ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[registrars]


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

Re: [registrars] ICANN budget.

  • To: "Robert F. Connelly" <rconnell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [registrars] ICANN budget.
  • From: "Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 07:25:43 -0400
  • Cc: Registrars Constituency <registrars@xxxxxxxx>, Duane Connelly <duane@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • In-reply-to: <6.1.0.6.2.20040524233045.04246788@mail.beach.net>
  • Organization: Tucows Inc.
  • References: <6.1.0.6.2.20040524233045.04246788@mail.beach.net>
  • Reply-to: ross@xxxxxxxxxx
  • Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5a (Windows/20040113)

On 5/25/2004 2:37 AM Robert F. Connelly noted that:

3. More of ICANN's resources are expended upon the larger registrars.

4. Most especially, large registrars with many resellers probably cause many more vexing problems for ICANN, they are certainly a problem for *all* registrars.

Bob - this isn't the first time that I bring this up. Drawing lines between large registrars and small registrars causes us to have less of a voice within ICANN. The real issue here lies with the overall size of the budget and the economic demands of non-contributing parties. Let's try and keep this discussion based on fact and focused on where the heart of the matter lies.
--

                       -rwr








                "Don't be too timid and squeamish about your actions.
                                           All life is an experiment.
                            The more experiments you make the better."
                        - Ralph Waldo Emerson

Got Blog? http://www.blogware.com
My Blogware: http://www.byte.org





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