[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [registrars] Testbed Period
Richard Lindsay wrote:
[I have deleted Becky's address as she is traveling to India, as well as cc's
to Mark and firstname.lastname@example.org]
> whether or not the "post testbed period" begins as scheduled.
As you might know there was a first regsitrar telconference with ICANN and DoC
regarding the NSI contract and other relevant issues concerning the
post-testbed period. I hope that minutes will be ciruclated in this list.
Louis Touton and Karen Rose were attending the telconf, along with
InfoNetworks; Nominalia; DomainBank, AllWest, eNom and ActiveISP (sorry if I
am missing someone).
Some issues we discussed relevant to your questions:
> Who will determine whether or not the testbed has completed
> its stated goals, and when will this announcement be made?
Loiys said that ICANN will send an officical communication on this regard
during next week. It was not clear whether the message we will get will
clearly state the date in which post-testbed (ie, regular) period will start.
I have formally requested both DoC and ICANN not to extend the testbed period
as most of it is really about policy, legal and comercial issues more rahter
than purely technical ones (even if there are also some important techbnical
ones, indeed). Combining this with the absolute lack of information about the
test (due to the chilling effect of the non-disclosure agreement and its
interpretation by NSI) I sumbitted that thee is an uregnt need to add more
registrars as this would put a little bit more of "balance" on what is clearly
a "power struggle".
I should say that I am less than convinced that they will buy my arguments ;-)
> What steps if any are being taken to address issues surrounding
> NSI contract and the SRS system?
We were through the contract and reviewed "major concenrs". Both ICANN nd DoC
encouraged all of us to provide further input on this topic.
My advice: do that, and make noise ;-) Concenrs with what is an absolutely
unbalanced and unaceeptable agreement should be sent to DoC and ICANN, but
this should also be disucssed on public mailinglists, newspaers and so on.
Public pressure seems to be the only thing that convinces some people to
On another wavelength, I am vsiisng DGIV next Wednesday (this is the European
Commisiion's Directorate-general for Competition Policy) in order to address
all our concerns regarding the anticompetitive effects of the NSI alicnse
agreement. I invite all EU registrars, and all those having relevant interests
within the EU, to coantct me so we can disucss a common strategy.