
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:53) HAHAHAHAHA ! ICANN can go take a flying leap!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:53) The CCtlds realize that they don't need ICANN
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:53) Never let the facts get in the way of a good story
<Dassa> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:53) That is not what they are saying.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:54) of course not
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:54) But it's true.. they don't need ICANN
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:54) this is the ersatz performance, everything else is offline.
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:54) ccTLD's may not need ICANN, but we need to be in the root (speaking for .tk .aq .pn)
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:54) If the CCtlds and the alt roots work together that could change
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:54) They want icann as long as its a net plus for them
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:55) what, keeping the americans on side?
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:55) cctlds want more money and power
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:56) CCtlds want ICANN-root listing and ICANN wants inter-national legitimacy-- do we have a deal?
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:56) ya, add it global support for wipo2 and let's shake on it
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:57) Why have the DNSO if ICANN doesn't listen to them anyway?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:57) Look at the VeriSign agreement.
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:57) done-- now get esther and vint out ther to sell it and swinehart to sell protection insurance
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:57) for show
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:57) for window dressing when they need to pretend they're bottom up
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:58) bottom up (as long as you're not an individual)
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:58) exactly
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:59) All but the IPC are under-represented, cctlds are asking for more of pie
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 05:59) All of the CCtlds are never going to go along with this. Many don't even acknowledge ICANN as an authority.
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:00) ICANN, the American Joke-- humor ICANN if that is what they want for now...
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:00) Well, cnnic is an alt model. Can you imagine Iraq wanting to take part in ICANN
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:01) Who is the "king of registrars" ?? VeriSign?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:01) Take it offline Amadeu
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:01) honestly, u don wan to go there
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:01) Check the staffing and associates of Verisign-- same front-company model as SAIC used to be for CIA business
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:03) Why doesn't Vint tell Amadeu to "take it offline" ? He has told Karl that at least 3 times - when Karl brought up very good points.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:04) Because Karl is for individuals and is also an alt root user
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:04) welcome back patrick
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:04) Hi Patrick
<PatrickC> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:04) Hi Len, Leah & all
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:05) brb
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:05) what makes ccTLD's unique is that they not only realise DNSO does not work for them, they are preared to do something about it
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:05) DNSO is too broken
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:05) an option that the rest of us don't have
<Dassa> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:05) Patrick: What is the AuDA position on ccTLD's forming an additional SO ?
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:06) They support ICANN . . .
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:06) Me as an indvidual - what can I do if I am not happy with the DNSO or ICANN? My only voice is Karl Auerbach
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:06) and will pay. Partly because they want Aus Gov support . . .
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:08) u notice karl is getting tired?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:08) Vint: "Yes it would be.." (translation: take it offline)
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:09) Karl can't get a word in edgewise, but Amadeu, Cohen, and Touton can talk all day long. I would be tired too.
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:12) "the right to pay"-- did I hear that right?
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:12) NSI no longer have 2/3 of market - thats got to be good
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:13) Depending how you slice it they have about 50% that is not good
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:13) No longer has 2/3 of the market.. but makes money from the sale of every domain name
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:15) This is what its all about. If you pay money, you get a say.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:15) which ensures that individuals will never participate
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:15) did i miss much?
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:16) Unless an indiv constituency self forms, raises funds, and gets in line with the bribes
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:16) fat chance
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:16) well, we're organizing... but I don't hink we'll be looking to fall in with the bribes.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:16) no pay - no play
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:17) size will matter
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:17) i have some "outreach" ideas
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:17) I was being halfways sarcastic with the bribe part but they will want money. This is a money making monopoly organization
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:17) ICANN has become quite fond of vacations in many places
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:17) funding, yes.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:18) i believe at $25/per head per year is a good strating membership fee..
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:18) starting
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:18) but, how long until you are big enough to be a contender?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:18) We wanted dialog with Icann and have extended that invitation many times. I don't know how many times they think they will be approached in a friendly manner
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:18) depends
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:19) could be fast, if we approach it correctly
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:19) could be real fast
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:19) .humanrights asserts the right to pay ICANN-- here is a promissory note for $500,000, now can we talk technical cooperation and mutual root recognition?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:20) Unfortunately Len .. that's how it works.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:20) yes, unfortunately
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:20) what about the public comment session!?!?!?!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:20) to VeriSign $500 K is chump-change
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:20) len, do lunch with joe sims, but you gotta know the secret handshake
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:20) do you think the BoD would discuss the alt.roots if an organization were to offer funding for the study?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:21) Would it be wthin their scope then?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:21) no Leah
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:21) they would squirm away from it
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:21) I wonder
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:21) maybe... if they got to vacation in an exotic location
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:21) ha!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:21) and then still reserved the right to simply refuse.
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:21) Satiris, backtracking here, what do you mean real fast if approach correct?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:22) the "non-commit" stance... maybe we will
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:22) How about large funding if they cooperate?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:22) Not that I would advocate that
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:23) well, if we can harvest a whois email list of individuals and small business domain registrants, we could draft a letter that would outline the situation
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:23) I'd rather see funding go other places
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:23) another tough question down the gurglar
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:23) offline again
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:23) and I'm sure if we could get 2000 initial members we could be of to a quick enough start to make a diffence
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:23) difference
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:23) Ya wtf was that about the NC hiring a policy wonk
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:24) why have the previous attempt to form an individuals constituency failed?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:24) wrong process
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:24) we must cast the net outside of the usual suspects
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:24) and no holds barred
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:24) how do you do that without money?
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:24) hi again. I lost my connections and had to shift to another machine
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:25) wb joop
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:25) Just hand over the money!
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:25) what's happening "on stage"?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:25) we need volunteers to initate the movement, but if we do it right, the volunteer period should not require more than 3-4 months
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:25) Public forum joop
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:26) DNSO is broken for this reason. You have to pay to have a voice.
<anon183> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:27) .
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:27) "take it offline"
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:28) supposed to be an open what, did vint say
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:28) New Net!
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:28) Ahha !!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:28) LOL
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:30) "Stablity of the Internet" = political control issue
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:30) how about a key light on the floor mike so we can see faces?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:31) ah another face in the dark
<AmandaMoger> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:32) I will ask about a light during the break but it will be difficult to do I think.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:32) I disagree
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:33) A distributed root does not imply a split or fragmented root
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:33) right
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:33) splitting the american root (the american intranet) is different to the internet which is already fractured by US intrante, China intranet, Multnational corps intranets-- unique namespaces and mutual recognition of root s will do it
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:33) Thanks, Amanda.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:35) So do I :).. But not a single root system run by ICANN
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:35) We need a single virtual root
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:35) with all the TLDs
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:36) Food for thought...
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:36) If ICANN had just added all the TLDS 6 years ago.. we wouldn't be dealing with this today
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:36) not ICANN but IANA
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:36) What makes the Network Admins think it will go away because Icann doesn't like it or they don't like it?
<PeterMott> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:37) I'm off to bed - goodnight from NZ
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:37) Amadeu want lunch!
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:37) do they really think the alts will disappear because they don't like answering customers' questions?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:37) nite Peter
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:37) I'm off to bed for a couple hours of sleep...
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:37) G'night peter
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:37) night
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:37) no online comments yet
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:37) nite sotiris
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:37) nite all
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:37) nite Sotiris
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:37) Good nite Sot.
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:38) any chance that they will read out further comments after the break? I didn't get read out yesterday either
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:38) were you in the GA portion or the NC portion yesterday Joop?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:38) I missed the NC... it was very late here
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:38) zzz time for me, back for the good stuff. Keep em honest
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:39) Bye Gary
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:39) the GA [portion (Esther Dyson and David Johnson
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:39) Bye Gary
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:39) Leah I havea question
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:39) kendall: I saw the NC until 3.30 a.m. here :-)
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:39) nice camerawork
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:40) I went to bed around 6am here yesterday
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:40) ouch. still got puffy eyes?
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:40) Hi David
<DavidFarrar> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:40) Hi Patrick
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:40) Hello David, you missed some stuff
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:40) yes I do Joop! I am going to take a nap...it is 6:30 am now I'll be back after the lunch beak
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:40) bye
<DavidFarrar> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:40) Hi Joop - what' happened?
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:40) It's just adjourned for lunch.
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:41) I'm not the best to ask. I lost connection for more than 1/2 hour
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:41) Usual stuff. Playing games.
<DavidFarrar> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:41) Any discussion on IDNH constituency?
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:42) What did I miss, Patrick?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:42) Joe A, what was your question?
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:42) I am familiar with the basic issues of alternate roots (not a tech though)
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:42) I missed it if there was. Talked about several issues. . .
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:42) I'm not a tech either
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:43) but I notice that there are 4 companies that say they sell .shop
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:43) including Alt Roots, ccTLDs, Budgets, funding, NCDNHC, etc.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:43) which ones?
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:43) How could that be settled?
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:43) new.net
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:43) domainisland
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:43) suncare
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:43) xs2.net
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:43) Hi Joe. That's one problem - everybody's getting in on the act now.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:44) If I am not mistaken, name.space (xs2.net) probably has the legitimate claim..
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:44) I would have to check the first use in service date...
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:44) I'm all for new ideas but I think that this could be a legitimate concern
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:44) But name.space is rather free-wheeling compared to the others.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:44) However, new.net came on the scene and decided they had the right to usurp any tLd they chose...
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:44) That makes the most sense Leah
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:45) name.space rather did the same thing, but did have about 30 that they started with in 95/96
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:45) bottom line...
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:45) New.Net floated 20 TLDs. Of those 18 were alrready claimed.
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:45) Oh gosh. They have hundreds
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:45) Name.space
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:45) TLD holders will have to get together and work out conflicts...
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:45) Most of them were, in fact worked out ...
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:45) Name.Space has 540 last time I checked. Most are unused.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:46) until ICANN deliberately selected .biz...
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:46) I do feel for you on how that happened. I think it should have been considered
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:46) because of that, others felt it okay to do the same and we have a proliferation of conflicts to work out now
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:46) I counted a bunch
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:46) I think it is important to note...
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:47) that this is not going away...
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:47) Bye all, I'll get some shuteye, so that I can be back for the open mic time (at 4:30 a.m here)
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:47) ICANN legitimised deliberate colliders-- hows that for stability and consumers
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:47) and that it is really important for all tLD holders to get together on the issue...
<joopteernstra> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:47) Patrick,, will you stay up all night?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:47) see you then joop
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:47) One "solution" is to let them fight it out in the market place. That's what you might call the "competitive approach" favoured by some.
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:48) By Joop
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:48) That includes ICANN/DoC and ALL the ccTLDs...
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:48) There is nothing technically problematic with multiple roots...
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:48) I'll be here for a while. It's 9:00 pm now.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:48) It is the collisions which cause the problem...
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:48) Leah, I understand that you have a legitimate claim.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:49) the idea of a unified rootzone is valid, but that should not be determined by any one root manager
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:49) but at some point, this would all have to be managed
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:49) why, Joe?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:49) Do you think that any single body will manage China?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:49) they will do as they please
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:49) I'm not sure
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:49) Not "why". What do you mean by "managed"?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:50) the beauty of the internet is that it is decentralized...
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:50) peer to peer and network to network...
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:50) I'm just saying that somehow there should be some sort of agreement on who owns what domains
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:50) or Tlds
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:50) it will never be controlled or managed in that sense
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:50) maybe so
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:50) no one "owns" domains...
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:50) Basicall we can co-operate or fight it out. The old story.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:50) There is, however, a right in a business priduct...
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:50) Ok, forgive the rhetoric
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:51) that does not mean, however, that there is no responsibility to the public in the operation of that tLD
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:51) or SLD
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:51) There should be standards for operation and best practices...
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:51) But I think that if I owned a business and registered a domain, I would prefer that it could be reached by the most end users
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:51) but that should be determined by ...
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:52) those who are operating them ( as a group)
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:52) It may come down to "let the buyer beware" when it comes to buying domains
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:52) I guess it is always that way
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:52) Of course, Joe, and that is why there should be a "vritual unified root" which includes all known operational TLDs
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:53) I could see that
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:53) As far as which registry you choose to register a domain in...
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:53) that would be buyers choice and there would be a choice to make based on many things...
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:53) right
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:53) service, reliability, price...
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:53) on the american intranet ((ICANN root) you can have com/net/org/cctld but on the whole internet you can have millions of namespaces
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:53) How do you choose insurance?
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:53) agreed
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:54) or clothing...
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:54) You find the best service for hte best price and do what is best for you...
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:54) Businesses fail, right?
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:54) No, I agree with that
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:54) The market determines that
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:55) If you choose a domain name from a ccTLD and that CCTLD decides to clsoe the registry... what then?
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:55) I got concerned when I saw how many differing registries were claiming the same tlds. That's all
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:55) If you register a .TV name and Tuvalu cancels their contract with Idealabs, what then?
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:55) Right. That all can happen
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:55) Joe, that is a large problem that will get even worse now
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:56) People may just have to learn the hard way.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:56) Icann has now set a precedent taht it is okay because they have their own sand box and we can't play in it...
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:56) What else is new
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:56) It will cause a large problem all over the world but for them to admit they caused it would mean backing down on their stated position
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:56) bad politics
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:57) so you will suffer, as will many others...
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:57) do you think new.net will back down?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:57) Not likely
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:57) probably not
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:57) why should they with no guidance...
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:57) Actually ICANN has deliberatel chosen to squash .biz just to set the precedent. If it works they hope to kill of the alt TLDs.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:57) ICANn is the market leader...
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:57) that infers a great responsibility for doing the right thing...
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:58) they have done the wrong thing and it will come back to bite
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:58) but, Patrick, they will never kill the alts. There is too much out and out rebellion in the world...
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:58) It may just be all part of the evolution of the Internet
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:58) I think what we will see is more new.nets with money
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:59) The problem is the lack of understanding of hte DNS and hte responsibility to the users
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:59) no conscience
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:59) FYI: we do not plan to close our registry and will be expanding all over th world soon
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 06:59) But there has to be some way to decide who runs what part.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:00) It will be an interesting year
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:00) I imagine that maybe the market will rule
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:00) what part of what?
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:00) Thats for sure Leah
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:00) each individual tld
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:00) each TLD is operated by its holder...
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:01) for instance, if you introduce a tLD, you set up a registry (or outsource it)...
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:01) It will come down to who has the most money, best product, and marketing power
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:01) It is then up to you to provide domain names to the public...
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:01) I'm just speaking of the conflicting tlds
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:01) you are responsible for making sure that those delegated domains resolve
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:02) First in use on the net has the legitimate claim, but if someone comes along and ..
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:02) introduces a duplicate, there is a problem..
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:02) e.g. .biz...
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:02) Like new.net and domain island both provide plug ins. It will come down to whose plug in becomes the most popular
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:02) One can sue the other... It's new law...
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:02) and the 18 New.Net colliders !!
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:02) In the case of new.net and domain island...
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:02) There probably will be some court battles
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:03) domain island was there first, but did not have it operational
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:03) hmmm
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:03) It's a good question as to who has that claim
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:03) Leah, I wish you had spoken yesterday instead of Dyson-- compare the succinctness, the accuracy and generosity of Gallegos and Dyson-- no contest on who deserves to be listened to by ICANN
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:03) There will be battles
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:03) I already considered legal action. No grounds I can see.
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:03) And then you have Xs2... They have listed 500?? Do they all work? I'm not sure
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:03) They don't want to talk to me
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:04) yes, they work, but many have no population...
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:04) so they are pretty much squatting on names
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:04) It's a shame
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:04) Thats how I see it
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:04) However, they are (the ones that do not collide) being included in the major roots now. The PacificRoot has added all the non colliders
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:05) There are now 1025 TLDs in The PacificRoot rootzone file
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:05) That includes all the ccTLDs, ICANn TLDs and the alt TLDs
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:05) Is the Pacific Root rootzone file recognized by ICANN?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:05) of course not
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:05) but it is gaining in popularity world-wide
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:06) But at least they don't collide right?
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:06) at this point
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:06) No they do not collide until .biz is entered into the USg root
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:06) The way it works is that Pacific root "includes" ICANN but not vice versa.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:06) then they will retain the original .biz and exclude the ICANN .biz
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:07) Well, I respect the work you're doing Leah
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:07) Thank you. It's rather thankless...
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:07) I hope that at some point you get credit for what you have done
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:07) You were there first
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:07) quite frankly, the only reason I have done this is for the entire community...
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:08) You're efforts should have been considered in that approval process
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:08) Had it not been for that, I would have politely given up the TLD...
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:08) before it had much population...
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:08) However, to allow that precedent would hurt the entire global internet and kiiled an industry...
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:09) It became representative of all TLDs and I could not shake it off...
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:09) I sure didn't need the headache.
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:09) Well it looks like the press is recognizing your plight
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:09) I wish it were just MY plight...
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:09) And the organization you started is gaining some respect too
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:09) Bye for now
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:09) If so, it would not be such a big deal..
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:09) cya patrick
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:10) Bye Pat
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:10) Where are you based Leah
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:10) My concern is for the users, the DNS, individual rights, and small business
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:10) The corporation is based in Georgia, but I work out of Virginia
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:11) at this time anyway ;)
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:11) So you were up early today
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:11) The actual registry is in California
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:11) 2:30 am
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:11) I'm in CA so I stayed up late to listen in
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:11) Itis now 7:12
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:11) am
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:11) :)
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:12) I'll be interested to hear what they have to say the second session and tomorrow.
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:12) I think it will be very interesting
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:12) I'm sure it will be just more rhetoric
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:13) Their aim is to kill choice and rule
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:13) It's obvious that they are positioning themselves to take the position of a single root controlled by ICANN
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:14) It seems that it would be impossible to enforce that in any way thought
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:14) though
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:14) In the long run, they will not be able to control the internet
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:15) Itis decentralized
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:15) That's how it was designed right?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:15) Further, they have no authority other than that given via contract..
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:15) If they do not have the support they can't control...
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:16) As the public is made more aware of that fact and that they have been duped by special interests, the climate may change
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:16) It will mean disruption for a time, though
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:16) Is ICANN getting more support now from the ccTLDs.. from what you can see. I've been listening in but missed a lot
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:17) If there were coopertation it could all be avoided, but then the public would have to be considered by ICANn and it is not
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:17) That is up for debate right now...
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:17) Leah, summarise your thoughts on IP6 and Flemings IP32-- wont this make the irrelevance of ICANN and its claims even more obvious?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:17) I think they are willing to help ICANN but want to retain autonomy which ICANN would wish to remove
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:18) Len, IPV8/16 would be destructive at this point. It is a layer on top of IPV4, but would create a different kind of conflict
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:18) It is based on .com
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:18) Well I want to stay up but I'm going to have to go
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:18) difficult to explain in short space
<JoeAlagna> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:19) You guys take care. Leah thanks and I wish you the best
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:19) I'm going to take a little break myself
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:19) bye Joe
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 07:22) See you guys in a little while.
<RebeccaNesson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:05) Stuart Lynn's presentation on Simultaneous Language Translation is linked off the agenda for this meeting and is available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/stockholm/archive/lynn-translation.html
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:13) Hello everyone
<baptista> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:17) what is wrong with amandos eyes? they look funny on my screen.
<baptista> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:17) hi patrick
<baptista> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:18) yes - he does speak fast. i always make mention of that.
<baptista> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:19) all he has to do is speak slowly in consideration of the translators
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:25) "because we are an international organisation" says Chair of calif,us, corporation
<RebeccaNesson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:26) Stuart Lynn's presentation on the Proposed Budget is linked off the agenda and is available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/stockholm/archive/lynn-budget.html
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:33) much better floor mike picture, amanda, thanks
<Keith> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:33) Hello all
<AmandaMoger> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:33) All the credit should go to the light/sound staff.
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:34) thanks light/sound too--see, technical cooperation at ICANN
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:37) Lynn has a screw loose
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:39) Good morning everyone.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:39) hi Judith
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:39) hi judith
<Keith> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:40) Hiya Judith
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:40) :-)
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:40) Have a missed anything profound?
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:40) Usual stuff.
<Dassa> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:41) Night everyone, I'll catch the rest from the archives.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:42) Judith: Vint tells Karl to "take it offline" anytime he asked about individuals constituency
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:42) but lets the others talk til the cows come home
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:42) Just like Melbourne
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:42) Hi Kendall. You picked that right.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:44) Karl needs to "butch up" with Vint, stop being so easily dismissed.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:44) yeah, he cows
<Keith> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:44) I am watching a vampire movie on TV while listening to the ICANN budget discussion - seems like the words fit the movie...lol
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:44) Agreed. He should stand up physically if needed !!
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:44) Don't know why, its really just a personality thing.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:45) vint is just using his power. He knows Karl is not against alt.roots and is an advocate for individuals... vint doesn't want either
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:47) would it make a difference?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:47) come a long way????
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:47) only in power grabbing
<CraigSimon> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:48) Doesn't that depend on the quality of the communication, Kendall?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:49) how can Karl compete with a showman like vint, so polite and calm and sincere, with that latenite ezlistening radio dj VOICE
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:50) If you want to improve outreach - why not get the individuals involved?
<Keith> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:51) But ICANN only wants outreach to "sympathetic" groups - no-one who might criticise..
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:51) ICANN and the IP interests hate the idea of individuals having a voice: it might upset the power balance
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:53) Louis needs more support (and money) ?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:53) How much of the budget goes to JDRP ??
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:54) Listen, at this point I have no allusions that being on the board or NC or anything carries any weight or serves any purpose. The ccTLD's won't be the first to revolt, so one might as well speak one's mind if/as one needs to. I've emailed Karl, encouraged him to bogart if he has to.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:54) Most goes to legal fees to Jones Day
<Keith> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:55) Jones Day??
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:55) I'd rather sleep on a bed of nails than devote my time to ICANN
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:55) The CCtlds aren't going to pay up like ICANN is expecting them to.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:55) the legal firm, Keith
<Keith> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:55) Thanks Leah
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:55) The law firm that Louis Touton and Joe Sims work for
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:56) a half million dollars to them for a quarter
<Keith> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:56) You are kidding Leah?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:56) When you look on the Jones Day site for Joe Sims he works in the (wait for it) antitrust area
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:56) nope. look at the resolutions and budget
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:56) and a few members of the Board OK'ed the payment w/o consulting with the rest of ICANN
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:57) well, that fits, Len. we dont trust him and he doesn't trust us
<Keith> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:57) I thought Verisign were paying for Joe Sims
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:57) They are too
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:57) Verisign pays a fortune to ICANN
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:58) He has his fingers in everyone's pie
<Keith> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:58) Joe has no fingers or anything else in my pie - but then my pie isn't golden enough...
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:59) right.. if you don't have lots of money or power, Joes' not interested
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 08:59) I wonder what the ethical obligations are for lawyers working for "an international organisation" (vint, about 20 minutes ago) as opposed to mouthpieces/offline-consultants for a california corporation going global.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:00) Should be: the law firm of "Dewey Cheatum and Howe"
<Keith> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:00) lol
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:00) oohhh yer good, Kendall
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:01) Anyone got the scribe notes on vint's comments Len notes above?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:01) no scribe notes for me
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:01) What was vint speaking in reference to?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:02) Is the Scribe-to-IRC program working Ben?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:04) It kills me that the incumbent monopoly (VeriSign) is so involved with the gTLDs. What better way to foster competition?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:04) Judith, just look at any time Karl spoke. Same thing happened.
<RebeccaNesson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:04) Kendall, during powerpoint presentations there is no scribing. So, yes IRC-to-scribe is working, but no, you will not see any new scribed comments during the course of Stuart Lynn's budget presentation. That presentation is linked off the agenda for this meeting and is available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/stockholm/archive/lynn-budget.html
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:04) Seeing and hearing Lynn, it is hard to believe he came up with that alt root stuff unaided. I really want to see the first draft of it and whose name(s) on it-- and the cc list for drafting input
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:05) Thank you Rebecca
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:05) Unfortunately, his explanation for all of this is not in thepresentation
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:05) Watch! the CCtlds aren't going to pay up :)
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:06) I honestly don't see what they are paying for
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:06) root service?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:06) that was ridiculous... someone suggested having people pay $500 for At Large Membership in the ICANN forum. Anyone else see that one?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:07) no, KD, when?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:07) look in the ICANN forum under the budget proposal
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:07) Any more than $10/yr per member is uncalled for
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:08) Judith, vint responding to an online question on multinlingual translations and if icann was just a us copr then english would suffice-- vint said well, of course we are an international organisation (he started by saying it was implicit in the discussion occurring that ICANN had answered that question "because of course we are an international organisation"
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:08) "If the elections were held".. did you catch that. Then again they might not be held. Just ask Esther.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:09) Leah, in some places $10 bucks is a lot of money.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:09) It's a fortune in third world countries
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:09) A month's pay some places
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:10) I noted vint saying this (exact quote) on this chat when he said it so you can track back on the archive and see it there as well as the video
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:10) and for what, exactly?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:10) Leah, some places in the U.S. too. There are poor pockets everywhere.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:10) It can't be free, though, Judith. It does cost money to hold elections and provide the forums (if they have any).
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:12) Karl speaks out!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:13) Danny was great in the GA meeting yesterday.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:13) Leah, maybe relative to income, not unlike biz fees in trade groups.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:14) If ICANN cut VeriSign out of the picture and started collecting the fees for themselves there would be plenty of money
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:15) They are hooked on "corporate handouts".
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:18) did I hear him use the term "industry" ???
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:18) yes
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:19) Listening to Lynn speak I can't help but remember his recent email to me noted here: http://www.icannwatch.org/article.php?sid=187&mode=&order=0. His trustworthiness borders on the absurd.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:19) Are you sure that Louis didn't write that email?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:20) Louis is usually more savvy in his deception.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:22) letting the public participate would also go a long way to increase legitimacy
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:23) good luck
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:23) maybe that will speed up the introduction of IPv6
<Keith> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:23) I think the Board feels it does allow public participation
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:24) sure ... just like everyone in China is free
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:24) ICANN (staff) has a clear picture of what it can get away with. The board is just along for the ride.
<Keith> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:24) But the Chinese Govt probably also thinks that is so...
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:25) There are plenty of "other venues" besides ICANN
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:26) They fly around the world so that other people can participate by watching them have a meeting. Do those people get to vote or have a voice?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:28) Karl speaks the truth again!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:28) clap clap clap!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:28) Karl is right on!
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:28) vint knows best
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:29) nonsense
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:29) see.. vint tells karl to "take it offline"
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:29) trust the voice of vint
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:30) every single time. it's sickening
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:30) and so obvious
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:30) Was that Karl getting ruled against again by Vint Cerf ?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:31) Interesting, scribe point #14.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:31) Karl was absolutely right. The Board ignored the DNSO and the public with regard to the VeriSign agreements
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:31) Vint lied. He said they implemented the DNSO suggestions with Verisgin in the end. They did not.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:31) Although Vint instists that they did follow DNSO advice. I clearly remember the NC recommending that they NOT go with option 2.
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:32) Vint just says what sounds good. He's smooth that one !!
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:32) That's correct, KD
<baptista> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:32) what was the morning session like
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:32) JOe, more of the same
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:33) lies, avoidance, bull
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:33) Karl was brilliant as usual... but got shut down again
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:33) I recently read somewhere that there is some acceptable level of lying accepted, even expected, in Congress, like its understood this is part of the "ability to function" in that environment. Clearly ICANN rides on the same premise, and it accepted by the powers that be in the same way.
<baptista> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:33) well - at least some standards are being maintained
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:33) I have pictures in my mind of the big bus giants feeding language to the board members via ear pieces
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:34) Vint has mastered the "jedi mind trick"
<baptista> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:34) can someone let me know when the meeting starts again - i'm now reviewing the morning session
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:35) brb - quick break...
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:35) Lynn is the patsy in the alt root thing with ICANN now-- if his paper is discredited utterly as appears likely then ICANN can lose the CEO and get cooperative with the virtual inclusive root idea--
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:36) Vint has a lot of power inside and outside of ICANN, and probably thinks he wields it as gently as possible. He couldn't possibly have any allusions as to when he's smoothing things over (to ICANN's advantage), and knows its part of his job. I'm not even being cynical - just practical.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:36) hi folks, I'm back
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:37) has the public question period happened?
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:37) Hi Sotiris
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:37) I also wonder how accurately the scribe records Karl's questions? in number 13 for example.. I don't think that captured everything Karl was saying
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:37) Yes
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:37) have they taken any questions from this forum?
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:37) Yes
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:37) Kendall, they never do. Thank goodness for the video archive.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:37) He specifically said that he felt that ICANN didn't listen to the DNSO with regard to VeriSign
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:38) that didnt' make it into the scribes notes
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:38) You can make an online comment ?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:38) He said ICANN staff shouldn't have policy appointments, as policy belongs in the SO's per the bylaws. Perfectly logical point.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:38) http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/stockholm/realtime/ask.asp
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:39) You can make an online correction, I mean.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:39) Kendall, he said they "threw away" the DNSO suggestions.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:39) you can write to Ben or Rebecca
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:40) was my question asked: Considering the amount of money generated and exchanged within the domain name market, will the ontological status of domain names be legally established in the near future? Are domain names property or not? If so, what kind of property, and whose?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:40) I bet Vint will ask you to take it offline Sotiris
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:41) ha!
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:41) Sotiris, you'll probably have to resubmit it in the open mic section.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:41) i will
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:41) It is the question on everyone's mind though. If they answered that one.. it would help to answer a lot of other ones
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:42) no kidding
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:42) How much will you bet me that they wouldn't read that question in any circumstances?
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:42) But you note that they never ANSWER questions !!!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:42) So.. Sotiris after Deborah's first time watching ICANN.. did she run away screaming?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:42) they will probably not read it, you're right Leah
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:43) no, she was quite interested
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:43) but had to get some rest, she's in the middle of a move
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:43) but I think we've hooked another one.. :-)
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:43) They might ASK the question. They just won't ANSWER it. LOL.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:44) hehehe
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:44) Watching ICANN operate is like standing the middle of a hurricane sometimes.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:44) it's not really funny
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:44) though
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:44) Patrick, it is listed in the "past" sessions. It won't be read at all.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:44) I can see how they might be laughable if they even asked it..
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:45) They would defer to Louis... who would give you some Toutonology
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:46) HEHEHE
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:46) well, I submitted it again, for good measure
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:47) Is is just me or do we hear Bob Dylan at every meeting?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:49) no, it's true..
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:49) far back as I can remember
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:50) I can.. sitting next to Louis for dinner
<RebeccaNesson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:50) Masanobu Katoh's presentation on Internationalized Domain Names is linked off the agenda for this meeting and is available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/stockholm/archive/katoh-idn.html
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:51) dylan ... how appropriate
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:51) how so Judith?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:51) represents protest songs
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:52) ironic, really
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:53) "and all the criminals in their coats and ties are free to drink martinis and watch the sun rise" dylan, hurricane carter
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:54) who pays for the wine at dinner?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:55) VeriWine
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:55) lol
<MarciaLynn> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:55) lol
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:55) Veriwhine
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:55) that too
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:56) Very Well Connected (USGmil/CIA)
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:58) so, with this system you can surf to qb--wkjekkre.com ?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 09:58) Katoh recommends an alternative root!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:01) client side approach is a quick hack that allows incumbent registries (like NSI) to continue to use their existing system by putting the onus on the user
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:05) I think the long-term solution is better
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:05) is anyone in here present in stockholm?
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:05) yes
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:05) James - do you think that server or client approach is better?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:05) james, will you ask my question at the mic? : Considering the amount of money generated and exchanged within the domain name market, will the ontological status of domain names be legally established in the near future? Are domain names property or not? If so, what kind of property, and whose?
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:06) sotiris: suggest you send it to public comment.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:06) thanks James
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:06) for nothing
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:06) ken: there is no such thing as a 'better' solution
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:06) James, after that can you ask my question also already on public comment since yesterday (every session including this one):
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:06) ken: there are pros and cons, it is trade-off we have to do
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:07) James, i've posted my question on each day
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:07) of course, you don't want to raise any eyebrows, do you james?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:07) Will ICANN today undertaked to recognise Human RIghts Root and resolve.humanrights [and of course slds from www.humanrights]. Thanks
<baptista> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:08) also JamesSend - you may remember i asked that the idns zone file be available for ftp download or alternatively via axfr
<baptista> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:08) i was told it was not because you have priprietary data in it
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:08) I second Joe's question.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:08) "cybersquatting" is not really an issue. If someone exploits someone else's mark the UDRP should cover it.
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:08) baptista: i dont run operation
<baptista> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:08) may i suggest your public root servers provide axfr and any proprietary data be kept to experimental servers
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:09) sotiris: not that i don want to raise your questions, but i have my own to raise :P
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:09) we'll see what you have to raise james
<baptista> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:09) but your involed - so advise them of what is i said - it is inapproriate for a root server provider to hide their zone file. if you have experimental data in there move it to an experimental server.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:10) I'm sure it will be just as crucial an issue, right?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:10) See, proves my point this morning that the online chat should have an in-venue "runner" and dedicated keyboard
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:10) AS OF RIGHT
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:10) baptista: ok. i will pass the message to patrick
<baptista> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:10) thanks james
<baptista> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:11) you see james i now test all public servers and use axfr to build a master record of all zones used in the alt root - and i can't get anything done with idns because of the blocks on axfr and lack of ftp
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:11) james, do they hand you question cue cards before the meetings?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:11) you know, the ersatz, rehearsed stuff?
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:12) baptista: keep going..i pull it and send it to patrick later
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:12) safe topics
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:12) sotiris: *rofl* yea sure...
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:12) Is there nobody else here actually at Stockholm?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:12) is it such an improbability?
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:12) I just came back. Patrick? Me? or Greenwell?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:12) Ben.. but he won't ask the crucial questions..
<baptista> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:13) ok folks - it's time for me to pull a richard sexton and hit the couch - will be back for public session. nice group we have here today by the way
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:13) See ya, Joe.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:13) later .god
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:13) sotiris: honestly, ur question does not seem to me critical. my work in IETF is IDN, not about domain name property
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:13) later, Joe
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:13) Joe, searching for the other RIR document
<^Buckshot00> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:14) Bye..Joe
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:14) ok james, make like an ostrich then..
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:14) IDN... really? another joke..
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:15) Back to UDRP ... Why do we need UDRP if we have a Sunrise period? UDRP should resolve TM & IP concerns
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:15) Sotiris, likely answer (and probably accurate too) is that property issues are handled by courts ... likely result of property question would resolve to the benefit of WIPO interests.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:15) do IDN's exist James?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:15) Sunrise period is wrong!
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:15) Since we are here in this online space, instead of defining ourseleves by our criticism of this farce, why not use this (a historical archived document online of ICANN) to agree on a few things
<MarciaLynn> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:15) or... why do we need a sunrise when there is the UDRP
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:15) all i can say is it is a mistake to get lawyers involve in domain names (which is really identifier) in the first place
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:16) exactly james
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:16) Katoh just said domain names are identity, not identifiers. Of course he has heavy heavy IP responsibilities.
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:17) actually katoh got the point perfectly
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:17) How so?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:17) domains were never intended to be "property"
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:17) katoh say domain names as identify or identifier..
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:18) then why is there an IP constituency, and why UDRP?
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:18) he did not say either way..but the point is clear
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:18) what's clear james?
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:18) when u use domain names as identity, u going to run into problem
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:18) Katoh meant that names like "amazon.com" identify the corporation. Like a brand name.
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:18) nope
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:19) James, that's a raher interesting perspective... too bad it flies in the face of actual practice to-date.
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:19) Katoh said domain names are not "identifiers" but "identities"
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:20) so james, what exactly is an IDN?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:20) not real names agian
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:20) nothing or something?
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:20) internationalized identifiers
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:20) Yes, Patrick, that's what I meant to say.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:20) get realnames out of here!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:21) puhhhleeze
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:21) uri
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:21) Real names is important. More than you might think.
<JamesSeng> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:21) doing internationalized names is almost impossible with existing infrastructure
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:21) Noone cares about Realnames I don't use them. Never have never will
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:21) in other words, IDN's do not exist
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:21) Real names is a sell-out
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:21) highest bidder gets any keywords they want
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:22) whereas .COM, .NET, and .ORG do have some kind of existence..
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:22) Thank you... "take it offline".
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:22) Sure. I'm not talking about the company. But the idea.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:22) Good idea... take the concept. Dump the company.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:22) Kendall, everyone in this game, from RealNames to ICANN, is a business and acts like onel
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:23) What the real names system does is creates another layer on top onf the DNS.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:23) So.. that makes me upset Judith. I'm an individual. How do I compete against that?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:23) Similar to New Net Patrick?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:23) Kendall, that is the $60,000 question. (Higher given inflation.)
<MarciaLynn> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:23) currently, you do not, kendall
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:24) realnames is a clientside, so is newnet plugin
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:24) The true identifier is the IP address. Overlaid by the domain name. And overlaid again by the real name system.
<CraigSimon> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:24) I think Katoh's point was that since some people are starting to think of DNs as their identity, rather than just identifiers of resources, then entities which are established with non-Latin names feel they need to use an IDN to present themselves on the Internet.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:24) Kendall, new.net has real TLDs. It's not a layer
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:25) lets use it, but not refer to it as RealNames(tm)
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:25) There will be other layers for indexing on the DNS
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:25) Sure Kendall. That's why I said real name system !!
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:26) Exactly, Leah. Like the Internationalised Domain Names might.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:26) Take it offline Amadeu
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:26) when will the IPv6 update be applied?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:26) Kendall, here's the problem. I'm an individual, want freedom to innovate unrestrained, develop something that turns into a business, and boom, I sell out to send my kids to college. Real ethical problem, as I see it.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:26) They could. The only problem is the character sets used by IDNS
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:27) and its using the clientside to do multilinguals that's scaring the cctlds back into the fold. Why buy blabla.cctld when you can have nonroman.nonroman?
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:27) It's easier to look up an Arabic name in a Yellow Pages then link to the IP address.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:27) IDN's do not exist.
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:27) What I see as a DNS directory. That's my particular interest.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:27) companies like North Pole of America has a system that actually uses character sets in languages used by those who are native to them
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:28) There should be 2 types of individuals Judith - commercial and non. If you do that you switch camps. Maybe the rules are slightly different
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:28) So if you don't use Microsoft your out of luck (like the UK Gov't?)
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:29) Kendall, I've been "self employed" all my life, so think of myself in an individual capacity (have never been corporate or worked for one.)
<anon217> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:29) Where are the ICANN Board members logged in ?
<anon217> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:29) 22 users here
<anon217> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:29) Is this the IRC for the ICANN Board ?
<anon217> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:29) testing
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:29) no
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:30) this is ICANN public chat
<anon217> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:30) noise?
<anon217> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:30) oh
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:30) anon 217, tell us more about the irc for the ICANN Board
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:30) Does the Board has their own channel?
<anon217> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:31) oops wrong channel
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:31) that should be logged and made public
<RebeccaNesson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:32) There is no ICANN Board chat.
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:32) If you click on Status and type /list you get all the channels.
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:32) But you had to come in outside the ICANN page.
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:33) For example there's an #ICANN-general.
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:33) And a #scribe.
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:34) as well as #icann-chat.
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:34) But none for the Board that I can see.
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:35) Most channels have only one person on it.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:35) IDN's are a pipedream and netsol is selling it at a premium... what a sham.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:36) they want a simple hack so they don't have to update their system
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:37) wrong sotiris. with walid and a majority of users within a year using nonlatin, they go back to priority position in the namespace
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:37) UDRP should be used to solve cybersquatting issues NOT sunrise
<anon217> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:37) #board
<anon217> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:38) testing
<anon217> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:38) Vint ?
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:38) I'm tempted to /nick Vint
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:38) irc channel #board, eh
<MarciaLynn> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:38) <<thought the same thing patrick
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:38) well, we'll see about that gary... I doubt it.
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:38) Not on this server, Len.
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:39) LOL
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:39) do it patrick
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:39) I just joined it... and I had ops
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:39) UDRP was constructed with sunrise in mind. It was an intentional stepping stone. Trademark should have remained in the courts based on actual infringement. But once IP lobby got a foothold, they took the whole territory. I'm sure they're not done, either.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:40) no, WIPO will attempt to rule the entire namespace..
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:40) the lackeys
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:40) My view is that UDRP is ok but has gone WAY too far.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:40) Sotiris, that's what I said.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:41) Patrick, it was never meant to be a standalone function, just a means to an end.
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:41) The problem with UDRP is the competition between arbiters.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:41) yes Judith, I know... :-)
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:41) but it should be a stand alone Judith
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:42) Kendall, its inappropriate from the outset.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:42) Milton Meuller had some excellent suggestions for revisions in UDRP
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:42) The problem with the UDRP is it is flawed, one sided and favors one group
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:42) he did
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:42) I worked on
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:42) WG-B
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:42) Just a speeding train.
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:43) Anybody fair-minded agrees with your last comment, Judith. "The problem . . .
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:43) Sotiris, Dot Humanrights Interim Trust registered for the WIPO Melbourne "consultation" a few weeks ago (as announced at ICANN Melbourne) but desite online confirmation and further paer registrataion on the day, the "presntation" I ticked the box to give was not called on. In fact, there was a set agenda of the usual supects, as it were. Are you suprised by this?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:43) Leah, that's the purpose of the UDRP. For those who forced its creation, its successful.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:43) not at all
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:43) len, it's a self-perpetuating coven
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:43) 13
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:43) 666
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:44) is a witch coven
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:44) UDRP as a concept is needed
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:44) boo!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:44) hehehe
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:44) UDRP as it is implemeneted is not good
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:44) Exactly.
<anon217> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:44) testing
<anon217> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:44) Karl ?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:44) it's a tool for Big Business
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:44) LOL
<anon217> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:44) #board
<MarciaLynn> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:44) rofl
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:45) Kendall, we agree to disagree.
<KarlAuerbach> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:45) Hi Can I help ?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:45) hey karl!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:45) Considering the amount of money generated and exchanged within the domain name market, will the ontological status of domain names be legally established in the near future? Are domain names property or not? If so, what kind of property, and whose?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:45) Karl, is that you or an imposter?
<KarlAuerbach> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:45) Hey Sotiris
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:45) it's patrick
<BenEdelman> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:45) Patrick, I see that you just renamed yourself to KarlAuerbach.
<KarlAuerbach> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:45) Imposter
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:45) I've asked this question 3 days running, and still it has not been read karl: Considering the amount of money generated and exchanged within the domain name market, will the ontological status of domain names be legally established in the near future? Are domain names property or not? If so, what kind of property, and whose?
<BenEdelman> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:45) Can you explain what you're doing here?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:46) why Ben?
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:46) Hi Ben
<BenEdelman> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:46) That seems potentially misleading, and not appropriate for this forum. Hence I asked him to explain himself!
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:46) Can you kick off anon217
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:46) ok...
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:46) I was fooled..
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:47) or at least ask him to stop trying to join #board
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:47) He keeps asking for Vint and Karl !!
<MarciaLynn> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:47) and asking for Vint & Karl...
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:47) Sorry All. Just kidding.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:47) no problem.. maybe you could be Louis next?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:47) thanks Patrick...
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:48) got my hopes up.
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:48) LOL
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:48) :-)
<MarciaLynn> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:48) noticed that quickly pasted question sotiris - you're prepared ;-)
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:48) yes, I'm trolling for lowlifes like me, the unwashed masses..
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:49) in the hopes that one of us snuck into the queen's palace
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:49) Cochetti makes an excellent argument for inclusive roots etc.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:49) and has the chutzpah to ask a real question
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:49) unlike james Seng
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:49) who will ask his assigned question
<anon217> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:50) The ICANN Board uses other people's names here ?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:50) and go back to sticking his head in the sand
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:50) give it up anon217
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:50) wow James, what a burning issue!
<NobuoSakiyama> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:50) I saw the name of Kraaijenbrink in the #scribe before noon, but now he is not there:-)
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:50) NOT!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:50) James, sit down and out a sock in it
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:51) put a sock in it
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:51) ICANN should stick to technical issues - not politcal or economic issues.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:51) political
<anon217> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:51) Which IRC channel does the ICANN Board use ?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:51) none anon
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:51) now go away
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:51) so that was Jame's important question... what a joke.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:52) lemon cups for James
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:53) testing
<anon217> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:53) #board
<anon217> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:53) Vint move on
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:54) notice james has not returned..
<anon217> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:54) Karl ?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:54) test
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:57) D'crok!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:57) I bet he was anon217
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:58) probably
<Crock> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:58) no I am here toosimultaneously
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:58) hahahaha
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:59) blah blah blah... I'm a sell out for my bosses
<Crock> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:59) great alt root paper of ICANN CEO Lynn, hay
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:59) hahahaha
<SergioBac> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:59) (It seems like there's more audience today than yesterday.)
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:59) channeling?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 10:59) what is he a magus?
<SergioBac> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:00) thanks ben:)
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:00) IDN vs. "alt root" positions are just too hypocritical to handle ...
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:00) they are getting ready for Discussion Draft on a Unique, Authoritative Root for the DNS Sergio
<InternetStability> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:00) Get rid of the ICANN .biz collider
<SergioBac> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:00) oh so... party time:)
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:01) again no open microphone!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:01) LOL
<Takeitoffline> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:01) Alt root
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:01) no surprise there
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:02) The Board should stick around for 1 hour regardless if it cuts into dinner
<Takeitoffline> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:02) bad luck vint, nice try
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:02) this is bulls..t
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:02) Poor Amadeu might starve
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:02) this is so sad ...
<SergioBac> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:02) I totally agree
<SergioBac> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:02) sad is the word
<RebeccaNesson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:02) Stuart Lynn's presentation on his draft on a unique, authoritative root is linked off the agenda for this meeting and is available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/stockholm/archive/lynn-singleroot.html
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:03) Mike said... stall for as long as you can so you can avoid public comments
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:03) this is the second meeting where they've dissed the public comment time!!! what the hell is going on?!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:04) hey crock is back from making his ridiculous point
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:04) hi crock
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:04) business as usual
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:04) and the worst part is that today's session is called "Public Forum", so when does the public get to talk?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:04) bullsh*t
<SergioBac> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:05) just think about that draft. who did it? the public?nope.
<PublicForum> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:05) Help, where am I
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:05) i'm putting worldatlarge.org back online...
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:05) ICANN Policy = do what VeriSign says
<anon217> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:05) #scribe
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:06) hey anon217, ask my question next: Considering the amount of money generated and exchanged within the domain name market, will the ontological status of domain names be legally established in the near future? Are domain names property or not? If so, what kind of property, and whose?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:06) How is policy perspective lacking when he told me "the policy is quite clear and well-established by the Board and community action..." (see http://www.icannwatch.org/article.php?sid=187&mode=&order=0)
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:06) Yeah Dave.. quit acting like a moron
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:06) is he acting?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:07) easy Judith... he lied
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:07) these people lie so often they can't help themselves
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:08) worse, they believe their own lies
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:08) This man detracts from ICANN's legitimacy (if it could go any lower).
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:08) yes judith
<IcannAgenda> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:08) use words like authentic and authoritative and unique and just a dash of fear of The Other
<SergioBac> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:09) correct me if I am wrong: is the Lynn's draft made to "obtain the criminalization" of alt root?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:09) The ICANN policy is to protect the big-money
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:09) "policy" ... citation please?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:10) It is the first step Sergio
<SergioBac> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:10) thanks KD.
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:10) sorry for the skylarking foks but it is a silly and bizarre experience watching ICANN CEO stumble thru alt root rationale (
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:10) where to post comments for query?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:11) URL?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:11) They would like nothing more than to outlaw alt.roots. They believe in one root - run by VeriSign.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:11) its a policy ... its a discussion draft ... its a bird ... its a plane ...
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:11) Ben, URL to post comments
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:11) please?
<SergioBac> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:11) (citation) criminalization of alt.roots :: "regulate the strucutre to regulate substance":: Lessig.
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:11) If he loses his voice, we may hear from someone who will tell the truth
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:11) http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/stockholm/realtime/ask.asp
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:12) Bottom up procedsses are shafted.
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:12) By the NC resolution.
<RebeccaNesson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:12) Judith, you can post comments using the link on the main webcast page for the "Comment Submission Form". It is in the section entitled "How to: Ask & Comment". The url for the comment submission form is http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/stockholm/realtime/ask.asp
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:13) It is a bunch of rubbish!
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:14) Thank you.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:14) I'm getting "error reading" on submitting my question. Ben?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:14) He's talking about "Slicer" in the ICANN forum
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:14) "and people who I spoke with" says Lynn-- who were they? in addition to the footnoted ones
<SergioBac> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:15) slicer had some time on his hand:)
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:15) way to go Karl!
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:15) Microsoft OLE DB Provider for ODBC Drivers error '80040e21' Errors occurred /scripts/dbpostacceptor.asp, line 84 CANNOT SUBMIT QUERY at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/stockholm/realtime/ask.asp
<MarciaLynn> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:16) yeah karl !
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:16) ask my question now please, public comment gatekeeper
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:16) Keith from RealNames again
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:16) How much time has Keith burned up in public forum?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:16) dump this realnames crap!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:16) He's asked at least 3 questions
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:16) Maybe someone else can try this, I'm getting error on submission, my question is: Policy or discussion draft? The document cannot be both, but as Mr. Lynn has stated during his presentation that his posting reflects ICANN policy, I'd like to know the citation for that ICANN policy.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:16) public forum has become corporate scmooze
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:17) schmooze
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:17) I submitted it Judith
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:17) Thank you.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:18) get this guy out of here!1
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:18) what is this guy saying?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:18) is he lucid?
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:18) Funny how Vint is letting him carry on !!
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:18) He's pitching his business.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:18) what drugs is he doing?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:19) pitching his business? what business? it's a joke..
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:19) RealNames.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:19) won't last beyond the year..
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:19) So Vint is saying there is no policy. Is that what he is saying?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:19) it's a microsoft search tool.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:20) how much time did Keith waste? How many questions could have been asked in his place? Considering that was his 3rd time at the mic?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:20) it's like aol.
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:20) "I just have to jump in here" says Vint and off he goes
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:20) hahaha karl!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:20) Vint is giving Karl a hard time
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:20) nice little dig there..
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:20) gibberish surey..
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:20) lol
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:21) surely
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:21) So... for "public comments" we hear from Sheppard and RealNames?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:21) real public
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:21) what a crock!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:21) anbd i don't mean dave..
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:22) you mean anon217
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:22) yeah, he's gone now
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:23) Very true!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:23) I'm f-ing pissed.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:23) We have been waiting for 6 years now!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:23) what the hell is going here?>
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:24) go nigel!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:24) yes there is Vint
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:24) so, according to vint, it's "a game"
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:24) the market needs to determine the demand for TLDs not ICANN
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:25) *clap* *clap* *clap* *clap* !!! Way to go Nigel!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:25) hahahaha
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:25) not about the number of competitors!!1
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:25) what the hell is amadeu saying?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:25) "comptetition is not about the number of competitors" ?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:26) WTF ?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:26) STUBBY
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:26) oh yeah right ken!
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:26) I submitted a question.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:26) "artificial sense of urgency" gotta like this guy..
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:27) So, besides hearing from RealNames, Sheppard, Amadeu, now we waste time with Ken Stubbs?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:27) Leah, it's a waste of time
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:27) does the public get to have any questions?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:27) It's on the record
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:27) Not only has Ken been involved... he's been involved with 10 different companies.
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:27) Ahha !! IP again.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:28) Its all about IP.
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:28) A good guy !!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:29) right on Milton!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:31) Withdraw the Policy Paper from Lynn!
<SergioBac> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:32) it really would be a start. that paper has had a bad start.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:32) BEN can we take a comment from the chat room on this topic?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:32) what that man's mouth out with soap!
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:32) that's "wash"
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:33) Melbourne origins of LYnns paper-- wasnt that when ICANN was served with court documents re non-ICANN tld .humanrights?
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:33) see http://www.humanrights.com.au/dhr/trust.html
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:34) don't you love how vint tries to belittle Leah before the question was even asked?
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:34) Leah, well said.
<MarciaLynn> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:34) yes, and ppl laughed, i don't see anything funny about it
<RebeccaNesson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:34) Kendall, we don't take comments from the discussion forum. We take remote comments from the remote comment submission system. As you just heard, Vint just asked Leah Gallegos's question from the public comment forum.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:35) thank you Rebecca. I just wanted to make sure that Keith from RealNames didn't get another question in.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:35) There he goes again .... we have a policy ... we don't have a policy ... really!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:36) yes you are trying to quash their existance
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:36) dot BIZ predates ICANN by 5 years
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:37) 3 years, Kendall. IT was created in 95 and ICANN is '98
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:37) oops thanks for clarification
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:37) we took over management last year
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:37) D'crock AGAIN ??
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:38) new.net
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:38) Well, hans, when icann brings in say .shop there will be a major collision for more than 1%
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:38) I wonder if DOT WEB will get up to the mic? Chris said that their lawyers are in Stockholm.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:39) Very good ... idn and "alts" no different
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:40) they aren't if they're client side
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:40) well said
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:41) Steve is also hinting they'll get into applying for future ICANN TLDs
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:41) Good!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:41) The more the merrier
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:41) Carrot and the stick done very well
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:41) Gary, yes indeedie.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:41) so rebecca.. one question from the public comment forum during public comment?!?!?!?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:41) wow, that's great!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:41) really bottom-up.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:41) Tucows kissing up to the Board?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:41) what a farce.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:42) Tucows is very politically driven.
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:42) Even more than most;
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:42) A commercial for Tucows
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:42) wonderful, another corporate yoyo
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:42) We've already had a RealNames commercial. Why not a Tucows commercial?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:42) of course.
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:43) Hang on, this is tucows carrot and stick
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:44) BS
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:44) I'll have to update Elliot ... he knows me, and I've been there often.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:44) and they will get sued by Image Online Design
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:44) He just challenged Chris for .web.
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:45) or offered a partnership?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:45) I hope Chris' lawyers heard that
<BenEdelman> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:45) Folks, FYI, I have fixed the problem with the comment submission system. My sincere apologies for this temporary glitch.
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:45) a good test: does a rich american business man (tucows) use non-ICANN roots/tlds nor have any of his friends
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:45) If ICANN would just introduce hundreds or thousands of TLDs we wouldn't have this problem
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:45) take it offline
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:46) times up, says vint (gee where did the day go, on all those reports)
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:46) Aghha !!! Karl cut down again.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:46) no problem Ben, the comments won't be read anyway
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:46) ga-roots@dnso.org
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:47) Er, can ga-roots@ still exist given NC resolution?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:47) HA! I don't have a root. I didn't create a root.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:47) don't know? Doesn't it? Would Danny have mentioned it otherwise?
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:48) Vint doesn't recognise Kent Crispin !!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:48) he doesn't know who Kent is? yeah right!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:48) The other-half of "crispy-crock"
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:48) bull!
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:48) poorly orchestrated
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:49) Judith: its contrived
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:49) scripted
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:49) If ICANN would just introduce hundreds or thousands of TLDs we wouldn't have this problem
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:49) algorythmic guarantee, jumpin jiminy, crikey
<MarciaLynn> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:49) yes, fully planned imho
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:49) BS
<ThomasRoessler> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:49) He's technically entirely correct - as far as I got him, the audio transmission broke down.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:50) but, why does it take ICANN so long to introduce TLDs?
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:50) No, uniqueness is uniquely profitably to those who control it
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:50) namely VeriSign
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:50) do you realize that Hans just made it clear that he has no clue about the DNS?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:50) Hans K?
<LeahG-originalBIZ> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:50) yes
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:51) yes
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:51) what a joke
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:51) A unique "super root" is the way to go
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:51) Thomas, you have two books of same title, different ISBN #. Why isn't ISBN polluted?
<SergioBac> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:51) KD what exacctly would be a unique super root?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:52) One unique root formed by many smaller roots
<SergioBac> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:53) thanks Kendall
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:53) .chaos
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:54) .union was a good one - I supported it
<MarciaLynn> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:54) haha
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:54) Excellent carrot and stick
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:55) that was a restricted one that would really be used. instead we got .museum
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:56) Big biz icann will never support union. Can you imagine bigbiz.union owned by bigbiz workers? immune to UDRP
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:56) D'crock is up at the mic again! I bet Keith is in line behind him
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:56) I would like bigbiz.sucks
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:57) IANA asked them to create the "proof of concept"
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:57) This is a scripted propaganda run.
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:57) The paid rent-a-crowd is out in force
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:57) So technically they didn't do it on their own
<MarciaLynn> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:57) agree judith
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:57) yes, this is totally contrived bullsh*t
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:58) They were asked by the ICANN-of-the-day (IANA)
<MarciaLynn> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:58) that was rude
<MarciaLynn> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:58) of vint
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:58) YES! Go Karl.
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:58) Lynn's paper is not in reasoned tone, it doesn't sound like a draft or rfc at all
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:58) HAHAHAHAHA
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:58) Way to go Karl!
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:59) Right ON!!!! Karl
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:59) good karl
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:59) Ya know what, ccTLD's are moving up the food chain and others will do so as well ... folks will be nipping at ICANN's turf. Its kind of self descructing, I think.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:59) RealNames pays money.. and Keith gets plenty of mic time
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 11:59) so where's the public forum?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:00) what the hell is this?
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:00) I guess they took the public forum offline
<JudithOppenheimer> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:00) I'm outta here, see y'all later.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:00) there is none... we were too busy listening to D'crok, Amadeu, RealNames, Krispin, and Hans
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:00) See ya
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:00) CYa J
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:00) Later Judith
<MarciaLynn> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:00) cya
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:00) bye j
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:01) what is this? olympic bid?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:01) who cares!
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:01) The only public forum was Leah. Good choice, imo.
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:01) thankyou all for participating!!!
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:01) yeah right!
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:01) This isn't over.. it's only beginning
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:01) kendall do you have the yahoo groups url handy
<SergioBac> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:02) Thanks B e n and R e b e c c a ; good work.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:02) join us on the wg-review at yahoo groups
<MarciaLynn> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:02) yes, thank you ben & rebecca
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:02) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wg-review
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:02) we're in the process of preparing the Individual's constituency proposal
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:02) Thank you Ben and Rebecca
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:02) Ya thx
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:02) welcome back Dave
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:02) thanks kendall
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:02) hey it crocker again..
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:03) Are you happy that you wasted so much time at the mic?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:03) how much did you and Kent get paid for that?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:03) saying absolutely nothing, I might add.
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:03) are you gloating Crock?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:04) you and your triple chin?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:04) lol
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:04) say, is there a mcDonalds near to where you are?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:04) or a Burger King?
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:04) Is it Crock? How do you know ?
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:04) maybe you and Keith can go out for a burger?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:04) it's him.
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:04) haha
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:04) He was harrasing the board earlier acting stupid
<MarciaLynn> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:04) geesh
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:05) he's the only one who'd sit back and listen to us abuse him.. gloating cause he's an "insider"
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:05) well all those folks this afternoon are there on the video record pushing that line, crispin, crocker, lynn, cerf they all made it clear -- cant wait to see it replayed elsewhere in a few months
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:05) then, suddenly he dissapears from the chat and appears at the mic... not long after he reappears in the chat
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:05) he's gone again
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:06) it had to be him
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:06) anyway, i'm outta here folks. nice chatting, time for us to get cracking on this Individual's constituency, hope to hear from all of you
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:06) Now what about GA-ROOTS? Will they kill it off ?
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:06) they will probably kill of the entire GA
<Len> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:06) see ya tomorra
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:06) I missed the NC meeting. I'll have to check the archive
<SotirisSotiropoulos> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:06) bye all.
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:06) Goodnight
<KendallDawson> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:06) I'm out of here too
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:06) Makes sense. They don't like us.
<GaryOsbourne> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:07) Time for my beauty nap See ya tomorrow same bad time same bad station
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:07) ok bye all
<MarciaLynn> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:09) see y'all tomorrow :-)
<SergioBac> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:10) Bye all... see you tomorrow.
<PatrickCorliss> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:10) bye !!
<SergioBac> (Sun, June 03, 2001 at 12:11) thanks Ben and all and Rebecca.