Re: Shared database

[Einar Stefferud <Stef@nma.com>]

Well, I would simplify all this down to:

It only takes one to start a war,
but it takes two or more to stop it;-)...

We do not need long tomes to be written about all this, 
to understand what needs to happen.

So, lets just go out there and do it...

Cheers...\Stef

>From Jeff William's  message Sat, 25 Jul 1998 21:12:06 +0100:
}
}Stef and all,
}
}Einar Stefferud wrote:
}
}> I might be helpful to parse the language more carefully;-)...
}>
}> Completion of negotiations is not the same as implementaion of the
}> results of negotiations.
}>
}> So, Clough is speaking at cross purposes to Magaziner's point.
}>
}> And, of course they are not going to start working ahead on any
}> separation until they complete the negotiations.
}
}  THis line of pursuit is not a wise one in that it inevitable that there is going
}to be a
}separation and the Registration Database must be part of that separation by
}negotiated agreement.  So to say that no implementation is or could be pursued
}while negotiations are underway, seems like a stalling mechanism and is not in the
}
}spirit of cooperation on the part of NSI.
}
}>
}>
}> >From my point of view, it does not amtter that implementation will
}> follow after completion of negotiations;-)...  What will matter the
}> most is getting a settlement on which we can all bank.
}
}  Settlement is one thing indeed that is important.  Sharing the
}Registrationdatabase is at least as important.
}
}>
}>
}> Cheers...\Stef
}>
}> PS: It is also very hopful as I see it that Magaziner continues to
}>     reinforce the bit about how we all need to cooperate, or we will
}>     all be sent to our rooms until we can learn to cooperate.
}
}  Agreed, and that cooperation is a two sided coin.  One cannot have one side
}cooperating without the other doing the same. If this is not done, than you do
}NOT have cooperation by definition.
}
}>
}>
}>     This refusal to leave any door open with even a crack to the
}>     possibility that some bully will be able to con the US Govt into
}>     getting the nod is very encouraging indeed.
}
}  Depends on how you define "Bully".  And whom is viewed by whom that is a"Bully"
}to the other.
}
}>
}>
}>     The key is in cooperation, not in nasty press releases or in
}>     bashing others on the net, as continues as we speak.
}
}  Agreed.  And we still have far too much of this continuing.  This is mainly due
}to a lack of trust between stakeholders, and organizations that stemmed from the
}MoUvment.
}
}>
}>
}>     /s
}>
}> >From your message Sat, 25 Jul 1998 17:05:05 -0800:
}> }
}> }From:  Magaziner hopeful for domain deal, by Reuters (C/Net - July 24 1998) -
}> }http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,24591,00.html
}> }
}> }Magaziner said Washington hoped to conclude negotiations with NSI by the
}> }end of September to end its monopoly.
}> }
}> }But NSI's head of communications, Christopher Clough, said things may run
}> }well behind that deadline. "It is at least a six- to nine-month process
}> }just for the engineering and software needed and the shared database to be
}> }completed," Clough told reporters.
}> }--------------
}> }And when was the work begun?  This has been a known deadline for five years.
}> }
}> }Ellen Rony                    "On the Internet, no one knows you're a dog."
}> }Director, Alexander Works                               \\
}> }Tiburon, California 94920                          \     @@==*
}> }415/435-5010                                        ======
}> }erony@marin.k12.ca.us                              //   \\
}>
}>
}
}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
}
}
}