ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[registrars]


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

RE: [registrars] Variations on the current domain name model - proposed registrar workshop for Luxembourg

  • To: "Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [registrars] Variations on the current domain name model - proposed registrar workshop for Luxembourg
  • From: "Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 10:36:18 +1000
  • Cc: <registrars@xxxxxxxx>
  • Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Thread-index: AcVlOMljQGwOzCxfQyWDOUKgdoRBtAAPvwuA
  • Thread-topic: [registrars] Variations on the current domain name model - proposed registrar workshop for Luxembourg

Hello Tim,

> 
> The add grace period abuse needs to be addressed separately. 
> I see no benefit in dilluting that issue by labeling it a 
> business model.

Good point.  I was not intending to have a discussion about the add
grace period, I was merely pointing out current practice.

The add grace period is a characteristic of the current registry
service.  It needs to be clear whether the current activities are a
breach of the current registry-registrar agreement, or whether Verisign
wishes to change rules for the grace period in some way.      If
Verisign wishes to  change the rules, then I think it would be useful
for registrars to discuss how the rules should change.  


So to be clear - I was proposing a workshop to consider new services,
without changing the current service.   

I agree that we could also have a discussion about changes to the rules
regarding the add-delete grace period of the current registry service.

Regards,
Bruce Tonkin




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