ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[registrars]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [registrars] OPOC Proposal

  • To: ross@xxxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: Re: [registrars] OPOC Proposal
  • From: Ross Rader <ross@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 08:20:00 -0400
  • Cc: Registrars Constituency <registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • In-reply-to: <450F100A.3080406@tucows.com>
  • Organization: Tucows Inc.
  • References: <450F100A.3080406@tucows.com>
  • Reply-to: ross@xxxxxxxxxx
  • Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (Windows/20060909)

Ross Rader wrote:
Your feedback on this iteration of the Whois Operational Point of Contact proposal would be appreciated:

http://www.writely.com/Doc.aspx?id=dgsxrsww_2gjfj37

There are some newly proposed additions that I've boxed out with [PROPOSED:] - your feedback on the notice requirements would be especially helpful...

Apologies, I forwarded a link to an older revision, here is the correct link:

http://www.writely.com/View.aspx?docID=dgsxrsww_2gjfj37&revision=_latest

My personal concerns lie primarily with section 4 in that they require registrars to expose registrants to a level of detail that might otherwise be made transparent in various registrar business models. I have deep concerns that ICANN's policies are interfering more and more in the business of registration, and less and less with the DNS. Domain name registration has been made significantly more complex in the last four years, with very little apparent benefit for registrants.

-r



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>