[council] GNSO Council Restructuring - a wrinkle in the two houses approach
Adrian Kinderis
adrian at ausregistry.com.au
Mon Dec 8 20:26:18 UTC 2008
Alan,
I disagree.
In my opinion, ICANN has recourse at the Registrars level. If the reseller is out of line, the Registrar that appointed them should be held accountable.
I am not keen on creating further contracted parties at this level.
Adrian Kinderis
From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg
Sent: Tuesday, 9 December 2008 3:19 AM
To: Council GNSO'
Subject: RE: [council] GNSO Council Restructuring - a wrinkle in the two houses approach
At 08/12/2008 10:32 AM, Philip Sheppard wrote:
Can you provide an example of a new constituency for the contract parties house (that is not a splinter group) ?
One that I would like to see, although it is not without some possible conflicts, is registrar reseller constituency.
Just as a current registrar is bound by both a contacts with ICANN and with a Registry, I would like to see resellers bound by a contract with ICANN and with a Registrar. That would give ICANN direct recourse to deal with them, and make them a contracted party.
Alan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20081209/3e6afc8b/attachment.html>
More information about the council
mailing list