[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[registrars] Teleconference results

Fellow Registrars,

Good morning.  I wanted to comment on this morning's (for me)
teleconference.  Overall, I was extremely pleased by the fact
that by and large there is a great deal of consensus among 
the group.  I think this a strong indication of the level of
common purpose which we all share.  I just had a couple thoughts
that I wanted to express

1.  I think having the teleconference was positive, and would
prefer to have more frequent, but shorter teleconferences.
I would suggest that proposals, and counter-proposals first be 
submitted via this mailing list, and the teleconference be
used as a method of gauging support, and voting when necessary.
Also I imagine it would help Michael a great deal if we could
come up with rather specific agendas, and have each section or
topic led by someone else.  Since the secretariat will have the
burden of attempting to document the teleconferences, it may
be hard to lead the discussion and take notes at the same time.

2.  It appears to me that there is quite a bit of activity that
is not really documented on mailing lists, or on any of the 
DNSO web pages.  Obviously much of this is inevitable, since
the sites and lists were just set up, and are still being finalized.
However, I would really like to encourage anyone with information
related to Registry/Registrar issues to post reports to this or
the DNSO list.  Especially for those of us not in the US, and
in different time zones, on-line is often the only way to stay
up to date.

3.  Concerning the issue of who should be on the list and who
is a "member" I think we should include all the post-testbed
accredited registrars, whether they have signed the application
form or not.  Without signing the application, there will be
no designated voter for the organization, so they effectively
cannot vote, but until we have membership dues or other payments
there is no reason to exclude any ICANN accredited registrars.
After the 90 day post-testbed period we can amend the procedures,
but unless someone complains about getting the mail, we should
make every effort to get ALL registrars to participate.

4.  Finally concerning the testbed period and issues surrounding
the NSI contract and the Registry/Registrar process in general,
I really hope that this constituency can serve as a catalyst for 
getting this whole process on the road.  In particular, I hope
the testbed Registrars will use this forum as one of the ways
to show us post-testbeds the path to enlightenment.  I think it
would be a shame (not to mention a colossal waste of time and
effort) if all of us are forced to go through the same pain
that I am sure the testbeds are feeling right now.  

I would be very interested in hearing from the rest of you
on any of these issues, and encourage comments or opinions.

Anyway, I am looking forward to working with all of you,

Best regards,

_/_/_/interQ Incorporated
_/_/_/System Division
_/_/_/Director and General Manager
_/_/_/Richard A. S. Lindsay