RE: [nc-deletes] NSI's Comment on Deletions

[Jane Mutimear <jane.mutimear@twobirds.com>]

Title: RE: [nc-deletes] NSI's Comment on Deletions

I can't make Monday or Tuesday at 2pm London time.  I could make the rest of next week though.

Jane

-----Original Message-----
From: Jordyn Buchanan [mailto:jordyn.buchanan@Registrypro.com]
Sent: 04 March 2003 15:27
To: tim@godaddy.com; nc-deletes@dnso.org
Subject: RE: [nc-deletes] NSI's Comment on Deletions

Tim Ruiz wrote:

> I spoke with Brian yesterday before he submitted the comments.
>
> I understood him to be concerned that enforcing the deletion of the
domain,
> or a registry auto-delete, would be the greater of two evils.

> By not requiring deletion, there is the potential that registrars may
hoard
> or warehouse domains. But there are already provisions in the RAA to
prevent
> that, if they are just enforced.

> By requiring the deletion, there is the potential that registrants
could lose
> their domains unintentionally, or at least be required to pay the high
RGP
> redemption fees to get it back.

This wasn't clear to me from the comments.  In fact, it's completely unclear to me exactly which portion of the "uniform deletion practice" he is referring to.  It seems that he is objecting to the entire concept of requiring that names be deleted without a renewal, which is unsurprising considering that NSI has historically had one of the largest stockpiles of unrenewed yet undeleted names.

> This also seems to be part of what Marcia Wells is getting to in her
comments.

Is it?  It seems to me a lot of her arguments indicate that names should get deleted *faster*.

> BTW, when do we meet again?

Now that the comment period is closed, we should do so soon. Unfortunately, I already have calls scheduled at our usual time throughout the rest of the week.  How about Monday?

Jordyn

________________________________________________________________________
BIRD & BIRD 
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. 
It contains information which may be confidential and which may also be privileged.  
Unless you are the named addressee (or authorised to receive for the addressee) you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. Further, we make every effort to keep our network free from viruses. However, you do need to verify that this email and any attachments are free of viruses as we can take no responsibility for any computer virus which might be transferred by way of this e-mail. 
Please refer to http://www.twobirds.com/fsma.cfm for our regulatory position under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 of the United Kingdom. 
A full list of partners is available on request. 
Details of our offices are available from http://www.twobirds.com 

This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
http://www.star.net.uk
________________________________________________________________________