ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]

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

[ga] RAA

  • To: ga <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [ga] RAA
  • From: Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 10:42:38 -0700 (PDT)
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=zvobmYBaB70/uhVHIoI7XoN7fqfQ0c8imu5t02mLvYM27lwrNB+8amb56PqZqHnXmd4YKyPdTH3o1z3oSKsaL867xNZuIg3TfUOue8Y50HyVM3zSo6pFc8ufx9stLZmbHq2ASA/sIC6eC5+TtL3KPvtu19NJ4KVmAvfjjxwxqTk=;
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I am hereby asking Danny and Karl to co-chair the RAA working group.
   
  The WG will be moderated, censored and in general pestered by yours truly. This situation should change and I ask for volunteers.
   
  The Registrar Accreditation Agreement is too important for us to remain silent. With the announcement of the GoDaddy "solution" to the RegisterFly situation, the matter is brought head on into the forefront.
   
  The current Whois wg is veering toward either a crash with the RAAs or at the very least modifications to the RAAs. 
   
  New gTLDs and their resulting registries and registrars need new RAAs to function better than the current situation.
   
  The registrants must become beneficiaries of these new agreements for there to be any balance at all.
   
  As for Karl and Danny. I would not ask if I did not believe that together they could best serve the GAs' purposes by co-chairing the group. This will help them divide the work and will foster divergent points of view. Clearly these are two very important and busy individuals. Hopefully between them they will have enough time to help us.
   
  Please review this page with whatever interest you have.
  Important elements to look at will vary with each person's interest.
   
  http://www.icann.org/registrars/ra-agreement-17may01.htm
   
  Some of you may look at the ccTLD agreements just for a contrast, however unless there is a strong showing of interest we will not be dealing with ccTLDs.
  http://www.icann.org/cctlds/agreements.html
   
  It is important that we are cognizant of the fact that we as a group will be facing the fact of exclusion of the registrant community directly. This WG will in fact make a difference in favor of the registrant. This should not be avoided and we should be honest at the outset of this endeavor. The outcome here will make more of a difference than all the self organizing attempts to date.
   
  May good faith and right be with us,
  Eric
   

       
---------------------------------
Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>