At 22:00 04/12/03, John C Klensin wrote:
That is in sharp contrast to your "Law is necessarily ITU" assertion...
sharp enough that, if logic is applied, there are only two possibilities:
(1) The senior ITU personnel who fairly regularly make those statements
are trying to obscure their real power and plans, if not outright lying
about them. If that were true --and, for the record, I don't believe it
is-- it would be irrational to trust them with the Internet or anything else.
(2) You are speaking nonsense, to the extent that it is probably
irrational for any of us to continue reading or responding to your messages.
Dear John, ...
this is very poor and such flaming risks to back fire. Why to use it? Again
you want me to tell the opposite of what I say. I say "law is necessarily
the ITU", I do not say "ITU is necessarily the Law". If you are not sure
about the diference it impliers, may I suggest you to discover the 3rd
possiblity in watching TV next week - unless you do not trust TV frequency
allocation and gave up that ITU related device.
You will decide if Bush, Fidel Castro, Chirac or Putine fall in (1) or (2).
You may also want to read the documents they are going to sign with 50
other heads of State, that some people are going to discuss very seriously
in the coming two days, settling the future of the DNS. Michel Geist
published something very documented on that subject today.
Governments and ccTLDs: A Global Survey at
Column at <http://shorl.com/fastokobruhako> [Toronto Star]
Think Web's virtually government free? Think again
Let me address this however,... Local laws will never been consistently
voted and enforced on spam, with some chance of success, unless there is an
international understanding and effot. As you may have read from your own
mail, ITU (it is a mystery for me why you want to keep the T and not to
push for the common desire of an ITU-I) proposes recommandations. The
chance we have that countries do not authorize signed spam (like the USA?)
will be through that kind of recommandation. And if I juge by this thread,
I am afraid it is going to call for a very long time.
Good evening, John.