Re: [council] Revised Resolution regarding Verisign Registry Site Finder Service
- To: "Cade,Marilyn S - LGCRP" <mcade@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [council] Revised Resolution regarding Verisign Registry Site Finder Service
- From: Amadeu Abril i Abril <Amadeu@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 06:29:04 +0200
- Cc: "Grant Forsyth (E-mail)" <grant.forsyth@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Bruce Tonkin (E-mail)" <bruce.tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Dan Halloran (E-mail)" <halloran@xxxxxxxxx>, "Council (E-mail)" <council@xxxxxxxx>, "John Jeffrey (E-mail)" <jeffrey@xxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <0F25F91B59355E42846E57527F331EA90207A962@lganj0se6.lga.att.com>
- References: <0F25F91B59355E42846E57527F331EA90207A962@lganj0se6.lga.att.com>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624
Cade,Marilyn S - LGCRP wrote:
Supports ICANN's actions to
1) monitor community reaction and experiences with the new registry service
2) request advice from the Security and Stability Advisory Committee and from
the IAB on the impact of change introduced by the registry service of VeriSign
3) encourages broad participation by the community in the upcoming meeting
hosted by the Security and Stability Advisory Committee
4) pledges its members support for the upcoming meeting
Sorry, but I fail to understand number 4). supports ICANN's actions to
pledges... My English does not codify it.
Requests that ICANN
1) provide a ruling of whether this service is a registry level service, in violation of existing accreditation agreements and if so, take immediate appropriate steps to end the service until required process is undertaken;
I'd say resolution, not ruling.
4) in any event, obtain a suspension of the service until the various reviews on the service are completed and presented to ICANN, whether through voluntary or involuntary means
Where are numbers 2) & 3) ?
1) work cooperatively to ensure full opportunity to fully understand the service, its implications for the DNS, and what steps are needed for retroactively addressing service introduction, and proactively present a recommendation regarding the need for a formal notice and comment process in the introduction of new services at the registry level via undertaking a PDP.
Two things: I would a refernce of time. We should request for an
immediate suspension ourselves. Not as law enforcers (we are not) but as
a voice of the community.
And somehow I feel that we need to explain that all this has to be done
ASAP (at least taking steps to obtain a suspension untill full decision)
Amadeu, laaaaaate at night (or early in the morning, dunno anymore...).