Subject: RE: IAB comments on Green Paper

From: Jim Fleming <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 21:01:31 -0600

On Monday, February 23, 1998 9:50 PM, Sascha Ignjatovic[SMTP:[email-masked]] wrote:
<snip>
@
@the root name servers are not the problem hier 
@

Let's agree to disagree on this one.

@the problem is that usg puts the commerce departement!! 
@(also than !!! when the national telcommunications infrastructure agency
@ is a part of the commerce departement-how long it should remain there:-) 
@in the front of "managing" some vital resources of global internet !!
@

I assume that you have pointed to the U.S. funded and controlled Root Name
Servers based on your own free will. Why one would waste bandwidth
sending queries across the expensive transcontinental links can be
the topic of another discussion.

Continuing...now that you have chosen to "use" the U.S. Government
provided resources, you have to live with the decisions they make
about those resources. If you do not like those decisions. Point
to some other Root Name Servers. If Europe had some, you would
have a more efficient system and your own rights to control them.
You would be a peer.

@and that its trys to establish "ownership" over something wich is 
@some how a property of all of humble "us" :-)
@

There in lies the problem. The U.S. Government controlled
legacy Root Name Servers are not yours. They belong to the
U.S. taxpayers. There are strict laws about how U.S. Government
facilities can be used. When the Internet was heavily based in
DOD funded activities, things were free wheeling. Now that the
Internet is a largely commercial enterprise, the participants
have to fund their own infrastructure and not ride on the coat-tails
of the U.S. taxpayers.

@if somebody is building up rockets this dont mean that he "owns" 
@the universe :-)
@

If you buy tickets on their rocket, you fly where it goes.
Buy your own rocket and you get to decide the mission.
Why is that so hard ?

Jim Fleming
Unir Corporation
IBC, Tortola, BVI

---

From: Sascha Ignjatovic <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 1998 05:39:08 +0100 (MET)

please read this mail only if you are interested otherwise discard
thanks
---------------------------------------------------------------------

On Mon, 23 Feb 1998, Jim Fleming wrote:

> U.S. taxpayers. 

when you pay a doctor to run a medical service and to cure you
do you own the doctor and the medicine and do you poses his 
knowledge becouse you pay him 

in your theorie  when you pay for something its yours :-)

if you pay me for some advice i give you and if you build up some
VIP lounge to host me during i advising you - do i belong to you as your 
property from than and you own me and do you own my intelectaul knowledge
becouse you builded up the lounge ??

i think not  

the internet was not only the product of taxpayers money
-the most of the mentioned taxpayers hase no idea of the 
 internet at all  and now you achive them to the "owners" 
 of the internet ?

the internet is a INTELECTUAL product and PROPERTY of many people 
-not only the agencys and paying people  
 but the people who HASE DONE the REAL work developing the CONCEPT 
 of the INTERNET 

the internet belongs to this people MORE than to the taxpayers!!

and there is a big part of the internet wich is NOT payd by american 
taxpayers :-)
as example the europeans and others too are paying the trafic from europe 
to america for americans becouse they are paying the transcontinental
lines and trafic to usa internet -source euroispa (if it is true:-)

> There are strict laws about how U.S. Government

we dont want to ride on the american tax payers 
in reallity the american company named NSI 
makes a benefit for their own on the "costs" of american taxpayers 
why you not go to them and convince them :-)

and dont forget  the commercial aspect of the internet 
is just ONE SINGLE aspect of the internet  there are MANY more like
religious scientifc political cultural etc..

and the commerce ASPECT of the internet DOESNT RULE the internet !!

> Buy your own rocket and you get to decide the mission.

i am sory but we want no more to use rockets to drive anywhere 
-they are to slow :-)  

instad we like to use quantum computing/networking and  
later information/knowledge and than later again antimatter computing :-)
to act in a instantinuos way over wast distances over the unvierse
becouse we understand that as a spiritual living beengs we are not
depending on this material bodys to reach higher level of understanding and  
existence 

policy is a importend part of human society and hase some certain
funktion but is 

NOT THE HIGHEST INTELECTUAL AUTHORITY of the human society

so please let us alone with your "taxpayers intelligence" :-)

so you see  the internet and what it could become is much more than the 
property of taxpayers 

we call the internet as the "most wunderful thing we have on earth"
and you call it "property of american taxpayers" ??

this is really hard :-)

thanks
sascha

ps.i am very thankful to american goverment and its taxpayers and 
   i aknowledge their particular rolle in building up the internet
   -but they where only suporters  the reall builders are some other
   people and organisations !!  and i accept their leadership when it
   advances us all   but if they stand between us and the further 
   advancement than they have no leadership autority 

   and with the GP it is showed that they have not the competence 
   to lead the global internet as the scientific political economical
   and cultural infrastructure for the planet earth becouse they reduce 
   it to electronic commerce and taxpayers ownership with american  
   taxpayers commerce intelligence runing it 

   see sometimes is the best thing someone can contribute to a great 
   development just money-he hase nothing else to contribute 
   but to make them for that "king of the world" is a little to much :-)

---

From: Karl Auerbach <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 1998 10:14:28 -0800 (PST)

Sascha and everyone:

Please make sure that you submit comments in the proper form and to the
proper address as indicated on the Federal Register Notice.  Otherwise
they are comments that will be lost. 

		--karl--

---

From: Sascha Ignjatovic <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 1998 21:50:21 +0100 (MET)

> they are comments that will be lost. 

thank you mr.karl

i just let my self a little more time just progresing in the art of
arguments and coments i want to make to them 

so i am yet not finished how it could look like but slowly i get some 
ideas along wich line i may argue  but of course as a single person
this may not count to them until you have reacht a intelligent and 
inchargt person there 

it would be interesting to learn who will examine this comments 

do you want to ask them or should i try to get more on this ?

it would be interesting to learn how the procedure would be there after
they get coments after coments and how they process it and whats than ?

thanks
sascha

---

From: Sascha Ignjatovic <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 1998 22:02:00 +0100 (MET)

> do you want to ask them or should i try to get more on this ?

SORY HIER IS A MISTAKE  

I AM NOT COMPETENT TO CHECK OUT HOW THE PROCESS IS OF EVALUATION  
PROCESSING AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMENTS TO THE GP 

SO I HUMBLY REQUEST SOME OF YOU VERY COMPETENT TO FIND THIS OUT 

THANKS
 
> they get coments after coments and how they process it and whats than ?

AND SPECIALY  IT IS ALWAYS GOOD TO KNOW THE PEOPLE PERSONALY WITH WE HAVE
TO DEAL-MR.MAGAZINER IS ONE OF THEM 

so whos officers are working on this matters 

thanks
sascha