nanog mailing list archives
RE: ICANN dead?
From: "Daniel Golding" <dgolding () sockeye com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 13:38:10 -0500
I have to ask that folks stop posting email with subject lines like "ICANN dead?", due to the unreasonable sense of hope and longing that it may provoke in the rest of us. Indeed, when we discover that ICANN, is in fact, not dead, it's rather disappointing. - Daniel Golding
-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu]On Behalf Of Christopher Schulte Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 11:15 PM To: Patrick Greenwell; Curtis Maurand Cc: nanog () nanog org Subject: Re: ICANN dead? At 07:23 PM 1/16/2002 -0800, Patrick Greenwell wrote:Just another example of the guardians of "Internet stability" exhibiting their true level of suitability for the task.Oh please. Didn't we go over this mid November, 2001? http://www.icann.org/ ( which is available from my workstation just fine, by the way ) is not a critical part of the operational stability of the internet as a whole. It may have been unavailable. If so, big deal. Move on. Enough said./\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\Patrick Greenwell Stealthgeeks,LLC. Operations Consulting http://www.stealthgeeks.net \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ --chris
Current thread:
- ICANN dead? Curtis Maurand (Jan 16)
- Re: ICANN dead? Patrick Greenwell (Jan 16)
- Re: ICANN dead? Christopher Schulte (Jan 16)
- RE: ICANN dead? Daniel Golding (Jan 18)
- Re: ICANN dead? Christopher Schulte (Jan 16)
- Re: ICANN dead? Patrick Greenwell (Jan 16)