Re: ISO 3166 recomendations.

["D. Chiodo" <djc@microwave.com>]

On Tue, 24 Dec 1996, John Palmer wrote:

> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 96 3:14:35 EST
> From: John Palmer <jp@PalmerOwns.The.Earth>
> To: iahc-discuss@iahc.org
> Subject: Re: ISO 3166 recomendations.
> 
> > 
> > Agreed. One policy for all. No exemptions for crappy policies here and there.
> > Let us now review all delagations to any country and see if  there is
> > "community consensus" regarding the ISO TLD registry in place today. Why?
> > Someone controls . and anyone who sits under . is part of a public trust
> > and a public delegation. Therefor as much as ANY public International
> > asset, ISO TLDs are an INternational asset, and must be delagted to a
> > organisation that follows standards and meets "community consensus".
> > 
> > Lets not fragment the DNS space. One policy for all.
> > 

If rants like this don't convince you John Palmer is off his nut, nothing
will.

> It is the SAHC (Socialist Ad-Hoc Committee) which is going to fragment
> the name space. 
> 
> If you look at the list from Jon Postel of people who applied for gTLD's 
> you see a lot of money there. 
> 
> We will use that money to make the SAHC and their bullshit draft 
> insignificant. 
> 
> I intend to run USA and EARTH as MY EXCLUSIVE PROPERTY and will spend 
> EVERY PENNY that I have and will ever earn for the next 40 or so years
> left in my life to promote them. 

Your exclusive property, in your exclusive Internet. The rest of us will
continue to use the real Internet, and ignore you. Substitute "and will
NEVER earn" in there and you will have a truer statement. Where are you
going to get all this money? No business in its right mind will register
in your private zones, and certainly not exclusively. Not if they want
anyone to see their pages, that is.

> For instance:
>       * Free web space and development services for any non-profit
>         which will register exclusivly under USA and EARTH. 
>       * $1,000 (this could go up) for any ISP who will agree to include
>         our TLD's in their name servers and who will activly promote 
>         them to their customers
>       * $10,000 to any ISP who will renounce their current .COM/.NET
>         domain and register SOLELY under .USA or .EARTH

Make damn sure you get this in writing, and signed, BEFORE you start
promoting his idiocy. In fact, you might want to get the money FIRST. And
cash the check too, to make sure it doesnt bounce. John Palmer doesnt HAVE
$1,000, let alone $10,000. And if you beleive he will, you are as nutty as
he is, and deserve to get burned.

>       * For the larger providers like NETCOM or AOL: a per-hit fee for
>         every hit that their servers make on our servers for one of our
>         TLDs ($1,000 isnt shit for AOL/Compuserve - they need a bigger
>         incentive).
> 
> We then have a viable commodity and can sell registrations to others. Like
> advertisers, our "circulation" can be easily audited by the various firms
> which audit publication circulation rates: We simply give them
> a list of the ISP's who have signed on to our proposal, show them the 
> contracts and allow them to independently check on these ISP's. 
> 
> This policy doesn't break the current DNS, but if others follow, we will 
> will have a million little iTLD's out there all independent of the SAHC
> and the SANA. This may cause headaches for some people on the internet
> and will fragment the DNS.   
> 
> You see, there is alot that I (and others) can do. 
> 
> Of course, litigation is inevitable as well. We demand access to the root
> zone file. It is a public resource and there is no reason we should not be
> allowed to list our service marks/trade marks in this file. 

You have no right to demand anything John. You are a little money hungry
pissant, trying to be God. I'm just glad you DONT have access to the root
zone file, and never will. I'd enumerate the overwhelming number of
reasons not to allow every little fly by night company to list their
trademarks in the root, but most of them would require I use words with
more than two syllables, which you wouldnt understand, so I wont bother.

> I will expose this "committee" for what it is - a power-hungry socialist
> politburo. Our nation destroyed such an organization (USSR) and we can
> do it again if need be. All we need is the truth and the money to spread
> it. We have both. 
> 
> If this fragments the name space, tough shit. 

YOU are the power hungry one, John. And you wont get it. And yes, tough
shit (to you) if they wont list your zones. 

> I will hold off on further action till Jan 31 to see if the SAHC actually
> tries to implement this policy of theirs. I am wondering if the ISOC or
> Jon Postel might not squash it before it does damage. It goes way beyond
> even his own draft policy. 

Sounds like a toothless ultimatum. What are you going to do John? Make
more empty threats? Continue to run your illegitimate zones tht no one
cares about? By all means do.

Oh, and by the way, I DARE you to terminate all nameservice for your
legitimate zones, and exist only in your fantasy zones. If you do, I'll
admit that instead of being just a little fly on the wall, that you
actually have some cahones. (But I will still maintain that you are
stupid, especially after you go out of business) 

Lest anyone think I am being unfair here, I would add that my opinions of
John Palmer are just that, my opinions, based on my observations. You are
of course free to observe and form your own opinions of him.