Subject: Re: newIANA (was Fram behind closed doors via opaque channels)

From: "Richard J. Sexton" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 19:44:18 -0400 (EDT)

At 12:06 PM 7/13/98 +0800, Dave Crocker wrote:
>Milton,
>
>At 09:33 PM 7/12/98 -0400, mueller wrote:
>>almost incomprehensible. ISI's involvement with the Internet is purely a
>>product of US Government funding. IANA is nothing but a government contract
>
>I'm sorry to have to say this, and to say it this way, but statements like
>the above demonstrate the kind of confusion about ISI and IANA that are
>prevalent around the world, particularly among those with no experience in
>Internet development or operations.  The reality of IANA's position has
>been stated and restated many times, yet that reality continues to be
>ignored.  The fact that the US government's Green and White papers go to
>some lengths to substantiate the basis for your view does not make that
>view correct.
>
>IANA gets its authority from the Internet operations and development
>community.  It always has.  And it has always worked collaboratively with
>that community.  Having been part of that community, I speak from
>first-hand knowledge.  If you have first-hand data which runs contrary to
>my own, direct experience about IANA's activities -- independent of its
>funding -- please provide it.
>
>One more time:  IANA funding has come from the US government.  It's
>authority has come from the Internet community.

Martin;

Don't let this idiot get you down. He is *severely* undereducated
and likes to brag about "operaitonal experience" although he's
been faking it for years. Dave had made a career out of editing
other poeples work. For example, he is listed as the author of
RFC822 the spec for emamil. Daves brother actually wrote it,
Dave just got his name in it.

IANA rules by will of the community ? That might have been 
true in a 5000 host network, but a vast majority of the
100,000,000 users of the net have no idea who IANA is...
or was.

Cheers,

--
The most important thing in the programming language is the name.  A
language will not succeed without a good name.  I have recently invented
a very good name and now I am looking for a suitable language.
     -- D. E. Knuth, 1967

---

From: Ned Freed <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 18:31:09 -0700 (PDT)

> Dave just got his name in it.

I cannot speak to the creation of RFC822, since I wasn't involved in standards
work at that time, but I can assure you that this is entirely at odds with my
experience in other more recent cases.

I've worked with Dave Crocker on numerous occasions. In the instances where he
is listed as an editor of or a contributor to an RFC I also worked on he always
was an an active contributor to that result. Indeed, there are instances, such
as the security multiparts described in RFC 1847, where the entire approach was
originally Dave's idea yet he is neither author nor editor of the document.
(And amusingly enough, his brother Steve is a coauthor in this particular
case.)

Dave has routinely offered valuable insight in all sorts of problems. And while
he and I have had our disagreements more than once over the years, I have a
great deal of respect for his opinions and his many contributions to the IETF.

And in any case, such ad homimem attacks are entirely unecessary and wholly
inappropriate. Please refrain from them in the future.

				Ned

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 18:52:33 +0800

>100,000,000 users of the net have no idea who IANA is...

The language that I typically use is "Internet operations and development
community".  That group very much DOES know who IANA is and very much DOES
provide the basis for IANA's authority.  

As noted by many people from just about every side of this topic, the REAL
power in the DNS system is the collection of ISP domain name servers and
their aggregate choice to point to the IANA root.  If they ever decide to
make an aggregate decision to point elsewhere, IANA ceases to be relevant
to the DNS.  The fact that all those ISPs (and corporate DNS servers) DO
point to the IANA-derived root is therefore not just significant.  It is
definitive.

d/

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dave Crocker                         USA:                 +1 408 246 8253
Brandenburg Consulting                                   675 Spruce Drive
                                                  Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA
fax: +1 408 273 6464                 Malaysia:            +60 19 329 9445
<http://www.brandenburg.com>                     Post Office Box 296, UPM
<mailto:[email-masked]>              Serdang, Selangor 43400 MY

---

From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 05:27:38 +0100

Dave and all,

> provide the basis for IANA's authority.

  This is yet another PRIME example of Dave Crockers illusions and /or
Hallucinations.
The IANA is and has been funded bu the USG via the DOD.  That was an is made
quite clear in the WP, contrary to any musings that Dave would have you believe.

> their aggregate choice to point to the IANA root.

  This is indeed a fact to a great extent.  Yet there are more and more
Name Servers that are taking a different view.

> If they ever decide to
> to the DNS.

  This is NOT a FACT but a supposition on Daves part.

> The fact that all those ISPs (and corporate DNS servers) DO

  To the extent that they do, yes.

> d/

 regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 12:54:13 +0100

Due to the interaction of time zones and mail servers, I didn't
see Richard's handsome apology until after I had sent this.

  Brian Carpenter

Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> 
> Richard,
> 
> Your personal attack on Dave Crocker is shameful. We are seeking
> consensus here, and being rude is no help. Dave has made many serious
> contributions, as has his brother, and your comment is beyond
> any reasonable bounds. You owe Dave, and Steve, a public apology.
> 
>   Brian Carpenter
> 
> Richard J. Sexton wrote:
> >

---

From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 05:50:33 +0100

Brian and all,

  Brian, It is our humble opinion that Rochard should NOT have made this
apology.  Dave Crocker doesn't deserve one.  He is a believer in excluding
the Internet User/Stakeholder.  That gTLD-MoU is prime proof of that as
he was one of its prime drafters and a member of it's leadership.

  Richard,  You had not need to apologize to Mr. Crocker.

 regards,

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 11:57:33 +0100

Richard,

  Brian Carpenter

---

From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 11:36:05 +0100

Brian and all,

Brian E Carpenter wrote:

> consensus here, and being rude is no help.

  Well Dave has been rude on three separate occasions in two days
on these lists to Richard, myself and others.  Dave Crocker is an ASS!

> Dave has made many serious

  First of all Richard already apologized.  Secondly, Dave Crocker
owes Richard and myself an apology and the rest of the list one as
well.

 regards,

---

From: Darren Nickerson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 22:28:41 +0100

>>>>> On Tue, 14 Jul 1998, "JW" == Jeff Williams wrote:

  JW> Brian E Carpenter wrote:

  +> Your personal attack on Dave Crocker is shameful. We are seeking consensus
  +> here, and being rude is no help.

  JW> Well Dave has been rude on three separate occasions in two days on these
  JW> lists to Richard, myself and others.  Dave Crocker is an ASS!

Folks,

I think, without really being certain, that we have achieved 'rough concensus' that a shunning is in effect ;-)

Please folks, this individual has wasted enough of your valuable time. Go do what needs to be done - in the long term you will be judged based on those results, not how intelligently and patiently you responded to this drivel.

I can't imagine anyone will pay much attention to the ranting anyway, given the degree to which it has degenerated into the nonsensical.

-DPN