Re: First? TRUE Root Name Server On Line

[jp@PalmerOwns.The.Earth (John Palmer)]

> 
> Jim, you wrote:
> 
> > This is truly a fine piece of work. I hope that you continue
> > to refine your analysis of not only the 9 "popular" Root Name
> > Servers but all of the Root Name Servers.
> 
> There is no distinction.  Having a server that answers for names in "."
> using data not registered via the IANA (directly or indirectly) is not
> the same as having a "root name server."
> 
> Your desire to make a distinction between "popular" and "actual" is 
> dishonest, misleading, ugly, and rude.  There are exactly nine root
> name servers.  Not "popular" root name servers - 9 SERVERS, total:
> 
> 	A.ROOT-SERVERS.NET.     602325  A       198.41.0.4
> 	B.ROOT-SERVERS.NET.     602325  A       128.9.0.107
> 	C.ROOT-SERVERS.NET.     602325  A       192.33.4.12
> 	D.ROOT-SERVERS.NET.     602325  A       128.8.10.90
> 	E.ROOT-SERVERS.NET.     602325  A       192.203.230.10
> 	F.ROOT-SERVERS.NET.     602325  A       192.5.5.241
> 	G.ROOT-SERVERS.NET.     602325  A       192.112.36.4
> 	H.ROOT-SERVERS.NET.     602325  A       128.63.2.53
> 	I.ROOT-SERVERS.NET.     602325  A       192.36.148.17
> 
> Get over it.
> 
> Paul
> 

Not everyone agrees about your view of the universe. I am willing to 
admit that we don't have a large number of people who use the Alternic 
cache (as opposed to the total number of people on the net), but we 
do have somewhat of a following.

You get over it. 

We can operate whatever kind of business we want. 

Consider this: We can pay major providers to use AlterNic's root cache. 
One of our plans is to
   1> Give free web space and web page developement expertise to people
      who want to be on the web provided that they register ONLY under
      an alternic TLD.
   2> Pay major ISP's to use the AlterNic root.cache.

We have been working on this for awhile, but have slowed down in deference
to the IAHC. If they come up with a hair-brained scheme (or no scheme at 
all), we will continue with our efforts. 

Again, I am not criticizing the IAHC. I am happy that 1> They exist and
2> that they see the need to move quickly.

Should they fail or fail to recognize our trademarks, we will buy market
penetration by giving out goodies to potential web clients (the only thing
they have to pay for is registration in the .EARTH or .USA zone) and 
paying ISP's to carry our iTLDs.

We have SIX new web servers on order and will be using NetScape Commerce
Server software on these sites. 

This is a possible solution to the problem. It will make the DNS less
homogeneous (as some sites will still not be able to see all TLD's), but
we will have to live with it. If we have to bull our way in, we will do
it, expending resources to accomplish our goals, but isn't that always
the way it is? Isn't that the way its supposed to be?

I would like to have an amicable relationship with the IANA/IAHC. I will
follow all procedures for applications. I will put together a first rate
NIC. They won't have any excuse to say no. If they do, it won't be our
fault. If that happens, we will go on to whatever is next (see above) 
as will everyone else.

EARTH and USA are ours and we intend to move forward with them, with our
without the I*** people. We would like to be friends, but this is 
business.

I will be posting a draft copy of the USA/EARTH registry terms and conditions
tommorrow. I will ask for your comments on it. These will be open TLD's
and I want community input.

John Palmer.