I'm drafting as we speak. mark maggie.mansourkia@verizon.com wrote:

No apologies necessary. I totally agree. Did we decide to file comments together on behalf of the ISPCP?

Magnolia Mansourkia Chief Privacy Counsel Verizon Communications 703-351-3199 Voice 703-351-3653 Fax 202-744-3745 Mobile

*Greg Ruth <greg_ruth@yahoo.com>* Sent by: owner-ispcp@gnso.icann.org

07/05/2006 01:09 PM

To mcfadden@21st-century-texts.com, ispcp@icann.org cc

Subject Re: [ispcp] Note to ISOC members on the NTIA request for comments on the MoU

All, Does anyone else have a problem with the statement

"...operational authority over the DNS root name server system through formal arrangements with the root name server operators is not desirable. We believe that the current distributed and redundant way of operating the root name servers by a dozen independent organizations is highly successful."

I think this Blanche DuBois strategy (depending on the kindness of strangers) is rather ingenuous (or, perhaps, disingenuous). It reflects the culture of the Internet about 20 years ago, when everything was done informally by "gentleman's agreement" (sorry Maggie). Things have changed. What's wrong with formal arrangements with the root name server operators?

Greg

__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com