<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [registrars] FW: Registry-Registrar discussions
- To: Elana Broitman <ebroitman@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [registrars] FW: Registry-Registrar discussions
- From: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 06:07:06 -0700
- Cc: registrars@xxxxxxxx
- Reply-to: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<div>Not sure if there is still a joint call with the registries this morning or not. It's on my schedule but I
have no call in info.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The position of Go Daddy on the issue below is that we would support the request as worded.<BR><BR>Tim</div>
<div> </div>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 8px; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><BR>-------- Original
Message --------<BR>Subject: [registrars] FW: Registry-Registrar discussions<BR>From: "Elana Broitman"
<ebroitman@xxxxxxxxxxxx><BR>Date: Wed, June 09, 2004 2:26 pm<BR>To: registrars@xxxxxxxx<BR><BR>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=GENERATOR>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=170171721-09062004>Dear registrars - as you will recall,
the org/biz/info/us/name registries are required to transition to the most up to date EPP standard in August
(publication of standard + 135 days). As you will also recall, we and the registries discussed our mutual
interest in extending the deadline for this transition to allow registrars to pace the migration. Below
is the statement that the registries proposed to send to ICANN. It is based on our input, but I wanted to
send it around once again. If you have any significant concern, please raise it. Otherwise we will
signify our assent to the registries by end of the day on Friday (EST).</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT face=Arial><FONT
size=2><SPAN class=170171721-09062004><FONT color=#0000ff></FONT></SPAN></FONT></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT face=Arial><FONT size=2><SPAN class=170171721-09062004><FONT color=#0000ff>When
last we talked among the registrars, we came up with a longer list of related issues and
concerns. We haven't forgotten it. The registries know that we have this list and the
ex.com.</FONT> <FONT color=#0000ff>will be walking them through it next week. We will provide
an update on those additional items as soon as we have it.</FONT></SPAN></FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT face=Arial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT face=Arial><FONT color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=170171721-09062004>Regards, Elana
Broitman</SPAN></FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT face=Arial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT face=Arial><FONT size=2><SPAN class=170171721-09062004> </SPAN>"The gTLD
Registry and the Registrar Constituencies would like to request an extension of the implementation period for
the RFC version of the EPP software. Specifically, we request that the gTLD registries that are currently
required to implement this release within specific timeframes complete their implementation no later than 31
December 2004 rather than the timeframes established in their respective ICANN contracts. Registrars would then
be able to begin their operational implementation which would be completed by 31 March,
2005.</FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT face=Arial size=2>Both constituencies continue to work to develop a
coordinated implementation plan but sufficient time no longer remains for adequate registry/registrar
implementation and testing under the existing contract deadlines. This extension will allow sufficient
time to develop an overall schedule for migration to the new release for registries and registrars that will
avoid adverse impacts on affected parties.</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT face=Arial size=2>If there are any questions, please do not
hesitate to contact us. In order to incorporate any response to this request into our coordination
discussions, we would like to ask that ICANN respond to this request no later than
[date.]"</FONT></SPAN></P></BLOCKQUOTE>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|