[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [atlarge-discuss] Re: [atlarge-panel] MOTION PROPOSAL: was WG-WEB: responses to Jamie
Richard and all stakeholders or other interested parties and members,
Your again mistaken here Richard. Jefsey warned that ICANNATLARGE.ORG
because of recent ICANN ERC developments would not be a "Proper
Domain Name" for us to use after he offered it to us to use should it
be selected in the vote, which it was. However Jefseys warning was
after the fact of these changing developments from within ICANN, which
are still BTW, not finalized until ICANN's December meeting. Hence
in effect a false alarm was run by Jefsey, although he really didn't
know that at the time.
The DN ICANNATLARGE.ORG was TRANSFERED, to Marc
due to no fault of Verisign, but because Jefsey, as he himself stated
on this forum, in part, because Joop would not alias ICANNATLARGE.COM
to ICANNATLARGE.ORG, and mainly because, the name servers
for ICANNATLARGE.ORG were misconfigured. All this I outlined
in swhois.net listings at the time and more importantly NSLOOKUP
for the actual zone time info on the Name Servers for ICANNATLARGE.ORG.
Richard Henderson wrote:
> This is absolutely correct. Jefsey warned everyone in advance. The name was
> effectively taken from Jefsey, not by Marc, but by NSI. Their systems are,
> in my opinion, a disgrace and so many people have reported year in year out
> how difficult they find it to communicate with them. There should be far
> easier processes through which Jefsey would have been able to safeguard the
> name which he has lost. As he says, if this name had had commercial value
> for him, he might well have felt inclined to sue.
>
> Marc Schneiders has managed to get the name with a "clean sheet" which -
> should he desire to share it with us - will make configuration much easier,
> and access should be easy right from the outset.
>
> It remains to be seen what Marc wants to do, but the whole system of
> registries and registrars with awkward customer liaison and answerphones
> that never put you through or keep you waiting for ages is disreputable.
> ICANN has presided over a system which is biased far too strongly in favour
> of the supplier, and mitigates against the interests of the consumer.
>
> The issue of expiring names remains an industry "set up".
>
> Icannatlarge.org was lost, even though its registrant wanted it, and it is
> only by possible good fortune that a person in sympathy with our general
> aims has managed to rescue it. If Marc Schneiders DOES come to our aid, he
> will be deserve immense gratitude for having the initiative to help this
> organisation.
>
> Richard
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin <jefsey@club-internet.fr>
> To: <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
> Sent: Sunday, October 06, 2002 3:18 PM
> Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] Re: [atlarge-panel] MOTION PROPOSAL: was
> WG-WEB: responses to Jamie
>
> > On 03:00 06/10/02, Jeff Williams said:
> > >Jefsey and all stakeholders or other interested parties and members,
> > >
> > >Understood here Jefsey. One small detail is not jiving now. That
> > >is that it seems that just today ICANNATLARGE.ORG was
> > >transferred to Marc Schnieder.
> >
> > Was not transfered. Was taken. Marc is the only sensible person in here.
> He
> > did what I tried and asked you guy to do: to register the name either to
> > get it transfered or to get it directly. May be did he got already when I
> > tried and it was the reason why I got an error message - was under
> process.
> >
> > >In addition you should have long
> > >ago abandon the alias to the .COM version of the DN.
> >
> > I am afraid I do not understand what you mean here. Joop registered the
> > .com to avoid that we use .org. This was all planed a long ago and you
> know
> > well with who :-) Old IDNO days.
> >
> > The he never permitted to alias icannatlarge.org to icannatlarge.com.
> > As he does not permit icann-at[-]large.xxx to alias to icannatlarge.com
> ...
> > what I will do when I have time for that.
> >
> > >Also you should have gotten a different host or Name servers or
> > >changed the config of the existing ones.
> >
> > Obviously then you did not understand my mail. I plainly explained why I
> > could not because of NSI denial. Actually would it be a commercial name I
> > would now sue NSI.
> >
> > >Marc has also now locked ICANNATLARGE.ORG sense it was transfered.
> >
> > I am very confident that Marc will manage it correctly.
> >
> > JFC
> >
> >
> > >J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin wrote:
> > >
> > > > Dear Jeff,
> > > > what you do not understand is that because icannatlarge.org has been
> put on
> > > > hold it does not resolve anymore and the current confirguation which
> is
> > > > inadequate but which worked cannot be mended.
> > > >
> > > > The nameserver associated to icannatlarge.org are ns1.codelocal.com
> and
> > > > ns1.pcode.com. These namesevers are NOT in operations for months now,
> but
> > > > names still are under my control. So they have been allocated the same
> IP
> > > > addresses as the name servers in use (which are authoritative). Until
> end
> > > > of Septembre it worked. I still tried access when Joop complained it
> was
> > > > resolving to the wiki (because Joop never supported icannatalrge.org
> as an
> > > > alias to .com).
> > > >
> > > > This was the only thing I could do as long as NSI does not want to
> respond
> > > > to demands. As I explained many, many, many times icannatlarge.org has
> been
> > > > put on a separate user account I have no access to (due to the
> additions of
> > > > mistakes when NSI purchased my registrar) and NSI had never returned
> it yet
> > > > to my own partner account. I own the name, but have no access to it to
> > > > update it or even renew it.
> > > >
> > > > Since no one wants to help with matter of fact assistance and everyone
> > > > prefers barking at me, I drop the issue. I also see there is
> absolutely NO
> > > > interest in the icannatlarge name per se, since I still have NO
> response
> > > > from either present and could-be webmaster to tell me if they are
> ready to
> > > > support or to allias icann-at-large.xxx and icann-atlarge.xxx names.
> And NO
> > > > position whatsoever from ANY member of the panel nor of the
> Membership.
> > > >
> > > > At this stage the only thing wich could be attempted is to
> rebuy/transfer
> > > > the name. I tried yesterday but the system was down (I cannot know if
> it
> > > > was the network problem or a default message due to the name being on
> > > > hold). Why not you to try to buy it? I should then receive a request
> for
> > > > approval.
> > > >
> > > > The only good news in all that is that NSI did not give a damn to
> > > > icannatlarge.org until it was to put to vote (against me and against
> my
> > > > propsoitions) and we voted we should use it. Good smoke screening.
> > > >
> > > > jfc
> > > >
> > > > On 08:46 05/10/02, Jeff Williams said:
> > > >
> > > > >Chris and all stakeholders or other interested parties and members,
> > > > >
> > > > > As has been pointed out time and time again, webalias/tocows,
> which
> > > > >owns or is the registrant of record of deleteddomains.com is
> notoriously
> > > > >inaccurate. This has been pointed out on the DNSO GA list forum
> quite
> > > > > a number of times on that forum.
> > > > >
> > > > >swhois.net search yields:
> > > > >Registrant:
> > > > > The WebAlias Network
> > > > > 29 Red Barn Road
> > > > > Trumbull, CT 06611
> > > > > US
> > > > >
> > > > > Domain Name: DELETEDDOMAINS.COM
> > > > >
> > > > > Administrative Contact:
> > > > > Contact, Admin webmaster@webalias.com
> > > > > 29 Red Barn Road
> > > > > Trumbull, CT 06611
> > > > > US
> > > > > 203-445-1471
> > > > >
> > > > > Technical Contact:
> > > > > Contact, Technical webmaster@webalias.com
> > > > > 29 Red Barn Road
> > > > > Trumbull, CT 06611
> > > > > US
> > > > > 203 445 1471
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Registrar of Record: TUCOWS, INC.
> > > > > Record last updated on 30-Sep-2002.
> > > > > Record expires on 21-Feb-2003.
> > > > > Record Created on 21-Feb-2000.
> > > > >
> > > > > Domain servers in listed order:
> > > > > NS3.DOMAINSERVERS.COM 209.50.253.132
> > > > > NS4.DOMAINSERVERS.COM 209.50.253.133
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The Data in the Tucows Registrar WHOIS database is
> > > > >provided to
> > > > >you by Tucows
> > > > > for information purposes only, and may be used to
> > > > >assist you in
> > > > >obtaining
> > > > > information about or related to a domain name's
> > > > >registration
> > > > >record.
> > > > >
> > > > > Tucows makes this information available "as is,"
> and
> > > > >does not
> > > > >guarantee its
> > > > > accuracy.
> > > > >==============
> > > > >
> > > > > Take note of the last record entry, and I quote again: "Tucows
> makes
> > > > >this
> > > > >information available "as is," and does not guarantee its accuracy."
> > > > >
> > > > > Ergo Chris, this information regarding ICANNATLARGE.ORG being
> > > > >on hold is inaccurate. Not surprising. So the reference source you
> are
> > > > >providing themselves, does not guarantee the accuracy of the
> > > > >information,
> > > > >and properly so, as at times, perhaps more often than not, it is
> > > > >inaccurate.
> > > > >
> > > > > So let this be a lesson for you and everyone here on this forum.
> One
> > > > >should be careful to read ALL of the information and do ALL of the
> > > > >checking
> > > > >before making such judgments of this nature.
> > > > >
> > > > > Now, like I said, ICANNATLARGE.ORG is NOT on hold in reality,
> > > > >it's name servers are not authoritative. Do an NSLOOKUP on them
> > > > >and the corresponding IP address for each Name server, and you will
> > > > >or should see that they are not authoritative, and that, as such, are
> > > > >misconfigured.
> > > > >
> > > > >NameCritic wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > You may need to look at the archives. Go to
> > > http://www.DeletedDomains.com
> > > > > > and do a search for any domain name containing the words ICANN for
> > > on hold
> > > > > > domain names. IcannAtLarge.org is in the list.
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > -Snip old stuff -
> > >
> > >Regards,
> > >
> > >Jeffrey A. Williams
> > >Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 127k members/stakeholders strong!)
> > >CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
> > >Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> > >E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
> > >Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 972-244-3801
> > >Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >---
> > >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> > >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > >Version: 6.0.391 / Virus Database: 222 - Release Date: 19/09/02
> >
> >
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
>
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> > For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 127k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 972-244-3801
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de