Re: Tired of Waiting

"Christopher Ambler" <cambler@iodesign.com> Tue, 14 July 1998 19:30 UTC

Delivery-Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 15:44:54 -0400
Return-Path: cclark
Received: (from adm@localhost) by ietf.org (8.8.5/8.8.7a) id PAA09683 for ietf-outbound.10@ietf.org; Tue, 14 Jul 1998 15:30:03 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailsvr1.iodesign.com (mailsvr1.iodesign.com [206.190.80.251]) by ietf.org (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id OAA08684 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Jul 1998 14:53:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tentacle (tide18.microsoft.com [131.107.3.28]) by mailsvr1.iodesign.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.1960.3) id NF0FM2HM; Tue, 14 Jul 1998 11:56:07 -0700
Message-ID: <08cf01bdaf58$9b7cc470$d7fd3b9d@tentacle.dns.microsoft.com>
Reply-To: Christopher Ambler <cambler@iodesign.com>
From: Christopher Ambler <cambler@iodesign.com>
To: perry@piermont.com
Cc: Noel Chiappa <jnc@ginger.lcs.mit.edu>, ietf@ietf.org, List@giaw.org, comments@iana.org, discussion-draft@giaw.org, domain-policy@open-rsc.org
Subject: Re: Tired of Waiting
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 11:52:52 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3

>No, it has just be denied by individuals like you who want to make
>money by getting a profitable monopoly on public resources. The bulk
>of the community has a pretty obvious interest in the other direction.


Your assessment is as inaccurate as your basis for the claim. What
is the difference between a registry making an honest profit and a
registrar making an honest profit? If both provide good service,
contractually prohibit gouging and harm to the Internet, where is the
harm?

For those of you recent to the discussion, please note that Perry was
a member of the IAHC, the group that proposed that a single registry
be created to handle all TLDs, including COM/NET/ORG (which they
carefully claimed SHOULD be a part). Their plan, as you may be aware,
called for registrars to pay $10,000 each just to participate (and still
does). They're STILL taking this money from registrars, including a
monthly fee, and they have absolutely nothing to show for it. They also
changed their internal pricing in much the same way that they claim
for-profit registries would. These are all public facts, and can be found
by reading the various archived lists.

Why do I bring this up again? Simply to show that there are seriously
different PHILOSOPHIES at work here, and they are overshadowing
the plain fact that if we could just put them aside, create a stable, fair,
open and transparent governing body, we could then come together
and resolve these problems.

But people keep bringing them up. Yes, I realize that I should just
ignore them and not reply, but when factual inaccuracies are posted
(and I'm sure Perry will claim I've done the same, natch) and
personal attacks like the above (where Perry presumes to claim
to know what it is that I want) are posted, and philosophical
opinions are taken as fact (like the namespace is a public resource),
the loudest voice seems to claim victory.

As I've said, let's stop it, and move on to more productive issues,
okay?

--
Christopher Ambler, Personal Opinion Only
--
NOTICE: The user of this email address is a resident of the State of 
Washington. Washington law provides for up to $500 per incident in
the case of Unsolicited Commercial Email (also known as spam).
This individual WILL file a complaint.