Re: [ga] WLS Conference Call

[Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org>]

On 2002-05-21 16:24:22 -0400, DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:

>If only that were true.  Sadly, what will pass for the "consensus 
>process" will transpire within a few days.  

Nonsense.

The transfer task force is, at this point, at the very first steps  
of its comprehensive review of deleted domain name issues, with a  
focus on WLS.  If you want to put it like that, what we have been  
participating in yesterday is a "problem-finding" mission:  
Identifying the problems, and identifying possible solutions.  (With 
an emphasis on _possible_.)

Despite the possibly unfortunate wording in the terms of reference  
(for which I may have to take some blame), what emanates from this  
is certainly not a policy recommendation, or even a consensus  
policy.  (The latter is already impossible by definition.)

Rather, what we'll hopefully end up with after this week is a  
somewhat clearer understanding of the implications of the WLS  
proposal, and of the side-effects it would have on competition  
between registrars, on intellectual property (think about the UDRP  
clause in the revised proposal - that part is not a red herring!), 
on other existing businesses, and whatever else people will come up 
with.  We'll, I hope, also have a clearer understanding of what 
policy-making should be undertaken next in order to mitigate some of 
the (of course unintended - after all, WLS is supposed to foster 
competition according to its proponent!) ill side-effects.

That policy-making would then have to be handled by whatever body is 
appropriate; currently, that's of course the DNSO.  

Examples include (1) the interaction with the UDRP which may or may  
not have been handled sufficiently in the proposal, (2) the  
interaction with a uniform deletion policy.

-- 
Thomas Roessler                          http://log.does-not-exist.org/
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html