Re: [net-com] Next stage - analysis of first comment period
- To: Philip Sheppard <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [net-com] Next stage - analysis of first comment period
- From: Marc Schneiders <marc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 14:03:18 +0200 (CEST)
- Cc: <net-com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <200406220915.i5M9FZcU016695@turbo.aim.be>
- Sender: owner-net-com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, at 11:16 [=GMT+0200], Philip Sheppard wrote:
> Our task today will be to go through this document and simply decide if we
> want to make any change to the report. It is long but not so daunting in the
> way I propose we work with it.
> It is significant that the two substantive comments received have been from
> organisations who are potential bidders in this process.
> One option is to reference the two documents and leave it to ICANN staff /
> Board to add in greater detail based on our existing broad recommendations.
> However, there may be some items where including these comments in our
> report will be useful for all concerned. We will discuss later.
I think we should focus on those materials that fit in with our report
and ignore the more concrete technical stuff. We cannot, e.g., decide
whether 8 nameservers are necessary, as Verisign claims. Neither do we
need to list all sorts of elements from the existing .NET and other
gTLD contracts. These will obviously be referenced by ICANN.