[registrars] FYI - Staff Manager's report on New Registry

[Tim Ruiz]

Ross,

Thanks for taking the initiative on this.

The process should of course be open and transparent.

While technical and stability issues are important, other factors should not
be ignored. Those factors depend to a large degree on the answer to Bruce's
question about the nature of registry agreements with ICANN. But either way,
there should be some consensus gathering on issues pertaining to a
particular service.

The proposed services must be reviewed prior to its introduction. Trying to
remove or discontinue a service after it has been in operation will raise a
whole new set of problems and legal issues.

Consideration should be given to similar innovation already in the market
place. It is not appropriate that a registry be allowed to use its
"monopoly" of a TLD to capture a market innovated by others. 

It is reasonable to expect that the process may be applied differently to
sTLDs. The key is that there is some involvement/consensus from the
community affected.

Finally, any service that was in question, under review, OR that has not
already been in production as of the date of Paul's letter to Bruce calling
for this PDP must go through the new process. It must not be grandfathered
in. That date is October 20, 2003.

Tim

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars at gnso.icann.org
[mailto:owner-registrars at gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Ross Wm. Rader
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 12:16 PM
Cc: registrars at dnso.org
Subject: Re: [registrars] FYI - Staff Manager's report on New Registry

On 11/4/2003 1:08 PM Michael D. Palage noted that:
> As the editor of the Staff Manager's Issues Report on the Development of a
> Process for the Introduction of New or Modified Registry Services, I would
> like to include a statement from each constituency regarding how you
> believe the issues affect your constituency. This will be included in the
> Stakeholder Groups and Their Apparent Positions section of the report,
> which is due to be published Friday, 7 November.
> 
> This is a follow-on to the request made of the constituencies in the GNSO
> Council meeting of 16 October.

Given the tight timeline and lack of apparent progress, it might make 
the most sense for us to draft a position and request signatories and 
forward a statement as an unofficial document. I don't believe that we 
can draft and adopt a formal position in the time allotted.

Unless there are objections or a proposal to the contrary, I would be 
happy to draft and circulate a document over the next twenty-four hours 
if it would help.

Please send me comments or information that you believe reflects your 
corporate position and I will attempt to incorporate it into the draft 
to the best of my ability and circulate for comment later tomorrow.

-- 

                        -rwr








                 "Don't be too timid and squeamish about your actions.
                                            All life is an experiment.
                             The more experiments you make the better."
                         - Ralph Waldo Emerson

Got Blog? http://www.blogware.com
My Blogware: http://www.byte.org