offtopic for NANOG - do not read

> Anyone trying to STEAL NSI's COM

NSI does not own the root domain .com .org .net or any other TLD.

I agree this needs to be posted elsewhere, but it started here.

Disclaimer: I am not in the legal profession nor (any longer)
contracting services to the US Government.. BUT I won't let that
stop me from giving my $0.02

I believe there is a leagally sound (and often used) claim which NSI
can assert regarding their rights in this matter. When the NSF
cut back on its willingness to fund the Internet cooperative
agreement and the InterNIC was shifted to a fee for Domain
Registration service, it was known by and agreeable to all parties
of the agreement that NSI would potentially invest considerable
sums to bridge the gap between reduced NSF subsidy and the revenues
generated by the fees.

I believe, this gap in operating revenues was large at the time
NSF announced its reductions in funding. I think it is fair to
assume NSI has always covered some expenses not considered part
of the contract. I believe that the gap remains large today, and
the gap is projected into the next few years.

The government frequently encounters this kind of situation.
Federal Acquisition Regulations address the rights of the government
and the rights of the contractor in this event. Any claims will
be resolved in the context of FAR and the NSF-NSI agreement
- - not in the context of NANOG or any other list.

There was no one yelling at NSI when they invested their
capital and resouces to carried the Internet through
periods of reduced Federal funding. There has never been any
hint of improper charges or business practices. Now, they have
stated their position and, in the honored tradition of the Internet,
offered it for public review and comment. I, for one, think NSI's
management is acting appropriately as the NSF announces the final
termination of the NSF-NSI cooperative agreement.

Furthermore, the troops who man the trenches day-and-night at NSI
to keep the Internet running are generally competent and respected
by their professional peers. Mistakes? Deplorable condition of
the database? Incompetence? I do not think so. Yea, things are
tough, people and resources are never adequate to feed the bandwidth
monster we (willingly) serve. I have, personally, operated large,
multi-cpu distributed databases with 20M+ records, many diverse
views of the data, and real-time updates. I know from experience
it is a *hard* job.

Therefore, before we talk any further about a world in which
another group takes on operation of TLD registries or takes
over operation of .com / .net / .edu, I suggest some serious
consideration be given to the migration methodologies and costs
of bringing up those new operations. I see not consensus on
a set of STANDARDS by which a new TLD operator can be accessed.
The simple econimics of today's Internet cannot accept any
more gross instability which *might* result if this transition
to multiple commercial domain registries is not done properly.

To some of you, the following probably sill seem unusual from
one who has been pioneering the new ATM Internet technology
but I, too, believe in open expression of opinions:

Network stability should be our industries' highest quality goal.

NSI's contributions to Internet stability weigh heavily in their
favor on this matter.