[35692] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Statements against new.net?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mathew Butler)
Wed Mar 14 19:07:18 2001
Message-ID: <F062E72E4BA2D4119F1700B0D03D205F3B86@mail.tonbu.com>
From: Mathew Butler <mbutler@tonbu.com>
To: 'Mark Radabaugh - Amplex' <mark@amplex.net>, nanog@merit.edu
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 12:54:23 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C0ACC8.F3056E70"
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C0ACC8.F3056E70
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
If the Commerce Department ruled that new.net threatened the very core of
how the Internet works (which it does -- resolver libraries and nameservers
were written to the spec, and the spec said that ONE zone was owned and
managed by ONE entity -- and multiple root zones were never included in that
concept), then I could see it legally working.
-Mat Butler
Speaking for myself, not my employer.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Radabaugh - Amplex [mailto:mark@amplex.net]
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2001 10:19 AM
To: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: RE: Statements against new.net?
>
> BUT if representatives from a dozen or a hundred ISPs meet
> together and
> choose to blackhole new.net for the explicit purpose of
> running them out
> of business, and then do so, they would be in violation of US
> anti-trust
> laws.
>
> -- David
But what if a quasi-government organization (ICANN) explicitly blessed
the concept of banning alternate roots :-) Now there is a can of
worms...
Mark Radabaugh
Amplex
(419) 833-3635
------_=_NextPart_001_01C0ACC8.F3056E70
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
5.5.2653.12">
<TITLE>RE: Statements against new.net?</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>If the Commerce Department ruled that new.net =
threatened the very core of how the Internet works (which it does -- =
resolver libraries and nameservers were written to the spec, and the =
spec said that ONE zone was owned and managed by ONE entity -- and =
multiple root zones were never included in that concept), then I could =
see it legally working.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>-Mat Butler</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Speaking for myself, not my employer.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>-----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>From: Mark Radabaugh - Amplex [<A =
HREF=3D"mailto:mark@amplex.net">mailto:mark@amplex.net</A>]</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2001 10:19 AM</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>To: nanog@merit.edu</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Subject: RE: Statements against new.net?</FONT>
</P>
<BR>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>></FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> BUT if representatives from a dozen or a =
hundred ISPs meet</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> together and</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> choose to blackhole new.net for the explicit =
purpose of</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> running them out</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> of business, and then do so, they would be in =
violation of US</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> anti-trust</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> laws.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>></FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> -- David</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>But what if a quasi-government organization (ICANN) =
explicitly blessed</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>the concept of banning alternate roots =
:-) Now there is a can of</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>worms...</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Mark Radabaugh</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Amplex</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>(419) 833-3635</FONT>
</P>
<BR>
</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C0ACC8.F3056E70--
