Re: [ga] List Rules

["Elisabeth Porteneuve" <elisabeth.porteneuve@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I went through PPT presentations attached to the quoted message (via Danny) 
http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/registrars/msg05626.html, 
re-read Jeff Neuman's quotes from New Delhi (via Dominik) 
http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga-200709/msg01071.html , Ross 
Rader's note 
http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga-200709/msg01300.html , but 
also browsed contractual reports ICANN receives from registries at 
http://www.icann.org/tlds/monthly-reports/ , especially com-net ones.


At the end of my reading, I think I understand better.

First of all, I understand the AGP serves the large spectra of non written 
purposes, for the benefit of registrars and their resellers. My blunt 
perception from PPTs is that a number of registrars run insecure software, 
and let their uneducated resellers to do as much mess as possible - all that 
is on the dark side of the moon, because outside of ICANN's contracts, AGP 
is a kind of insurance to fix unspoken disasters.
Secondly, VeriSign's reports clearly indicate that some registrars - very 
few - delete N (big N)  times more domains than add or renew, and that is a 
permanent situation. VeriSign's benefit is that their servers' performances 
are permanently benched and able to withstand a lot.
Third, I do not see much AGP benefit to registrants, they do not have EPP 
access to anything, and IMHO cannot make many mistakes (typo happens, of 
course).


Eventually I concur with proposed GNSO (Council?) motion - 50 deletes or 
10% - to discriminate between occasional mistakes or incompetence of the 
dark side and permanent tasting by some registrars.
Last, I think ICANN's should compile tendencies of monthly reports to show 
to the Board any new piggyback services happening in registrations.


My 2 euro-cents

Elisabeth Porteneuve


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <roberto@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "'Danny Younger'" <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>; "'Hugh Dierker'" 
<hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>; <debbie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 11:04 PM
Subject: RE: [ga] List Rules


> Thanks, Danny, that could be really helpful in trying to sort this issue
> out. At least for me.
> RG
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Danny Younger
> > Sent: Monday, 31 March 2008 21:49
> > To: Hugh Dierker; debbie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [ga] List Rules
> >
> >
> > Hello Eric,
> >
> > As much as I like motions, we would in a better position if
> > we could draft an issues paper laying out the pros and cons
> > of the AGP.  I note that the registrars have already created
> > a powerpoint on the benefits of the AGP -- you can view it by
> > clicking on the attachment at this url:
> > http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/registrars/msg05626.html
> >
> > By this way, this powerpoint was quite convincing (at least
> > to Board director Steven Goldstein that referenced this
> > presentation at the Washington JPA session), so our
> > counterpoint arguments must necessarily be of equal or
> > greater caliber if we are to convince both the GNSO and the
> > Board over the objections of the registrars.
> >
> > regards,
> > Danny
> >
> > --- Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > The list has run along very smoothly for several months. The main
> > > reason is voluntary compliance with the rules. Once this concept
> > > breaks down so does the list. We are not talking about
> > individual one
> > > time lapses. For constant repeat violations we must stand
> > strong and
> > > enforce the rules.
> > >
> > >   We are at a point for the first time in months, that the list is
> > > coalescing into the form of producing a statement/motion. The AGP
> > > issue seems to have come to a head and more formal resolution
> > > procedures may be appropriate. I believe it is at a motion
> > stage with
> > > 4 seconds. If the desire is to move forward in a constructive
> > > effective matter, we should hear that from the members.
> > >
> > >   Eric
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > ______________________
> > No Cost - Get a month of Blockbuster Total Access now. Sweet
> > deal for Yahoo! users and friends.
> > http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text1.com