IP: USPS Claim of GIAW/IFWP Support for .us Domain Takeover Looks

[Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

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
***************************************************************************