Re: [atlarge-discuss] Community & Registrar Input on Transfers

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Danny and all stakeholders or other interested parties ane members,

  I wonder if this is a wise or useful exercise.
Why?  Well if you read as you suggested Danny,
http://www.icann.org/legal/briefing-on-implementation-20oct02.htm
you will see that the following excerpts could cause this fledgling
orgnization some creditibility problems at this juncture:
"In the consensus-policy provisions of ICANN's existing agreements,
registrars and registry operators    have agreed to implement policies
developed after those agreements are signed only when:

        1. The policies are on a topic that is contractually defined as being
appropriate for
        establishment by ICANN;

        2. The policies are established based on a consensus among Internet
stakeholders
        represented in the ICANN process; and

        3. The registrar or registry operator has reasonable protections in its
            business from the effects of having to implement the policy, such
            as a reasonable time to implement the policy and a reasonable
            opportunity to pass on any costs of implementing the policy to its
             customers. "

  As #'s 1 and 2 here would seem to be potential show stoppers as
we are decidedly not considered "among Internet stakeholders
represented in the ICANN process as #2 outlines, such a potential
proposal that you are suggesting can just as easily after the fact be
ignored on these grounds alone.  You can count on Marilyn Cade
to make that point quite clear at the appropriate time.  Timing
is sometimes everything as you well know Danny...

  Now if you at this time, know of some way around this very strong
disencentive, unfair as it may be, than I would love to hear/read of it?

DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:

> A Correction:
>
> The Chair of the Transfers TF has just changed her mind:
>
> "I need to provide an update to the TF. Let me give some clarification to
> what happens next. I've had the chance to consult with the NC chair, and he's
> offered some clarification which I've asked him to provide as an email.
> First, after he and I reviewed the schedule and the timelines, we realize
> that an extension on the comments phase simply isn't possible if we meet our
> deadline to get this before the NC this year for a vote. As I stated in the
> Public Session this week, I am committed to completing this. The community
> needs closure; the users need it, the Registrars need it.  Although we will
> not extend the comment period, we will host at least one more open call with
> the registrars specifically, for comment/discussions.  This may/may not take
> place before 11/8, but will be included in the comment process."
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-transfer/Arc00/msg00599.html
>
> If we seek to provide a user proposal on transfers for consideration by the
> Council, we would need to complete the project within one week (a rather
> difficult undertaking).... on the other hand, we could allow ourselves five
> to six weeks to get the job done done (by-passing the Council and
> hand-delivering our proposal directly to the Board at the Annual Meeting on
> December 14-15 in Amsterdam).
>
> It seems pretty clear that Marilyn Cade intends to push through the current
> registrar proposal (even though it is currently opposed by BulkRegister.com,
> Go Daddy Software, Inc., NameScout Corp., Register.com, Inc., VeriSign
> Registrar, Wild West Domains, Inc., and CSL GmbH d/b/a joker.com).  I think
> that we as a group could come up with a better solution that what is
> currently being considered.
>
> It may be helpful to begin by reviewing the relevant portions of General
> Counsel's Briefing Concerning Implementation of Policies by Registrars and
> Registry Operators posted at
> http://www.icann.org/legal/briefing-on-implementation-20oct02.htm
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 127k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 972-244-3801
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de