Interesting People mailing list archives
IP: USPS Claim of GIAW/IFWP Support for .us Domain Takeover Looks
From: Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 1998 14:19:49 -0400
And while I was there I heqard no such thing. There were a lot of parallel sessions and who knows someone may have wispered it into some ear but no very loudly djf Date: Sat, 4 Jul 1998 12:30:46 -0400 From: Gordon Cook <cook () cookreport com> It is beginning to look as though the US Postal Service wants to grab control of .us name space so badly that it is planting false reports in the Internet press. Witness the following: Internet News - story at <http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/1998/07/0203-postal.html The story declares: "US Postal Service Bid to Control the .US Domains Advances [July 2, 1998] A United States Postal Service proposal to take control over the .US domain gathered support at the Global Incorporation Alliance Workshop (GIAW) conference in Reston, VA today." I, Gordon Cook, attended the workshop. I heard no such presentation. Kark Auerbach has stated on DOMAIN-POLICY () LISTS INTERNIC NET that he heard no such presentation and that "No such plan was endorsed by the participants." Jay Fenello on the same list stated "I agree with Karl." Terry Calhoun on discussion-draft () giaw org, wrote: " I flitted from group to group with the intent of monitoring (at least) all vectors of discussion. I did not hear the USPS mentioned in any venue. Tony Rutkowskii stated on discussion-draft () giaw org. "There was no place on the agenda for this subject to be raised, nor was it raised. There were two postal system related people present: Carole Dobbs, an Informations Systems Specialist at USPS; and Hany Elmanawy, Manager of VAN Services at the Universal Postal Union in Berne (which is establishing the .POST domain as an initiative among postal administrations). Both of these people were there as observers, engaging many people individually in discussions and watched the work being accomplished." Einar Stefferud wrote in response to my private question "I know nothing about any USPS presentation at the IFWP/GIAW conference I attended. As far as I know, it never happened." Mikki Barry added: Same here. I doubt that anything like that could have happened and nobody here had heard about it. Otherwise, I think that the firestorm would have received a lot more attention. I am hoping that this report wasn't something spread in an attempt to derail the process before it even begins." Jon Quarterman responded: "I saw no evidence of the USPS participating at the IFWP/GIAW conference while I was attending it, and as far as I know there was no such participation." Steff, John and Mikki have given me their permission to quote their responses. My other quotes are from public lists.) In short I, Gordon Cook, have been unable to find a soul who was there who heard any such report as was alleged by Scott Clark (sclark () webdeveloper com), the author of the story. I find it interesting that what looks to be a wildly inaccurate story is posted on the Mecklermedia site with no reporter's by line. I have enough evidence to conclude that Clark was the author of the story. If this becomes an issue I will back up my conclusions. I have emailed him and await his reply. I have so far tried unsuccessfully to find a phone number for him. I don't look at Internetnews.com, so I cannot conclude whether it is their generally accepted style to print stories without author's names. In this case it was certainly not helpful. I will categorically state that any discussion of the USPS plan in any formal sense whatsoever would have been directly contrary to the agenda of the conference which was to discuss ***PROCESS issues*** involved in setting up the new IANA corp. Process - not POLICY. Process - not content. Discussion of the advisability of any government agency having control over some part of domain name space has nothing whatsoever to do with the issues of the incorporation of the new IANA corp., its articles of incorporation, its bylaws or its board. Therefore in this context consider the next paragraphs of Clark's article: "The USPS asked conference participants to endorse its plan to map all street addresses within the United states to the .US domain. Every home, store and office would have an Internet address to match its postal address. Some supporters of the plan believe it could end many domain name disputes involving trademarks, copyrighted names, etc. For example, a Hollywood, California-based business named "John's Cars" could have the Web address (URL) "johnscars.hollywood.ca.us" and an e-mail address of "john () johnscars hollywood ca us" for its owner. At least that's the concept behind the USPS' proposal. According to US Postal Service documents obtained by InternetNews, other aspects of the proposal include establishing a governance structure for the .US domain space." COOK Report: Ah=8A. Is the USPS now leaking its own material to Clark in an effort to delude him and push its own agenda? Or does Clark merely refer to the postal service plan published by the COOK Report two weeks ago? Clark's write up continues: "Currently, IANA (Internet Assigned Numbers Authority) administers the .US domain, and has delegated registrar status to dozens of volunteers. The US Postal Service is currently testing services that link electronic input to physical mail delivery. The USPS believes that this can ease customers' concerns about privacy and security, promoting a more rapid acceptance of electronic commerce in general. Proponents of the proposal include Dr. Jon Postel, director of the IANA, who is under pressure to reduce his direct involvement in naming registration. Postel wrote in an e-mail to .US domain registrars, "If the US Government told the IANA to allocate the US domain to some agency there could be . . . worse choices. The USPS organizational structure and supplier sourcing agreements currently in place can provide services within the existing .US TLD [top-level domain], and will scale readily to handle any growth in future demands." " Is Clark a witting or unwitting shill for the agenda of the USPS? You decide. What continues to be clear is that Brian Kahin either cannot control or does not wish to control the process that he has been guiding for some six months with Postel's assistance behind closed doors and outside the knowledge of the Internet community. I don't claim this to be a definitive report on these events and look forward to hearing from Scott Clark, the USPS, or anyone who can shed further light on what looks to me to be the most sleazy and devious of ways for the USPS to push its agenda. If this indeed turns out to be what it looks like, the USPS has just demonstrated that it should not be trusted to manage the .us space. The Clinton administration owes the Internet an explanation of the not so cute games being played. *************************************************************************** The COOK Report on Internet New Special Report: Building Internet 431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 USA Infrastructure ($395) available. See (609) 882-2572 (phone & fax) http://www.cookreport.com/building.ht= ml cook () cookreport com Index to 6 years of COOK Report, how = to subscribe, exec summaries, special reports, gloss at http://www.cookreport.c= om ***************************************************************************
Current thread:
- IP: USPS Claim of GIAW/IFWP Support for .us Domain Takeover Looks Dave Farber (Jul 04)