North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: ISP Domain Auction

  • From: mike
  • Date: Mon Feb 12 15:12:02 1996

ok, I did not have that background on this particular one.

However, even with the paid there had been recently a posting of 
someone registering thousands of names (however not of widespread 
commercial use that one, it was all under the belt line).

The point I wanted to raise is, that INternic is asking money for 
registration of names, not for the registration act.

If I would want to register 200 names, I pay 200 names. We had the 
discussion here on what to do with copyrighted names. See Pluto: planet 
or Disnay character, let Nasa (guess tehy have pluto) and disney fight. 
Well, they won't. And I guess the consensus was that domain names are not 
infringing with registered trademarks (I can call my dog goofy without 
paying disney a royalty, or am I wrong there?).

Now we have one to show up and barter names, like the scheme: I register 
what Unilever wants before them and sell it back. Big deal to me, may he 
be happy. However, a corporation could (not here of course) decide that a 
definitive termination measure for $30k is cheaper than talking to the 
individual ( ;-] ). 

Shouldn't we here see how we get our act together, e.g. peering (why in 
this community are there people not peering, putting up 'rules' etc, when 
peering would just make everyone happy since the routing landscape is way 
simpler when there are lots of direct links), and of course, the same 
always: instead of creating unnecessary friction to put into the address 
allocation mechanism a measure to satisfy building up ISP/NSP businesses. 
I agree that there might some people need more restrictive routing, but 
restrictions must always be implemented in a way not to create injustice 
or even only extra problems.

On Mon, 12 Feb 
1996, Craig A. Huegen wrote:

> On Mon, 12 Feb 1996, mike wrote:
> > Well, this is because it is not into your pocket? I think it is totaly 
> > legit what the guy is doing. He bought the names, paid for it, and can do 
> > whatever he wants with it. He has the RIGHTS! You guys forced him to pay 
> > for it, now you pay for your stupidity to ask money for domain names, not 
> > for the registration effort.
> No.  I'll bet he _hasn't_ paid for it.
> I'll put $20 on my hunch that all of the names will be un-registered 
> anyway because he refuses to pay the InterNIC's fee imposed last year.
>    Record created on 29-Jul-95.
>    Domain Name: CHECKS.COM
>    Record created on 26-Apr-95.
> His apparent plan to get all these free domain names and sell them off has 
> been thwarted by the InterNIC's policy.  It's the InterNIC policy which 
> has caused him to want to sell all of these.
> Just let the public forum where that was posted know that they'll expire 
> anyway when the InterNIC doesn't receive money from him.
> /cah

Michael F. Nittmann                             ---------
Senior Network Architect                        \       /
(201) 928 4456                                   -------
(201) 928 1888 FAX                                \   /
[email protected]                                 ---