[79228] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Telcordia report on ICANN .net RFP Evaluation
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Patrick W Gilmore)
Fri Apr 1 08:49:29 2005
In-Reply-To: <200533122716.113665@BBPRIME>
Cc: Patrick W Gilmore <patrick@ianai.net>
From: Patrick W Gilmore <patrick@ianai.net>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 08:48:55 -0500
To: nanog@merit.edu
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Apr 1, 2005, at 1:07 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
>> I do believe that study is open to peer review?
>> Telcordia ranking VRSN way ahead does seem to be raising some
>> hackles here
>
> it is oddly interesting to see the persistent -- one might even say
> tenacious
> -- clearly bi-modal clustering of assessments about Verisign.
>
> From what I can tell, one cluster is primarily composed of people
> with serious
> (and probably larger-scale) network services operation experience and
> the
> other cluster has pretty much no one of that ilk...
Interesting assessment! I had not noticed that the only outspoken
supporters of Verisign were not truly operational.
But my recent post was not "against" (or "for", for that matter)
Verisign. I am just disappointed that ICANN did not have the integrity
to select a company that is _truly_ independent to judge the
applicants.
Would someone from ICANN care to explain their decision process? I
cannot believe they did not know the apparent conflict of interest.
--
TTFN,
patrick
