[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