Re: [ga] Re: Last minute changes to Verisign agreements
Dave Crocker wrote:
> At 10:23 PM 4/1/2001, DPF wrote:
> >The changes to the agreement are welcome but it would be a terrible
> >public policy example to agree to such changes with less than 24 hours
> >to consider and analyse them.
> Given that the changes are directly in line with the public requests, what
> is the purpose of additional delay?
> Remember that our job is not to negotiate the contract but to offer comments.
No. The DNSO's job is to develop policy, which the board and staff are then
responsible for implementing.
As long as the negotiations conform to the policy, we have no more to do than
offer comment. Perhaps not even that. Arguably, we should just shut up and let
them get on with the job.
Here, though, the negotiated deal violates policy by scrapping the separation
of registry and registrar. I do not think board and staff have the authority
to do that without DNSO approval. I don't think they have the approval, and I
don't think it should be granted.
This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html