RE: [registrars] Ross's Motion - Suggeseted Amendment

["Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Tom, the difference is that MSN and AOL customers have a choice.
VeriSign has just taken that away.

I agree with Ross and Rob, no un-sponsored gTLD should be allowed to do
this until there has been an opportunity to study it more fully. sTLDs
may have more flexibility given their sponsored nature and more specific
purpose.

On a broader concern, there appears to be no process associated with
approval of new registry services, like WLS and SiteFinder. Once Ross'
motion has been decided perhaps we should consider another asking ICANN
to establish a more transparent framework for approval of registry
services.

Tim

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of tbarrett
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 12:08 PM
To: ross@xxxxxxxxxx; 'Rob Hall'
Cc: 'Registrars Mail List'
Subject: RE: [registrars] Ross's Motion - Suggeseted Amendment


I would echo Rob's comments.

The broken policy process is the larger issue here.  

I believe that, if introduced correctly, wildcards in a tld can deliver
a
better user experience than what occurs today.  Frankly, there is no
reason
why an ISP/Browser vendor such as AOL or MSN deserves this traffic
anymore
than Verisign does.  There is no reason why the other tld's should be
prevented from doing this.  Although, if Neustar or Afilias wanted to do
it,
they should do it sooner rather than later.

I also do not agree that Siteminder has undermined registry or registrar
competition.  In fact, if SiteFinder provided a randomized list of
registrars for visitors to choose from to register the unregistered
domain,
then competition would be enhanced.  

In this regard, SiteFinder would be completely different than WLS, which
will only benefit a few large registrars.

The other issues: broken spam programs and security issues, seem
solvable
and less important.

Tom 


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ross Wm. Rader
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 1:25 PM
To: Rob Hall
Cc: Registrars Mail List
Subject: Re: [registrars] Ross's Motion - Suggeseted Amendment


On 9/18/2003 1:16 PM Rob Hall noted that:

 > Would you consider an amendment to your motion that refers the matter

to the
 > GNSO for immediate study, and suspends the recent Verisign
implementation
> until the study is completed ?

If it suspends all gTLD implementations until the study has been 
completed and a process has been followed to carefully gauge the impact 
of the proposed change on the technical and user communities, then yes. 
I don't want to be in a situation in a few weeks or months where the 
SSAC issues some findings and Verisign or Neulevel says "Thanks for the 
input, we'll take it under advisement" and ignores the interests and 
wishes of the community.

Elana and I talked earlier about essentially the same thing, but I've 
had a hard time framing it in words - can you put forward some proposed 
text that we could incorporate?

As well - Jim Archer - if you're listening, now's the time to get those 
"whereas's" in...

-- 


                        -rwr