Re: newIANA (was Fram behind closed doors via opaque channels)

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Mark and all,

Mark.Paton wrote:

> Come on Guys,
> Which side of the fence is totally irrelevant, the target is an open
> Internet.

  I agree completely, hence my posts.  It appears that the IANA does not agree
with
an open Internet judging from their recent announcement.  If you see it another
way, possibly you should review the IANA's own announcement.  If you
wish I will be happy to forward you a copy.  Let me know.

> Who funds the programme should not be an issue, if European
> agencies wish to fund the programme then let them come up with the money!
> All this acrimony is detracting from the end result, lets stop now and think
> about where we want to go and not who's paying for it.

  Again I agree.  It is important none the less whom has paid for it.  And that
is
and was my point.  "He whom has the money makes the rules."

>
>
> There needs to be a more open framework and information should be
> deceminated to the majority for comment.  The RFC's as my understanding goes
> is to create discussion as to the basis of technical fact and not to create
> fog.  Lets get on with the work in hand and lets drop the acid attacks.
> Dave Crocker may or may not be the great god that he or anyone else thinks
> he is, this is totally irrelevant and should be kept away from these
> discussion groups, they do not bear any relation to the end result.

  Again agreed and was part of the point of my comments.

>
>
> Mark Paton
> MNSL
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu [mailto:Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 1998 2:41 PM
> To: Jeff Williams
> Cc: ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: newIANA (was Fram behind closed doors via opaque channels)
>
> On Tue, 14 Jul 1998 05:27:38 BST, Jeff Williams said:
> > Dave Crocker wrote:
> > > At 07:44 PM 7/13/98 -0400, Richard J. Sexton wrote:
> > > >IANA rules by will of the community ? That might have been
> > > >true in a 5000 host network, but a vast majority of the
> > > >100,000,000 users of the net have no idea who IANA is...
> > > >or was.
> > >
> > > The language that I typically use is "Internet operations and
> development
> > > community".  That group very much DOES know who IANA is and very much
> DOES
> > > provide the basis for IANA's authority.
> >
> >   This is yet another PRIME example of Dave Crockers illusions and /or
> > Hallucinations.
> > The IANA is and has been funded bu the USG via the DOD.  That was an is
> made
> > quite clear in the WP, contrary to any musings that Dave would have you
> believe.
>
> OK. So it's funded by the USG. So what?
>
> > > The fact that all those ISPs (and corporate DNS servers) DO
> > > point to the IANA-derived root is therefore not just significant.  It is
> > > definitive.
> >   To the extent that they do, yes.
>
> See? You're agreeing with what Dave said earlier - that group "very much
> DOES provide the basis for IANA's authority".
>
> Which side of the fence do you ant to be on here?
>
> --
>                                 Valdis Kletnieks
>                                 Computer Systems Senior Engineer
>                                 Virginia Tech

 regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com