|webarchive 2nd Dec 2002ISOC-England: ISOC-E Digest Friday 17 May 2002 Volume 1: Issue 03
“The Internet is for Everyone”
The Internet Society of England freely distributable monthly Newsletter
Editor: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Producer: Richard Francis
Please distribute widely !
Instructions for subscribing/unsubscribing are included at the end of this message
***** See last item for further information, disclaimers, caveats, etc. *****
This issue is archived at <http://www.england.isoc.org/newsletter/index.rhtm>
Welcome to issue number 3
Feature: Governance of the Internet at the Crossroads
ICANN 2 ? (Richard Francis)
Feature: Crying Klez: Maybe the sky *is* falling (Robert M. Slade)
In the next issue of the ISOC England Newsletter
Abridged info on ISOC England
Date: Mon, 0 May 2002 00:00:00 -0000
From: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <email@example.com>
Subject: Welcome to issue number 3
Welcome to the third issue of the ISOC England Newsletter.
This month, the computer that runs the mailing list itself
was hacked maliciously, and all data pertaining to the
ISOC England Newsletter mailing list membership was erased.
Thankfully, we have kept back-ups of the original list
membership, but if you had subscribed to the distribution
list yourself, and this issue reaches you by way of
someone else forwarding it to you, then you may not be in
the distribution anymore. Make sure you don’t miss out on
future issues by sending a command to:
with the command:
in the body of the message
CALL FOR ARTICLES
Hacking is a plague to the Internet, and we are planning
on discussing the problem in one of our future issues.
If you wish to contribute an article on the subject, please
This month’s first feature article, “Governance of the
Internet at the Crossroads”, penned by Richard Francis, is
the first of a series on ICANN reform. He looks at reform
from the perspective of National Internet Top Level Domain
ICANN, the global Internet governing body, may sound like
an acronym we do not really relate to, but ultimately,
actions taken by ICANN will affect all of us! They are
responsible for the stable operation of the international
root server system.
Wiped disk… E-mails to all of your address book…
Have you ever been hit by a computer virus?
The second feature article included in this newsletter is
written by Rob Slade, a worldwide authority on computer
viruses for way more than a decade. According to Silicon.com,
KLEZ is a virus that is top of the “”virus league tables”. Just
like previous similar critters, it spreads by using loopholes
in MS Outlook – and is very successful at that. Computer
viruses are here to stay – but steps can be taken against
them to minimise their spread. In today’s world of information
overload, Rob’s article provides the facts.
We would really like to receive feedback from everybody,
so if you have suggestions, comments, or would like to
contribute an article to the ISOC-E newsletter, then please
write to: firstname.lastname@example.org
IMPORTANT: ISOC ENGLAND MEMBER DISCUSSION LIST
The ISOC England member’s discussion list has moved home!
The list has also been modified from being “opt-out”
to being “opt-in”.
This means that in the past, all ISOC England members
used to be automatically subscribed to the ISOC England
Discussion list. Today, members need to specifically
subscribe to the discussion list.
All members are joined automatically to the announce list.
This list is for announcements only and is for the use of
the board or authorised administrators of the chapter.
The members list is an open discussion list and is optional.
All members who wish to take part in chapter discussions
need to visit the website at www.england.isoc.org and log
in using their username and password.
You then need to select “Change personal details” and your
membership details will be displayed.
If you do not remember your password/username, a password
recovery function is provided. Once into your member area,
click on “Change my Subscriptions” and select the mailing
lists you would like to be subscribed to at the bottom of
the “update” page.
Emails will be sent to the email address you give in the
2002 ISOC BOARD OF TRUSTEES ELECTIONS
In accordance with the new ISOC Governance model, those are
coming up soon. An announcement was made by Christian de
Larrinaga, explaining the current position of the Board,
and the search for solutions to ensure that every voice
within ISOC England is heard:
The initial process has now taken place, and Veni Markovski
has been chosen as the ISOC European Chapters representative.
The election date is Tue May 28.
Announce Election done
Stop accepting nominations done
Announce initial slate Fri done
End accepting petitions Fri done
Final slate to Elections Comm done
Mail ballots Sun done
Election day Tue 28-May-02
Announce results Fri 31-May-02
End receiving challenges Mon 10-Jun-02
Reply to challenges Mon 17-Jun-02
Annual General Meeting Mon 17-Jun-02
For full information on the election process, please consult:
VOTING TAKING PLACE ON TWO MOTIONS FOR ICANN REFORM
The DNSO (Domain Name Supporting Oganization of ICANN) is
conducting a vote on the reform of ICANN. The two motions
to be voted on are:
* Motion 1. “Request that US DoC hold open competition for services now
offered by ICANN”
* Motion 2. “Basic principles for the ICANN Reform Process”
To have your voice heard, you need to register in the Voting
Registry. A form to that effect is found on:
Basic outline of the voting on Two motions about ICANN Reform
* Basic outline http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2002.GA-b12-outline.html
Electorate and Voting Registry
* Electorate. Voting roster
http://www.dnso.org/secretariat/b12.rosterindex.html, as of 15 May
2002, at the time the ballot was prepared.
Voting Rules used by the DNSO General Assembly
* Voting rules http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2000.GA-voting-rules.html
Time for the vote
* Begins: Wednesday 15 May 2002, 13:00 UTC
(06:00 LA, 09:00 New York, 15:00 Paris, 22:00 Tokyo)
* Ends: Wednesday 22 May 2002, 13:00 UTC
(06:00 LA, 09:00 New York, 15:00 Paris, 22:00 Tokyo)
Results published on 24 May 2002, 16:00 UTC
APRIL/MAY NEWS DIGEST
In the fast-changing world of Technology and the Internet, News are
a daily event. Here is a selection from April and May’s newsreel.
I welcome comments about the selection!
Please e-mail your feedback to email@example.com
‘NET IS DESTROYING CIVIL LIBERTIES,’ BLAIR WARNED
(silicon.com – 20 March 2002)
“If the government doesn’t explicitly defend personal liberties
then these may be swept away by the growth of new technologies.”
IBM DROPS INTERNET PATENT BOMBSHELL (ZDnet – 18 April 2002)
A recent IBM patent claim could threaten royalty-free access to a
key Internet standard protocol backed by the United Nations.
NEW LAW WOULD CRIMINALIZE FALSE WHOIS INFO (newsbytes – 3 May 2002)
A.N. Other would not be able to register domain names in US
NON EU ONLINE BUSINESS PROVIDERS TO PAY VAT
(silicon.com – 7 May 2002)
Businesses delivering goods digitally to European customers
will have to pay VAT even if they are based outside the
INTERNET GOVERNANCE & E-GOVERNMENT
DOT-EU DOMAINS GIVEN THE GREEN LIGHT (silicon.com – 26 March 2002)
The European Union looks set to have its own .COM equivalent
DOT EU REGULATION DOCUMENT PUBLISHED
CONSUMER GROUPS DECRY DOT-US POLICIES (Bizreport – 29 April 2002)
A good lesson in what mistakes to avoid with DOT-EU
ACM ASKS ICANN TO SCALE BACK MISSION (BizReport – 3 April 2002)
The Association of Computing Machinery gets involved in the debate
ICANN SEEKS NEW DOT-ORG OPERATOR (22 April 2002)
Do you fancy like bidding for running a major Top Level Domain?
E-ENVOY TOLD: ‘MORE ACTION, LESS CHAT’ (silicon.com – 25 April 2002)
National Audit Office criticizes the E-envoy mission
Report at: http://www.nao.gov.uk/pn/01-02/0102764.htm
BBC LAUNCHES EURO-CENTRIC SEARCH ENGINE
Dissatisfied with US-centric search engines?
OECD PUBLISHES REPORT ON INTERNET TRAFFIC EXCHANGE
(13 March 2002)
BT TRIALS ‘NEXT GENERATION’ BROADBAND (silicon.com – 26 March 2002)
Forget ADSL – even higher transfer rates are coming soon!
HALF A MILLION HAVE BROADBAND IN UK – OFTEL (NUA Internet
Surveys – 3 May 2002)
BT’S ‘NO FRILLS’ DSL IS AN ISP KILLER (silicon.com – 24 April 2002)
No frills ISP will hit the market in Autumn
BT ANNOUNCES PLANS FOR UK’S FIRST PUBLIC ACCESS WIRELESS LAN NETWORK
(10 April 2002) Full details in June
HACKING WITH A PRINGLES TUBE (BBC News – 8 March 2002)
Make sure that wireless LAN is secure, or you could get hacked
OECD’S CAUTIONARY TALE OF PORN AND CYBERSPACE (IHT – 3 April 2002)
Domain name renewals gone wrong
KLEZ TOP OF THE VIRUS LEAGUE (silicon.com – 1 May 2002)
Klez – extremely irritating – extremely contagious
HOW TO SURVIVE AS AN IT CONTRACTOR (silicon.com – 19 March 2002)
Tips for IT contractors and sub-contractors
IT SPENDING ON THE RISE (silicon.com – 18 March 2002)
Is the worst over ?
NTL: ‘WE MAY RUN OUT OF CASH’ (silicon.com – 27 March 2002)
BT competitors facing hardship
ITV DIGITAL COLLAPSE COULD HARM INTERNET TAKE-UP (ZDnet – 2 May 2002)
The UK government’s target of achieving universal Internet
access by 2005 could be wrecked by the collapse of ITV Digital,
MPs warned on Wednesday.
THE POLITICS OF PEERING (ISP Planet – 29 April 2002)
Inter-ISP Peering agreements will shape tomorrow’s Internet
TONGUE IN CHEEK
“I’LL BE BACK,” DISGRUNTLED CYBORG TELLS AIRPORT SECURITY
(silicon.com – 15 March 2002)
What could happen when you take Internet access too seriously.
YAHOO SUED BY SIGNATURE YODELER (USA Today – 19 April 2002)
What is the market price for a Yodel?
@rE Y0U l1v1ng 1n @ C0mpUtEr S1mUl@t10n?
Dr. Nick Bostrom, Dept. of Philosophy @ Yale University
put his point across that you are…
GOVERNANCE OF THE INTERNET AT THE CROSSROADS – ICANN 2 ?
by Richard Francis
Internet historians who look back to 2002 in the future may have some
sympathies with the Miami Law Professor, Michael Froomkin who has
‘Who cares what ICANN was supposed to be for half an eternity ago in
Internet time. (Maybe we’ve learned a thing or two since then)…the
critical element for ICANN is technical coordination…the public
interest is served by delegating resources, not hoarding them, and by
presiding over an orderly de-centralization of policymaking, away
from current single point of near-total failure’(1).
In February 2002, Dr Stuart Lynn, CEO of ICANN, published a proposal
for fundamental reform of ICANN. The premise of the proposal is that
ICANN, in its current form cannot fulfil the goals for which it was
set up.(2) Many commentators consider the ICANN system is
Dr Lynn’s premise has led to the most comprehensive global discussion
of ICANN, and mass of written material generated by that discussion
since its foundation in the 1990s.
The history of the establishment of the Internet Corporation for
Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) will be familiar to many members
of the local Internet community in the UK. For those who have not
followed the ICANN experiment in global co-regulation of the
Internet, ICANN is a Californian not for profit corporation, created
following President Clinton’s challenge to US Commerce Department’s
National Telecommunication and Information Administration to
‘support efforts to make the governance of the domain name system
private and competitive, and to create a contractually based
self-regulatory regime that deals with potential conflicts between
domain name usage and trademark laws on a global basis’ [and as it
has turned out, a raft of additional policy matters].(4)
At Harvard, faculties who are participants in the Kennedy School of
Government’s broad research programme, ‘Visions of Governance in the
21st Century’ describe ICANN as a rare ‘experiment’ in governance.(5)
ICANN is responsible for coordinating the Internet’s naming, address
allocation, and protocol parameter assignment systems. These systems
enable globally unique and universally interoperable identifiers for
the benefit of the Internet and its users. As overall coordinator of
the Internet’s systems of unique identifiers, ICANN’s role according
to its March 2002 mission statement, while defined and limited,
includes both operational and policymaking functions (6).
A few country code country code top level domain (ccTLD) managers,
such as Nominet UK, were involved in the international consultation
which led to the establishment of ICANN; most were not. At the time
there was a clear distinction between ICANN’s technical co-ordination
role and its role in relation to generic top level domain (gTLD)
policy matters. ICANN has added 7 new gTLDs to the .com, .org and
.net open gTLD registries. The clear distinction has been lost,
notwithstanding a separate agreement between the US Government and
ICANN relating to the organisation and management of the ‘IANA
The ccTLD Registry managers are internationally one of the most
‘organised’ group of actors on the ICANN stage. At the end of the
ICANN meeting in Accra they issued a communiqué, commenting on the
Lynn reforms (8). Now that many governments and the ccTLD managers
in their countries have a far deeper understanding of the
Domain Name System (DNS) the opportunity must not be lost to grapple
with one of the most difficult issues that ICANN have to deal with:
documenting the fact that the root of the ccTLD registry managers’
authority, within the DNS, is the consent of their local Internet
community, including national Governments as key members of those
communities. They do not get their authority from the IANA function
Two basic technical functions are critical for ccTLD registry
* Stable and secure operation of the Primary Root Server (currently
operated by Verisign under the direction of the US Government) and
the 12 Secondary Root Servers (currently operated by volunteers, two
of which are located in Europe)
* Maintenance of a database of ccTLD Managers and name server
There is a growing consensus among ccTLD managers that matters of
interoperability, stability, security are matters of responsibility
for the ccTLD itself, which is accountable for this to their local
Internet community. As a TLD registry is not considered to be
responsible for the technical use of each second level domain (SLD)
delegated to Internet users, or for the technical functionality of
the SLD, the administrator of the database comprising the
authoritative database for ccTLD managers (currently the IANA)
should not attempt to assume such a responsibility for ccTLDs, and
domain names registered under them.
When the ICANN Board come together at their next meeting in Bucharest
in June and begin the process of responding to the calls for reform,
it is inconceivable that they will recommend to the US Department of
Commerce to discontinue the experiment in governance. Nevertheless
there is a general view that the need for major reform is so marked
that the organisation that emerges will be so significantly different
for Internet historians to mark the launch of ICANN 2 in 2002-2003.
The organisation that emerges might be a UN Commission on the
Internet Naming and Numbering. My guess it will be ICANN 2.
A full response to the needs of ccTLD Registry managers must be built
into the reformed organisation.
1. See Prof Michael Froomkin Johnson & Crawford: ‘The Conflicting
Myths of ICANN’ – ICANN watch 22.04.2002
2. The full text of the Lynn proposal can be found at
3. eg Paul Hoffman in ‘Reforming the Administration of the DNS
Root’, 25 April 2002
4. For a summary of the report go to
5. See ‘ICANN and the Migration of Governence, JS Nye Jr and
JD Donahue in ‘Who controls the Internet?’ Bertelsmann Foundation 2001
6. The ICANN staff mission statement is at
7. see http://www.iana.org
8. see http://www.wwtld.org/communique/ccTLDGhana_communique_13Mar2002.html
Richard Francis is a founding director of Internet Governance
Consultants. He chairs ISOC’s Legal and Regulatory International SIG.
(Full Bio available in ISOC England Newsletter V1.01, archived
at: http://www.england.isoc.org/newsletter/index.rhtm )
CRYING KLEZ: MAYBE THE SKY *IS* FALLING
by Robert M. Slade
(This article was first published in Risks Digest 22.06 – 8 May 2002)
Maybe it’s because the name is unassuming, without the flash of a
“Melissa” or “Loveletter” or “Chernobyl.” Maybe it’s because various
reports have called it Klaz, Kletz, W32/Klez.[a-k]@mm, or I-Worm.Klez.
Maybe it’s because the public’s attention has been exhausted by media
viruses like Code Red. Maybe it’s because there have been a number of
versions, and only the latest one has made an impact. Maybe it’s
because the beast is bewilderingly complicated.
Whatever the reason, a virus called Klez (or, more specifically,
Klez.H) seems to be happily spreading far and wide, without much
attention from anyone except antiviral vendors. Warnings have been
issued about it, but these are often limited and unhelpful. The
general media does not appear to have paid any attention to the
problem at all. One of the most widespread and dangerous viruses of
recent times, Klez is hard to identify, is difficult to track, is
generating serious numbers, and carries a number of payloads. Also,
it probably isn’t the last of it’s kind.
Klez is actually a family of viruses. The limited information
available seems to indicate that the same author or a small group,
probably resident in China, is likely responsible for all of the Klez
variants. Eight have been identified so far, seemingly released
between the fall of 2001 and spring of 2002. Each variant has added
new features and payloads. In little over half a year the Klez family
has gone from being a minor nuisance to a major threat.
The first version was so buggy that flaws in programming seemed to be
the major concern. However, even then the virus was notable for its
ambition and complexity. In addition to spreading itself, Klez
dropped a virus called ElKern. (There have been reports of a new
version of a new version of the CIH virus traveling with Klez, but
this may be due to infection of the Klez program file itself.) The
subject line, sender address, and filename attachment were all
variable, avoiding the major means of e-mail virus detection. (Various
Klez variant subject lines have promised games, humour, pornography,
vague but important messages, and, interestingly, antiviral
protection.) Klez also used a vulnerability in Microsoft’s Outlook
mailer (actually resident in Internet Explorer programming) that would
automatically unpack and invoke the message attachment, in some cases
before the message was even read by the user.
(This mailer loophole, sometimes known as the IFRAME vulnerability,
had actually been addressed and patched by Microsoft in March of 2001.
Users who had regularly upgraded installed patches would not have been
at risk of this specific function. The bug is addressed in
However, the more widely known Microsoft security bulletin,
with a composite patch, and talks about browser certificates, rather
than the mail problem. It is also interesting to note that, in order
to use this function, Klez forms messages with a non-standard MIME
[Multimedia Internet Mail Extensions] format. Non-Microsoft mailers,
such as Pegasus and Netscape Communicator, may not even allow users to
see the attachment, and thus, inadvertently, offer users additional
The file attachment, as of version H, will have an extension of .EXE,
.BAT, .PIF, or .SCR. The MIME file type will not match the extension
(although that is not a reliable indicator of a virus infection).
E-mail addresses used to create new infected messages are harvested
from the infected machine. Recent versions of the virus also have
code to use ICQ as a source of e-mail addresses.
Klez.E (version 2.0, according to internal text), released in January
of 2002, added file infection capabilities, so that the virus could
spread using e-mail, direct copying to network shares, and infection of
program files. (Windows system files were often corrupted by the
infection attempts. Other files might be infected by a companion type
method: the original file was renamed and hidden and a copy of Klez
written with the original filename.) The virus carried its own SMTP
(Simple Mail Transfer Protocol) program so that it did not need to use
local mail clients. The “From” line was also faked such that if Alice
received an infected message from Bob, it might not come from Bob but
from Charles, who had addresses for both Alice and Bob on his infected
machine. This function not only prevented tracking of the infected
machine, but caused many people to try and track infections in the
wrong place. In addition, the virus had a payload to overwrite text,
Microsoft Word, MP3, HTML and other files with random data, thus
destroying the contents.
Early versions of the virus had a hidden message (in the body of the
infected message) seemingly indicating that the author was trying to
gain a reputation in order to get a better job. Later versions tried
to kill processes of the Code Red family of worms, including Nimda,
and included hidden messages suggesting that Klez was an antivirus
virus. Klez.E, in addition to adding to the list of virus processes
that would be stopped, also killed processes for a number of the most
popular and effective antiviral programs. It would remove Windows
Registry keys for antiviral software, and also corrupted checksums or
deleted files for antiviral systems. (Text strings seemed to indicate
that this was because the world had not offered the author a well-
paying computer job.)
The latest version (as of this writing), Klez.H, often sends itself in
a message offering a tool to remove and immunize against Klez.E. (It
purports to come from one of a number of well-known antiviral
companies.) Klez.H also added a new function: it would frequently
pick up a file from the infected computer and add it as an attachment
to the infected message sent out. There is already one known case
where a confidential negotiating document was transmitted to a mailing
list of several thousand people in this manner. Fortunately, the file
overwriting payload seems to have been removed.
Any available virus tends to spawn variants. It is also not unusual
for a virus author to improve on his (or her) own work, and release
new versions. However, variants seldom involve additions of functions
and features to the extent seen in Klez. The original version alone
demonstrated effective social engineering and polymorphic techniques,
as well as complex features that would be dangerous in conjunction
with other forms of malware. In less than six months, the author (and
the greatest probability is that there is a single author) has added
features manipulating processes in memory, attacking antiviral and
security software, increasing the means of reproduction and spread,
and attacking data availability and confidentiality. It is unlikely
that this is the last version of Klez that will be seen, and a number
of common viruses could give the author new ideas for new payloads to
add and new technologies to employ.
In a sense, though, there is absolutely nothing new about Klez.
Microsoft software is well-known to be full of bugs and security
loopholes: Internet Explorer is much more dangerous to use as a
browser than is Netscape Navigator. There are dangerous technologies
in common programs that should be disabled or patched. There is a
definite trend towards convergence in malware, with different types of
programs supporting and distributing each other. Polymorphism has
long been known in file infecting viruses: the use of variant subject
lines in Klez is tame compared to the (literally) myriad forms of
files generated by Tremor.
Most importantly, however, your mother’s old adage still holds true.
“DON’T RUN THAT PROGRAM ON YOUR COMPUTER! YOU DON’T KNOW WHERE IT’S
Rob Slade is a data communications and security specialist from North
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; A worldwide authority on computer
viruses and anti-viral software. Over the past 15 years, he has
reviewed countless versions of anti-viral software and analysed an
even larger number of computer viruses. His latest book, “Viruses
shows where computer viruses come from, how they spread, and how you
can protect the computers you are responsible for.
Full Bio on: http://victoria.tc.ca/int-grps/books/techrev/rms.htm
These are still in the process of being formed. More information soon.
ISOC ENGLAND PARTNER INTERNET WORLD AND NEXT TECH CONFERENCE
The new event for the next generation of IT covering storage,
webservices, outsourcing and networking. It’s a dedicated event
with a strategic free conference, worth £795 and free exhibition
- 11-13th June 2002, Earls Court, London.
Register now for FREE on http://www.nextecheurope.com
INET 2002, WASHINGTON DC, USA
18 – 21 June 2002
“Internet Crossroads: Where Technology and Policy Intersect”
Book NOW to attend the Internet’s yearly Global conference
whose main themes this year are about:
Technology, Uses of Internet, Governance, Legislation & Regulation
ICANN MEETINGS IN BUCHAREST, ROMANIA – 24-28 JUNE 2002
THIRD WIRELESS WORLD CONFERENCE
The Digital World Research Centre is pleased to announce its
third annual conference on the social shaping of mobile futures,
called the Third Wireless World Conference, on 17-18 July 2002.
This year’s theme is “Location.”
OXFORD INTERNET INSTITUTE (OII) – (CASTING A WIDER NET)
(Integrating Research and Policy on the Social Impacts of the Internet)
27 September 2002
Location: University of Oxford
One of the 4 breakout sessions at this inaugural session at the OII
is on Internet Governance and ICANN evolution or reform.
Full details found on: http://www.oxfordevent.com
For a full schedule of future meetings and events, please consult:
IN THE NEXT ISSUE OF THE ISOC ENGLAND NEWSLETTER
Don’t miss the next issue of the ISOC England Newsletter, where
we will be reporting on the ISOC Election results, as well as looking
at ICANN in more detail, and from other perspectives.
Date: 01 Jan 2002 (LAST-MODIFIED)
Subject: Abridged info on ISOC England
ISOC England is a full chapter of the Internet Society in the UK.
ISOC England is a voice of the future, creates awareness and
promotes the Internet in the UK as a centre for business, government
and cultural activities by working in partnership with many of the
leading institutions, in government, academia, society and business.
Our mission statement is:
To assure the beneficial, open evolution of the global Internet and its
related internetworking technologies and applications through leadership
in standards, issues and education in England.
For more information about ISOC England, turn to:
CONTRIBUTIONS: letters to the editors, suggestions etc. should be
sent to firstname.lastname@example.org with a clear subject line. We reserve
the right to amend and publish any letter sent to this address.
ISOC England does not necessarily endorse the views contained in this
newsletter which are the responsibility of their original poster. All
contributions are considered as personal comments.
Usual disclaimers apply.
SUBSCRIBING to the monthly Newsletter (for free!):
Send message to email@example.com with command:
in the body of the message
Send message to firstname.lastname@example.org with command:
in the body of the message
NEWSLETTER ARCHIVES are held at:
Copyright (C) 2002 The Internet Society of England
The ISOC England Newsletter is a free newsletter distributed to members
of ISOC England. Permission to re-distribute this newsletter for FREE is
granted to anybody, provided this copyright notice is included.
End of ISOC-E Digest 1.03