[NA-Discuss] [At-Large] Report to the ICANN Board ofDirectorsfrom WG onGNSOCouncil Restructuring

Tue Jul 29 21:24:47 EDT 2008

Dominik and all,

  Well as you know Dominik, you have my phone number by
which to contact me. And my Address is registered in the
federal registry for all to access should they choose to do so.

  I cannot receive Darlenes posts as I and all our members
in order to protect themselves must block gov.nu.ca which is
the DN of her Email address.
See:
http://private.dnsstuff.com/tools/dnsreport.ch?domain=gov.nu.ca&token=2700a623acc5804116758c830404c019

For instance especially see:
"FAIL:  Open DNS servers ERROR: One or more of your nameservers reports
that it is an open DNS server. This usually means that anyone in the
world can query it for domains it is not authoritative for (it is
possible that the DNS server advertises that it does recursive lookups 
when it does not, but that shouldn't happen).  This can cause an 
excessive load on your DNS server.  Also, it is strongly discouraged 
to have a DNS server be both authoritative for your domain and be 
recursive (even if it is not open), due to the potential for
cache poisoning (with no recursion, there is no cache, and it is
impossible to poison it). Also, the bad guys could use your DNS 
server as part of an attack, by forging their IP address. Problem
record(s) are: Server 216.108.1.1 reports that it will do recursive
lookups. [test] Server 216.108.1.2 reports that it will do recursive
lookups.
[test] See this page for info on closing open DNS servers."

And:

"FAIL Missing (stealth) nameservers FAIL: You have one or more missing
(stealth) nameservers. The following nameserver(s) are listed (at your
nameservers) as nameservers for your domain, but are not listed at the
parent nameservers (therefore, they may or may not get used, depending
on whether your DNS servers return them in the authority section for
other requests, per RFC2181 5.4.1). You need to make sure that these
stealth nameservers are working; if they are not responding, you may
have serious problems!  The DNSreport will not query these servers, 
so you need to be very careful that they are working properly."

And further still see:

"FAIL Stealth NS record leakage Your DNS servers leak stealth
information in non-NS requests: 
Stealth nameservers are leaked [ns3.internorth.net.]!

This can cause some serious problems (especially if there is a TTL
discrepancy). If you must have stealth NS records (NS records listed at
the authoritative DNS servers, but not the parent DNS servers), you
should make sure that your DNS server does not leak the stealth NS
records in response to other queries.  ns3.internorth.net.  This is
listed as an ERROR because there are some cases where nasty problems can
occur (if the TTLs vary from the NS records at the root servers and the
NS records point to your own domain, for example)."

And to top it off, gov.nu.ca DN has no abuse or postmaster Email
addresses a significant violation of IETF standard!  >:(

  And BTW, I have absolutely no interest in being sly in any manner,
as such behavior is dishonorable and deceiving intentionally.
I have always found such behavior very disgusting!  >:(  As such
I am very saddened and sorry to read Darlene's amateurish and
seemingly adolescent display in using false claims and name calling
as a means to enhance her very faulty argument accordingly.

Dominik Filipp wrote:

> Indeed, an interesting curriculum vitae :-))
> A sly fellow that Jeff...
>
> I responded to Jeff's view I'd found interesting, no matter whoever is
> behind the identity.
>
> Dominik
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thompson, Darlene [mailto:DThompson at GOV.NU.CA]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2008 6:52 PM
> To: Dominik Filipp; ALAC NA Discuss
> Subject: RE: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] Report to the ICANN Board of
> Directorsfrom WG onGNSOCouncil Restructuring
>
> Dominik,
>
> Why do you continue to feed the troll?
>
> http://www.gtld-mou.org/gtld-discuss/mail-archive/08030.html
>
> D
>
> Darlene A. Thompson
> Community Access Program Administrator
> Nunavut Dept. of Education / N-CAP
> P.O. Box 1000, Station 910
> Iqaluit, NU  X0A 0H0
> Phone:  (867) 975-5631
> Fax:  (867) 975-5610
> E-mail:  dthompson at gov.nu.ca
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> [mailto:na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Dominik
> Filipp
> Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2008 12:46 PM
> To: ALAC NA Discuss
> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] Report to the ICANN Board of
> Directorsfrom WG onGNSOCouncil Restructuring
>
> Jeff,
>
> You are right, however, if we got rid of the percentage (as mentioned in
> the Alan's explanation) and kept just raw vote numbers the situation
> might get better. I do not see any reason why the contracted parties
> should have similar power as the non-contracted parties, for other
> reasons than keeping ICANN captured, of course.
>
> Dominik
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> [mailto:alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Jeffrey A.
> Williams
> Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 9:32 AM
> To: ALAC; ALAC NA Discuss
> Cc: Peter Dengate Thrush; twomey at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [At-Large] Report to the ICANN Board of Directors from WG
> onGNSOCouncil Restructuring
>
> Dominik and all,
>
>   If the below outlined report is correct, than it is clear that
> commercial interests have a significant advantage and the majority of
> power in the GNSO as Registries and Registrars are essentially
> commercial entities/businesses.  Ergo no balance and essentially nothing
> has changed in the GNSO other than the "Names" of the specific
> representative groups.  Further there is NO Independent Registrant
> representative in this proposed structure, and NO user-non-registrant
> reoresentative/ALAC.
>
>   So I will now predict that there will be no significant change in the
> bahavior of Registries or Registrars and the abuses that have been
> occuring with increasing frequency will continue with even more
> increasing frequency.  I will also predict here and now that with this
> proposed structure the IPC will get whatever it wants.
>
> Dominik Filipp wrote:
>
> > Cheryl,
> >
> > After having read the last WG output at
> >
> >
> https://st.icann.org/data/workspaces/alac/attachments/at_large_advisory_
>
> >
> committee:20080729041513-0-3574/files/FinalReport-GNSO-ImprovementsWG.pd
>
> > f
> >
> > it seems like the proposed GNSO restructuralization could be as
> follows
> > (Attachment A)
> >
> > ------------------------------
> > 2 houses - contracted and non-contracted
> >            parties/constituencies, 2 parties
> >            in each house
> >
> > House 1 - Contracted party house consists
> >           of 2 (registry and registrar) constituencies House 2 -
> > Non-contracted party house consists
> >           of 2 (commercial and non-commercial)
> >           parties/constituencies
> >
> > that is, 4 parties/constituencies in both the houses collectively.
> >
> > The GNSO Council (given that the lowest proposed number of members are
>
> > considered)
> >
> > House 1
> >   Registries     - 3 members
> >   Registrars     - 3 members
> >
> > House 2
> >   Commercial     - 5 members
> >   Non-commercial - 5 members
> >
> > and also
> >
> > Equal number of votes between registries and registrars.
> > Equal number of votes between commercial and non-commercial users.
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Do I understand the proposal correctly, Cheryl?
> >
> > If so, there is a question I could not find an answer to.
> >
> > Q: What is the proposed number of votes for each of the four GNSO
> > Council parties?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Dominik
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > [mailto:alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Cheryl
> > Langdon-Orr
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 7:06 AM
> > To: alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > Cc: 'ALAC internal list'
> > Subject: [At-Large] Report to the ICANN Board of Directors from WG on
> > GNSOCouncil Restructuring
> >
> > At-Large.  please note that earlier today the ALAC Executive and our
> > representative on this WG Alan Greenberg, met and discussed our desire
>
> > to have a formal ALAC Statement to the Board on this matter.
> >
> >
> >
> > Please see our Wiki page
> > https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?at_large_advisory_committee  to
> find
> > a link to the report of the WG  from this now completed process, and
> > also under Announcements to find an short background piece from the
> > report and  a note as to the mechanism for the ALAC to review our
> > sub-committee and Rep statement appended to it, to be endorsed (in an
> > expanded form if so desired) as an ALAC Statement to the Board.
> >
> >
> >
> > ALAC  this serves as the start of the 7 day  minimum notice required
> for
> > a formal vote to be taken (between meetings) on this matter and in the
>
> > next 24hrs further background documents and proposed expansion of this
>
> > statement will be posted and a Big Pulse vote be created for the
> purpose
> > of recording your views to 1. Endorse the proposed document an ALAC
> > Statement, 2. Vote against the proposal or 3. Abstain.
> >
> >
> >
> > More in the next 24hrs.
> >
> >
> >
> > CLO
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ALAC mailing list
> > ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann
>
> > .org
> >
> > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ALAC mailing list
> > ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann
> .org
>
> >
> > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>
> Regards,
>
> Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!)
> "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
>    Abraham Lincoln
>
> "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
> often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt
>
> "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
> liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
> P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
> United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
> ===============================================================
> Updated 1/26/04
> CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
> div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
> ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
> jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827
>
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC mailing list
> ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann
> .org
>
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>
>

Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
My Phone: 214-244-4827