[council] GNSO Council Restructuring - a wrinkle in the two houses approach

[Stéphane Van Gelder]

Yes, sorry Adrian. I got your email just after sending mine and saw you were
making the same point.

Stéphane


Le 08/12/08 21:29, « Adrian Kinderis » <adrian at ausregistry.com.au> a écrit :

> Exactly my point Stéphane!
>  
> Adrian
>  
>  
> 
> From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org] On
> Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
> Sent: Tuesday, 9 December 2008 7:26 AM
> To: Alan Greenberg; Council GNSO'
> Subject: Re: [council] GNSO Council Restructuring - a wrinkle in the two
> houses approach
>  
> Just a question: if resellers have a contract with ICANN, don¹t they then
> become ICANN-accredited registrars?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Stéphane Van Gelder
> Directeur Général / General manager
> +33 1 48 01 86 17
>  
> INDOM ­ Noms de domaine / Domain names
> 124-126, rue de Provence
> 75008 Paris. France
> 0820 77 7000
> (Prix d'un appel local)
> De l'étranger (calling from outside France): + 33 1 76 70 05 67
> http://www.indom.com/
> 
> Daily domain name industry news: http://www.domaines.info/
> Mon blog/My blog : http://www.domaines.info/
> 
> 
> 
> Le 08/12/08 17:19, « Alan Greenberg » <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> a écrit :
> 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/20081208/4fe292ee/attachment.html>