[ga] Registrar debate
An interesting exchange of thoughts is occuring on the registrar list.
David Wascher: I do not understand - if the RC voted NO and the DNSO voted
NO but ICANN is still going to allow WLS - then what the hell are we here
for. The RC and the DNSO might as well pack up and go home because ICANN and
VeriSign are going to do what they want.
Rick Wesson: A better question is, "why is ICANN there" and why did you all
sign a document telling the DoC how great it is that ICANN is there. If the
WLS moves forward it is partly our own fault.
Michael Palage: What the letter states is that the registrars recognize that
ICANN is not perfect and there are outstanding issues, but we will work
within the frame work of our existing contractual relations to resolve these
issues. TUCOWS has been working on advocating a parallel argument where
contracting parties can have their disputes resolved in a commercial manner.
Something I have advocated since last February in Dulles.
Bhavin Turakhia: I am in full agreement with Rick. Maybe I should withdraw
my support for the ICANN letter. In fact on second thoughts now I am
wondering if it was the peer movement that made me sign it. For I have not
seen ICANN move towards reforming any issue. Its funny how decisions that
favour Verisign (read WLS) got taken right away while we are still
deliberating on the Transfers issue, or the Delete hoarding issue of
Verisign, without any assistance/resolution there.
The thread begins at
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