[alac] [fwd] [IP] worth reading the iab response to an iCANN question re this mess (from: dave@farber.net)

[Thomas Roessler <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Forwarded message from Dave Farber <dave@xxxxxxxxxx> -----

From: Dave Farber <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: ip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 13:23:02 -0400
Subject: [IP] worth reading the iab response to an iCANN
  question re this mess
Reply-To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
List-ID: <ip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
X-Spam-Level: 

I would consider ICANNs response to this issue to be a very good indicator 
of their ability to be a guardian of the DNS. If they don't take a strong 
position, I will read that as yet another bad bad sign.

Dave

Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 13:08:10 -0400
From: "Adam H. Pendleton" <fmonkey@xxxxxxxxxxx>

To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx

Dave Farber wrote:

>Doesn't Verisign have some kind of contract with a
>government body specifying how they are to
>discharge their trust in running the DNS?
Yes, Verisign has a contract with the United States Department of 
Commerce.  In adition, their actions are overseen, in principle, by the 
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers.  Currently the DoC is 
referring all queries to ICANN and Verisign, though they may issue a 
statement in the next few days.  ICANN has said that they *will* be issuing 
a statement in a few days, and there has already been much internal 
discussion.  See:

http://www.iab.org/Documents/icann-vgrs-response.html

ahp


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/


----- End forwarded message -----