Subject: Re: [dnsop] draft DNSOP minutes (IETF 60)

From: Dean Anderson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 17:35:47 -0400 (EDT)

On Mon, 16 Aug 2004, David Meyer wrote:

> David Meyer:    inaddr-required draft, very little activity.
> 
> Rob Austein:    This one's come up before. One issue is that some
>                 people never get past draft filename. If you look at
>                 the title it doesn't match that. We have one extremely
>                 vocal opponent of this draft who tries very hard to
>                 trash the discussion of it - if he does that again we
>                 will kick him off the list. 

I presume this is directed at me, even though I'm not the only opponent of
this draft, nor even the only vocal opponent.  But before I assume this,
and renew complaints about inappropriate activity by Mr. Austein in
relation to keeping this draft alive despite lack of interest, and despite
numerous editing and factual errors in the draft, and complaints of his
inappropriate action against Av8 Internet and myself in refusing to accept
email from Av8 Internet, refusing not just me personally, but email from
all of Av8 Internet to his official IETF address [email-masked], and falsely
claiming that Av8 Internet's address hijacked.  There are legal
consequences for these abuses, and the IETF has been previously notified
of this.

In any case, neither I nor anyone else has "trashed discussion" of this
draft on the DNSOP list, nor would it be appropriate to kick any opponent
of this draft off the DNSOP list.  This threat is yet another in a series
of inappropriate actions by Mr. Austein in relation to this draft.  

The discussion by the opposition has centered around the false and
misleading statements in the draft describing the policies of other
organizations, and other errors.  Exposing those errors and
inconsistencies is not "trashing the discussion".

The title is misleading given the apparent contents of the draft, but that
is only because the draft is internally inconsistent between its early
paragraphs and its later paragraphs. These inconsistent statements were
added after the notion of making in-addr required was very widely rejected
by nearly all participants.  Despite the introductory paragraphs which
seem to say otherwise, the purpose of the authors in writing this draft is
to make in-addr required, and that proposal has been widely rejected,
despite Mr. Austein's efforts to keep the idea alive.

Dean Anderson
Av8 Internet, Inc

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

---

From: Dean Anderson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 17:16:42 -0400 (EDT)

Another fake bounce from Mr. Austein.

It was also pointed out that Mr. Austein also fails to disclose his
conflict of interest with Av8 Internet according to the ISOC Code of
Conduct: http://www.isoc.org/members/codeconduct.shtml

  8. In  the case of financial or material conflict between personal and 
  professional interests, or between two professional interests,
  declare this conflict to all interested parties and if appropriate 
  in public.

Given the other abuses, this is probably a nit.

Dean Anderson
Av8 Internet, Inc

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 17:36:40 -0400
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Returned mail: see transcript for details

The original message was received at Tue, 17 Aug 2004 17:35:57 -0400
from cirrus.av8.net [130.105.36.66]

   ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
<[email-masked]>
    (reason: 553 Service unavailable; Client host [130.105.36.66] blocked using dnsbl.sorbs.net; Hijacked/Disused Netblock See: http://www.dnsbl.sorbs.net/cgi-bin/lookup?IP=130.105.36.66)

   ----- Transcript of session follows -----
... while talking to mx-1.isc.org.:
>>> DATA
<<< 553 Service unavailable; Client host [130.105.36.66] blocked using dnsbl.sorbs.net; Hijacked/Disused Netblock See: http://www.dnsbl.sorbs.net/cgi-bin/lookup?IP=130.105.36.66
550 5.1.1 <[email-masked]>... User unknown
<<< 554 Error: no valid recipients