[35765] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Statements against new.net?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Patrick Greenwell)
Thu Mar 15 17:16:26 2001
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 12:59:01 -0800 (PST)
From: Patrick Greenwell <patrick@cybernothing.org>
To: Ben Browning <benb@theriver.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20010314100457.02932490@mail.oz.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0103151241120.589-100000@localhost>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Ben Browning wrote:
>
> At 09:17 AM 3/14/2001, Patrick Greenwell wrote:
> >On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Scott Francis wrote:
> > > the very reason they pay my (all our) paycheck is for technical expertise -
> > > if Joe Q. User had technical expertise sufficient to make informed
> > decisions
> > > on this type of matter, why would he need to hire a network operator?
> >
> >Consumer demand is not driven by your technical expertise.
>
> I dare say there is a good consumer demand for a flying car, or a cure for
> AIDS.
And people are working towards both. In fact, there are a couple of
"flying cars"(different companies implementations) out there. What's your
point?
> Although consumer demand is not driven by our technical expertise, neither
> are our networks dictated by consumer demand.
Without consumer demand, it is highly unlikely that you'd have a network
to speak of.
> Perhaps new TLD's are necessary- I have no problem conceding that fact. I
> do not think, however, that one company should have a chokehold on them.
I agree with you, 100%. I don't believe one company should either, rather
it be NSI, ICANN, New.net, or any other player. But that is exactly what
the majority of individuals appear to be rather voiceferously
advocating, saying anything outside the "sanctioned root"(whatever that
means) should be blackholed, the people offfering such TLDS are "frauds",
etc.
