[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [atlarge-discuss] Our New Name Isn't...
Richard and all stakeholders or other interested parties and members,
Richard, I can sense your frustration. Cast it aside, as it is
not helpful to you or your cause. I too am not happy with the
string "ICANN" or "Atlarge" in the new DN for our presence.
But the members voted and the results are official, ICANNATLARGE.ORG
IS our new DN.
The recent problem with ICANNATLARGE.ORG not resolving can
be easily fixed. Jefsey can either move to a different hoster or
get the present Name servers fixed for the current hoster. I prefer the
former approach.
Richard Henderson wrote:
> Look, could someone PLEASE clarify this situation?
>
> I'm wholly unhappy to proceed with this name, especially when it doesn't
> resolve and there is continuing ambiguity. I also feel there is ambiguity as
> to whether most people actually wanted ICANN in the organisation's name. It
> may be true that more people wanted icannatlarge.org than any ONE of the
> other names, but that's because the "Icann" name was ONE name, whereas the
> "non-Icann" votes were split between three names.
>
> I maintain (until proven otherwise) that the majority of voting members
> wanted a name without ICANN in it, and that a simple vote on that issue
> would prove this. In other words I believe:
>
> We are lumbered with a name which most people didn't want
> We are lumbered with a name over which there is ambiguity and confusion over
> control and ownership
> We are lumbered with a name which doesn't resolve
>
> Personally, I would add to that, that we are lumbered with the dreaded
> stigma of the ICANN name, which I believe most members hold in contempt.
>
> We are NOT part of the Icann Agenda. We are part of a wider agenda which
> will outlive Icann and which should not be narrowed down to Icann in the way
> we define ourselves.
>
> I still call for the motion for a clarifying vote of the membership to be
> held. Why should anyone object to finding out the truth about what people
> actually want with regard to the adoption of the Icann name?
>
> And who wants an inaccessible name?
>
> Richard
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gary Osbourne <d_d@email.com>
> To: <harivijapur@rediffmail.com>
> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 3:07 PM
> Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] Our New Name Isn't...
>
> > Hi Hari, I'm not on the list due to netkooks like
> > Jeff Williams, as I know from long experience
> > that anything with him involved is destined for
> > failure (note ICANN has just killed the GA, he
> > bears the responsibility for that more than any
> > other individual, although ICANN would have killed
> > it anyway), but I do follow atlarge lists via
> > the web. If you visit ICANNWatch I'm 'fnord' there.
> >
> > Regarding your query here:
> > http://www.fitug.de/atlarge-discuss/0210/msg00067.html
> >
> > Due to the non-universality of registrars' WHOIS,
> > it is best to query the actual registrar. Both
> > NetSol's web WHOIS query and a direct port 43
> > query return...
> >
> > ----
> > Whois Server Version 1.3
> >
> > Domain names in the .com, .net, and .org domains can now be registered
> > with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net
> > for detailed information.
> >
> > Domain Name: ICANNATLARGE.ORG
> > Registrar: NETWORK SOLUTIONS, INC.
> > Whois Server: whois.networksolutions.com
> > Referral URL: http://www.networksolutions.com
> > Name Server: NS1.PCODE.COM
> > Name Server: NS1.CODELOCAL.COM
> > Updated Date: 29-sep-2002
> >
> >
> > >>> Last update of whois database: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 16:56:06 EDT <<<
> >
> > The Registry database contains ONLY .COM, .NET, .ORG, .EDU domains and
> > Registrars.
> >
> > Domain not found locally, but Registry points back to local DB.
> > Local WHOIS DB must be out of date.
> >
> > -----
> >
> > That last part may mean the domain is about to
> > be dropped (that is the message one gets in such
> > situations). If so, it may just be an internal
> > netsol/verisign drop to correct an error (which
> > Jefsey says it had due to netsol, though I couldn't
> > figure that out). But until recently Jefsey was
> > listed as the registrant. I have a copy of that
> > WHOIS query somewhere and will look up if it has
> > reached its expiry date. If so, perhaps then it
> > will be picked up by a pr0n site, or perhaps the
> > atlarge can use snapnames etc. to get it back. :)
> >
> > What the WHOIS shows is that there is a registry
> > listing but not a registrar listing, and that
> > the *registrant* is netsol. This could be due to
> > other things than a drop (possibly a transfer?),
> > but it means that the name is, if anything, likely
> > even further from being turned over to the atlarge
> > panel than previously presumed. The nameservers do
> > still point to Jefsey's baliwick but that is near
> > meaningless at the moment. Face it, the name is
> > tainted goods.
> >
> > Regardless, not that anyone asked me, but I'd
> > suggest that the panel OK the vote of the
> > membership and then call a new vote on a new
> > name given the circumstances. I know this is
> > wonky, but it strikes me as the best of a bad
> > lot of options given the long, and getting
> > longer, list of problems with that name.
> >
> > As this is now two domain names in a row with
> > problems, I'd also suggest the atlarge get its act
> > together very quickly if it wishes to be taken
> > seriously with regard to even just the D*N*S,
> > which is only one part of ICANN's ambit. I don't
> > care if icannatlarge has 1000 or a million members,
> > if none of them have such a basic understanding,
> > then even anti-ICANNites like myself will ignore
> > it as a large clump of netkooks.
> >
> > And if I was paranoid, or even just prudently
> > suspicious, I'd wonder why all these problems
> > are happening (I've never had such with scores
> > of functioning names over the years), and why
> > they are happening at such a crucial time. If
> > this atlarge effort dies, there won't be another.
> > It would be foolish, and entirely atypical, for
> > ICANN's puppetmasters not to be using agents
> > provocateur at this juncture.
> >
> > Feel free to pass this on or not, as, when, and
> > where you see fit. Cheers, -g
> >
> > --
> > __________________________________________________________
> > Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com
> > http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
> >
> > Get 4 DVDs for $.49 cents! plus shipping & processing. Click to join.
> > http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/990-1736-3566-59
> >
> > "Free price comparison tool gives you the best prices and cash back!"
> > http://www.bestbuyfinder.com/download.htm
> >
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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