[ga] A New Deal

[Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>]

Joe,
 
As you know I have been working -- or call it tinkering, with the idea of a 
sustainable alternative root management system. The dreams of the TLDA combined 
with the practice of the ICANN.  Both have merit and both are doomed.
 
Where I blazed a new trail is about to come to fruition.  Not in a starbangled 
sort of way but in an almost subrosa way. I deviated and eschewed the model 
that "experts" in the Net should establish and guide the programs. I studied 
hard the ccTLD models of Vietnam, Pakistan, Iran and .WS.  Instead of going to 
Internet and Computing folks for money I went to money folks for money. (some 
gray, some white and some very black) I asked all these folks what it would 
take to get them to put money behind a program. 
 
The answer is simple, to make a return on the investment.  Interestingly they 
all agreed a broad common shareholder base was preferable.  All were familiar 
with the near communist style of no money transparently changing hands at the 
top. All saw ICANN's model and agreed the people in control were deriving 
economic benefits as a derivative to their involvement hear and pointed to pass 
through certificates being similar.  
 
I believe I am close to an economic model that benefits users and allows for 
straightforward profit taking.

--- On Sun, 5/2/10, Joe Baptista <baptista@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


From: Joe Baptista <baptista@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ga] Contributions
To: "Hugh Dierker" <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> GA" <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Andy Gardner" 
<andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sunday, May 2, 2010, 11:31 AM





On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 1:27 PM, Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

 





I do believe this is unsung work and deserves some recognition. I am thinking 
of establishing an award in your name. I am very serious.

I agree.







 
Narten has helped us greatly with the statistics that he claims are no big deal.

That is a big help in establishing mandated participation in accordance with 
the rules.
 






No one can deny Kirokis' contributions

yes he's a good agitator too ..
 






We have benefited greatly from Danny, Roberto, Karl and Avri. The list goes on.

and let's not forget !Dr. Debbie.
 






Joe and Jeff while controversial have kept us alive in times of innactivity and 
the constant bringing to light is good for all.

shock treatment.
 





 
Perhaps it is time we begin to honor these contributions and toot our own horn 
a bit.


We are a fantastic group of people. The only place where everything ICANN comes 
to roost. We are also the oldest ICANN list in existence. I think it's time 
ICANN gave us back our vote and our voice. Let us evolve and replace ICANN.

cheers
joe baptista
 






--- On Sat, 5/1/10, Andy Gardner <andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


From: Andy Gardner <andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ga] Godaddy mail hostname = spam errors and possible security 
issue?
To: "ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> GA" <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Saturday, May 1, 2010, 9:02 AM




Mail from a Registrar to a Registrant, rejected due to errors in the 
Registrar's mail system is "tough luck" and not a potential security problem 
for Registrants?

And a Registrar spoofiing someone else's hostname is cool with you guys?

Sheesh.


On May 1, 2010, at 10:07 AM, Hugh Dierker wrote:

> So this sure looks like an error without a problem.
> 
> --- On Fri, 4/30/10, Hugo Monteiro <hugo.monteiro@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> From: Hugo Monteiro <hugo.monteiro@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [ga] Godaddy mail hostname = spam errors and possible security 
> issue?
> To: "Andy Gardner" <andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: "ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> GA" <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Friday, April 30, 2010, 3:25 PM
> 
> On 04/30/2010 10:04 PM, Andy Gardner wrote:
>> Godaddy appears to use "made up" hostnames for SMTP HELO entries...
>>   
>> 
> 
> Hello Andy,
> 
> That is in fact a shame, since the sending hostname DOES have a proper DNS 
> setup. Even so, RFC5321 does not mandate that the correct HELO is to be 
> provided. From section 4.1.1.1 we can extract:
> 
> "(...) The argument clause contains the fully-qualified domain name of the 
> SMTP client, if one is available. In situations in which the SMTP client 
> system does not have a meaningful domain name (e.g., when its address is 
> dynamically allocated and no reverse mapping record is available), the client 
> SHOULD send an address literal (...)"
> 
> 
>> Received:     from unknown (HELO gdmailer03.dc1.corp.gd) (208.109.14.188) by 
>> m1relayapp01-01.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net with SMTP
>> 
>> I can see a couple of problems with this.
>> 
>> 1. Many antiSPAM measure reject mail from unknown hosts.
>>   
>> 
> 
> 
> True, but that's actually their own problem. If their mail gets rejected, 
> tough luck.
> 
> 
>> 2. corp.gd is a legitimate domain name owned by someone else than than 
>> Godaddy.
>> 
>> Domain Name:               corp.gd
>> 
>> Registrant, Technical Contact, Billing Contact, Admin. Contact
>>   SRA, MII
>>   Private Registration, b-dul Unirii 80, Bacau, , , , 
>> ramsmith59@xxxxxxxxx
>> 
>>   Romania
>>   E-mail:                  
>> domainmailfwd@xxxxxxxxx
>> 
>>   Phone:                   1.44.7833722420
>>   Fax:                     1.40.72729289
>> 
>> Resource Records (2):
>>                            ns      ns1.register.com        
>>                            ns      ns2.register.com        
>> 
>> 
>> One wonders how a major ICANN approved registrar can make such basic 
>> technical errors, and leave them in place for YEARS?
>> 
>> 
>>   
>> 
> 
> 
> One possibility is that they have contracted a mailing service from a company 
> (corp.gd), which happens to be Godaddy client for a conectivity package, in 
> Godaddys own ip netblock.
> 
> 
> R's,
> 
> Hugo Monteiro.
> -- 
> fct.unl.pt:~# cat .signature
> 
> Hugo Monteiro
> Email     : 
> hugo.monteiro@xxxxxxxxxx
> 
> Telefone : +351 212948300 Ext.15307
> Web      : 
> http://hmonteiro.net
> 
> 
> Divisão de Informática
> Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia da
>            Universidade Nova de Lisboa
> Quinta da Torre   2829-516 Caparica   Portugal
> Telefone: +351 212948596   Fax: +351 212948548
> 
> www.fct.unl.pt                apoio@xxxxxxxxxx
> 
> 
> fct.unl.pt:~# _
> 
> 






-- 
Joe Baptista

www.publicroot.org
PublicRoot Consortium
----------------------------------------------------------------
The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive, Representative & 
Accountable to the Internet community @large.
----------------------------------------------------------------
 Office: +1 (360) 526-6077 (extension 052)
    Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084

Personal: http://baptista.cynikal.net/