ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


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

[council] re proposed resolution for issues report on deleted names

  • To: <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [council] re proposed resolution for issues report on deleted names
  • From: "Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 09:58:06 +0100
  • In-reply-to: <57AD40AED823A7439D25CD09604BFB54A5E7C1@balius.mit>
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Thread-index: AcTzfc7YrnXhsHIhRvizd8NP5CLdhQATNgUQABuWgWAAFzn1cA==

thank you for your clarity in distinguishing between the two issues that are
associated with the draft resolution.

The first, as you say, is the allocation mechanism by which market-savvy
registrars obtain valuable deleted names for re-sale.
The second, is the means by which these are sold to new registrants and the
resulting profit share.

I agree these are two issues.
I am less convinced that the first only is an issue that needs investigating
and that all is well with respect to the second.
I, and I guess fellow Council members, would like to learn more about that
second issue.
What is the best way we achieve this learning?
I had thought that an issues report might be the mechanism but I am open to


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