[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[atlarge-discuss] AtLarge-discuss Summary 25 Aug - 31 Aug 2002
Summary, 25 Aug 2002 - 31 Aug 2002
Nearly 140 messages from 21 senders
Bruce Young solicited other inputs with answers to question "Why should
individual users participate in setting domain name policy" to put on a
page in his website. Himself gave an answer opposing the ALSC view to
equate domain name holders as users:
He also suggested to put elsewhere a page with primers on the more
esoteric features of Internet technology, standards and regulation.
Joanna Lane forwarded the Panel decision about Timeline and procedures
for deciding the name of our organization:
and the resolution to change the domain name ICANNAtLarge.com to one
that does not use the .COM extension:
While the latter had only a a remark (aware of the preceding discussion)
forwarded from Vivek Durai:
the name's question was extensively discussed also in others threads,
raising questions like
- which list of names and related informations to be put in ballots
- necessity to avoid the membership vote for a name that turns out to be
- whether we have to use a TLD suffix (different from .com) or not
Jefsey Morfin inserted the name, structure and naming plan in a wide
consideration about our organization:
which had some replies.
Todd Glassey: "before we name this group - lets decide what its
deliverables are!." and after, he too submitted considerations about
deliverables and the state of the organization:
Giampaolo Bonora confirmed the offer of domain names netatlarge.org and
Notice to Members on the discuss list:
Jefsey confirmed his approach replying to Joop Teernstra, which "first
choice would be icannatlarge.org, currently held by elected panel member
>There is NO need for a change, choice, decision.
>There is only a lack of understanding by some of:
>1. what we need: a legal name to incorporate a secretariat and a banking account
>2. what we already have: a global name "@large"
>3. what is an internet name.
>Can you or anyone else had a cheap/free hosting with a dedicated IP for the site? So we can move ahead of all this totally out of sense fuss?
In reply, Joanna pointed out the situation:
and started a new thread involving WG-Outreach and WG-WEB:
Danny Younger reminded about the forthcoming timeline for comments on
DNSO WHOIS Task Force Report.
Vittorio Bertola submitted his comments:
Richard Henderson on a WG-Registrar idea:
>I'm toying with the idea of seeking ICANN accreditation for a new Registrar
>company called Integrity Domains.
>The process I have in mind is to gather together a Working Group (Integrity
>Working Group) to plan the ethos and distinctive features of a new kind of
>registrar, as well as setting out the strategy for achieving accreditation
>and operating as a viable company. [...]
>This may be an insane idea - but what have I got to lose at this stage
Full message at http://www.fitug.de/atlarge-discuss/0208/msg01195.html
Giampaolo pointed to statements of acceptance as DNSO candidate to ICANN
Board made by Panel members Youn Jung Park and Vivek Durai, on the DNSO
Jeff Williams stated his support for YJ Park and Richard Henderson for
Vivek Durai, with a reference to correct procedures to endorse a
candidate. Todd Glassey, Eric Dierker and Vivek agreed "that holding a
seat on both committee's management teams is a clear conflict of
Other messages, links and forwarded materials.
Giampaolo Bonora - firstname.lastname@example.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: email@example.com
For additional commands, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org