[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

pTLA request for MICROSOFT - review closes 2 January 2002m

The fact that it got announced is not as big of an issue as the fact that
people on the 6bone saw the announcement, which means that no one has
sufficient filtering policy in place...  So we need to blame the 6bone
community, not microsoft, who was doing what they thought was right, and
what was never explicitly (until later) denied on the 6bone.

removed some CC's

Rob Rockell
Principal Engineer
SprintLink Europe/Asia
(+1) 703-689-6322
Sprint IP Services : Thinking outside the 435 box

On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Rik van Riel wrote:

->On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, John Klos wrote:
->> > > MICROSOFT has requested a pTLA allocation. The open review period for this
->> > > will close 2 January 2002. Please send your comments to me or the list.
->> > >
->> > > <http://whois.6bone.net/cgi-bin/whois?microsoft>
->> >
->> > Not to be petty, but this stanza jumps out as a potentially historic
->> > note.  We will hope that MS does not live up to their long earned
->> > reputation for not playing with others  (http, kerberos, DNS, DDNS,
->> > DHCP and others leap to mind).
->> I must agree with this sentiment.
->> The very least that 6bone can do is have Microsoft agree to such terms in
->> writing. As a NetBSD developer, I do not want to see our work become
->> irrelevant should Microsoft start making incompatible protocols.
->The fact that 2003::/16 got announced not two weeks ago
->makes me somewhat suspicious, too. A written document
->stating that Microsoft won't pull an "embrace, extend,
->extinguish" on 6bone (or something roughly like this, in
->DMCA, SSSCA, W3C?  Who cares?  http://thefreeworld.net/
->http://www.surriel.com/		http://distro.conectiva.com/