RE: [registrars] Verisign change to operation of the .com DNS lookup service

[Mike Lampson <lampson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

It could also be argued that since ICANN gave explicit contractual
permission to .MUSEUM to implement this capability that other gTLD operators
would also need to receive similar explicit permission from ICANN.

_Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Michael D Palage
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 11:30 AM
To: ross@xxxxxxxxxx
Cc: registrars@xxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [registrars] Verisign change to operation of the .com DNS
lookup service


Ross,

Thanks for the clarification of "loaded".

>From a purely legal standpoint, ICANN has granted a registry (.MUSEUM) the
contractual right to use wild cards in their registry operations. Therefore,
there is a presumption that ICANN has condoned this service, either
explicitly or by mistake.

If, however, as you previously stated in your last email, ICANN staff just
made an arbitrary decision without consulting the community. Then the next
question you/community needs to ask is how do you undue this "mistake."

Please keep the constructive comments coming, they are appreciated.

Mike




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ross Wm. Rader [mailto:ross@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 11:13 AM
> To: Michael D. Palage
> Cc: registrars@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [registrars] Verisign change to operation of the .com DNS
> lookup service
>
>
> On 9/16/2003 11:00 AM Michael D. Palage noted that:
>
> > Ross,
> >
> > Thanks for the answers. I do not know about the questions being
> "loaded" but
> > they were meant to be tough questions (for both sides of the
> argument) that
> > would provide the quickest means of getting to the core issues.
>
> I should have been clearer about that remark. I mean "loaded" in the
> sense that there seems to be a presumption that the service is desirable
> and places the onus on the community to demonstrate why this is a bad
> thing. Verisign is the one that needs to demonstrate why this is
> desirable and how the benefits to the community will exceed currently
> accepted practices resolvers.
>
> I don't think they can. Even if I am wrong and there are benefits to
> doing things this way, it is simply not right to allow a corporation to
> throw away 20 years of DNS best practices because they feel like it. I
> want to be convinced, or I want it to go away.
>
> --
>
>
>                         -rwr
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>