Re: [registrars] .ORG NC Task Force

["Ken Stubbs" <kstubbs@digitel.net>]

mike....

 

the statement was presented at the 11th hour with a caveat that unless there was "overwhelming support", it would not be included in the document. the registry constituency opposed it, the BC approved  it, and there were no comments from the cc, isp, & ip. as a result it was not included . 

 

as I indicated in my previous correspondence, the registrars could certainly "sign on" to the BC commentary which is intended to go directly to the board.

 

ken 

p.s. I would like to be included on this registrar TF  

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Michael D. Palage

To: Registrars@dnso.org

Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 3:45 PM

Subject: [registrars] .ORG NC Task Force

Ken:

 

Why was there not overwhelming support for that statement, who was against it and who supported it.

 

Section 5.1.2 of the .org agreement ( http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/verisign/registry-agmt-org-25may01.htm) states rather clearly "Registry TLD and neither it nor any affiliated entity will be eligible to seek to continue to operate the Registry TLD."

 

Now thinking outside of the box our friends at VRSN if they decided to participate in .ORG would possibly try a combination of the following tactics: (1) Under Section 5.12 VeriSign can be a sub-contractor for up to 80% of the value of the Registry contract, i.e. non-profit entity, backed by VeriSign registry and/or (2) non-profit entity backed by either eNIC (.cc TLD operator) or dotTV (.tv TLD operator) registries which were recently acquired by VeriSign.

 

Unlike in the past where we have been reactive, this constituency should proactively protect the spirit and letter of the .ORG agreements. 

 

Anyone willing to serve on this Registrar Task Force as proposed in the 2002 Registrar Agenda that does not have a conflict of interest please let me know.

 

Mike

 

 

 -----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On Behalf Of Ken Stubbs
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 2:37 PM
To: Registrars@dnso.org
Subject: [registrars] additional BC comment on the "org" re-delegation

fellow registrars.....

 

the business constituency has recently forwarded this item to the task force:  (see my additional comments below)

 

"The BC has always supported the introduction of greater competition in the
provision of key gTLD Internet services and sees that such improved
competition would also add diversity and introduce new investment.
The suggested supplemental statement - with a minor enhancement - has been
part of the BC position on .org divestiture and we would support its
communication to the Board.
Rather than seek to prolong the TF work in formulating a consensus policy
recommendation for the NC to adopt and forward to the Board, it is BC's
expectation that the statement below will be part of our minority view
supplemental comments - unless of course there is overwhelming support for
its inclusion in the full report!"

 

"The Task Force would not, in the interest of increasing
competition, DIVERSITY AND NEW INVESTMENT, wish to see the incumbent
dominant provider of gTLD registry services, Verisign, take an
interest in or contract to deliver critical services
to the new management organization."

(note: there was not "overwhelming support" for inclusion of this item in the TF report and, as a result,  this last minute policy position will be separately communicated directly to the board by the business constituency...)

 

 

ken stubbs