Re: [registrars] Transfer policy

["Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2/10/2004 5:32 PM Elana Broitman noted that:

> Agreed that this step in the process is about implementation - not policy change.  But, as we went through the implementation process, we realized that most issues were subject to several interpretations and tweaks, which did not change the overall policy recommendation, but did allow for better implementation.  Therefore, this is the time for suggestions from the registrars, who will be most affected by the process.
Your general observations are correct, however in this specific 
instance, there is no policy support for the additional constraint - 
regardless of which interpretation you choose.
It would be prudent to let registrars comment on the implementation 
rather than trying to rally for another round of policy development. 
I've pointed out several times that there is a review mechanism built 
into this policy that allows the GNSO (ergo the RC, ergo individual 
registrars) to affect the policy, post-adoption. If there is a strong 
need to add additional constraints or otherwise modify the existing 
recommendations, it would be more appropriate to avail ourselves of the 
review process.
--
Regards,


	-rwr






"In the modern world the intelligence of public opinion is the one 
indispensable condition for social progress."
	- Charles W. Eliot (1834 - 1926)