Re: [registrars] Position Paper??
Thanks for your rapid and supportive reply.....
Michael, may we take you up on your offer to draft a brief report for
circulation/approval by the constituency, taking into the comments that have
Thanks to all again......
"Michael D. Palage" wrote:
> I have a list of those consensus items (see below) and can put them together
> in a report rather quickly. I feel a report like this would be similar to
> the ISPC and Business Constituency. I do not believe that we can objectively
> create a report like the IPC ranking the proposals because of all of the
> registrars participating in various proposal.
> • Must be new TLDs.
> • Must be generic TLDs in testbed.
> • Must be chartered TLDs in testbed.
> • All ICANN accredited registrars must be able to provide registration
> services in any new TLDs.
> • Registrars favor use of existing RRP protocol for shared registries.
> • ICANN must develop criteria for evaluating registries during testbed
> -----Original Message-----
> From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On
> Behalf Of Paul M. Kane
> Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2000 1:42 AM
> To: Registrars List
> Subject: [registrars] Position Paper??
> Morning all,
> I note the IPC, ISPC and Business Constituencies have all submitted
> comments on the introduction of new TLDs.
> Is the Registrar Constituency going to submit a position paper too?? I
> recall we had rough consensus in Yokohama on a number of issues.........
> See you in LA