RE: [registrars] Position Paper??

["Antony Van Couvering" <avc@nameengine.com>]

I'd like to weigh in in favor of one protocol, one only.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Larry Erlich [mailto:erlich@domainregistry.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2000 12:01 PM
> To: Richard Lindsay
> Cc: mpalage@infonetworks.com; Registrars List
> Subject: Re: [registrars] Position Paper??
> 
> 
> Richard Lindsay wrote:
> 
> > The individual points Mike has identified are fine, with the
> > exception of:
> > 
> > > * Registrars favor use of existing RRP protocol for 
> shared registries.
> > 
> > since many proposals do not use the exact same protocol.  It may
> > be reworded to say:
> > 
> > Registrars favor use of a Registry Registrar Protocol that will
> > ensure fair access for all Registrars, and encourage that a
> > protocol be submitted to the IETF such that an open source
> > solution will be available to all registries.
> > 
> > Or something like that.  I think we can actually do without
> > the point if there is any dissent.
> > 
> 
> Richard, I prefer Mike's original statement. 
> Not "a Registry Registrar Protocol" but
> "existing Registry Registrar Protocol". 
> 
> Larry Erlich
> 
> http://www.DomainRegistry.com
> 
> -- 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Larry Erlich - DomainRegistry.com, Inc.
> 215-244-6700 - FAX:215-244-6605 - Reply: erlich@DomainRegistry.com
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>