ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[registrars]


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

RE: [registrars] Update on the .NET RRA Taskforce

  • To: "'Jordyn Buchanan'" <jbuchanan@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <ross@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [registrars] Update on the .NET RRA Taskforce
  • From: "Bhavin Turakhia" <bhavin.t@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 00:16:06 +0530
  • Cc: "'Registrars Constituency'" <registrars@xxxxxxxx>
  • In-reply-to: <B231D476A3789B4ABEAED0CA1B12996301B0A42A@EXCHANGE.corp.register.com>
  • Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Thread-index: AcWnN7NkqQSPMo0IQwe1YI8NKH8B2AAClGGwAAEqvWA=

I endorse this motion 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jordyn Buchanan [mailto:jbuchanan@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 11:21 PM
> To: ross@xxxxxxxxxx; Bhavin Turakhia
> Cc: Registrars Constituency
> Subject: RE: [registrars] Update on the .NET RRA Taskforce
> 
> I endorse this motion. 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ross Rader
> Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 12:26 PM
> To: Bhavin Turakhia
> Cc: 'Registrars Constituency'
> Subject: Re: [registrars] Update on the .NET RRA Taskforce
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> 
> There appears to be some doubt as to the level of support 
> that this working group has from our constituency. In order 
> to clarify this for those outside our constituency, I'd like 
> to propose a formal motion that this document become an 
> official position of the constituency and that the .net WG 
> are empowered to formally continue advocating these consensus 
> recommendationsto ICANN staff and Verisign for the purpose of 
> achieving an outcome that prefers the interests of the 
> membership of this constituency.
> 
> This is largely a symbolic motion and not intended to change 
> or alter the constituency position in any way. I am simply 
> intending to provide the WG with the full and formal support 
> of this constituency in order to further dispell the notion 
> that there is a lack of unity in support of these recommendations.
> 
> On 18/08/2005 11:44 AM Bhavin Turakhia noted that;
> > Hi all
> > 
> > The .NET RRA Taskforce has been working diligently on making 
> > amendments to the new .NET RRA to reverse/reduce the damage 
> caused by 
> > the modifications to the .NET Contract. We have finalized a draft 
> > version of our proposed changes to the .NET RRA which 
> addresses most 
> > of the concerns which I publically announced on behalf of all 
> > Registrars at Luxembourg as well as other concerns which Registrars 
> > have raised directly to the taskforce or members of the 
> taskforce. It
> also ties in some other loose ends.
> > 
> > We will keep all of you updated of the progress. Meanwhile 
> if anyone 
> > wants a confidential redlined version of the final document you can 
> > send a private email to Jon Nevett or myself.
> > 
> > Thanks
> > Bhavin
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> - --
> - --
> Regards,
> 
> 
> 
>                        -rwr
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>                 "Every contrivance of man, every tool, every 
> instrument,
>                  every utensil, every article designed for 
> use, of each
>                  and every kind, evolved from very simple beginnings."
>                         - Robert Collier
> 
> 
> Got Blog? http://www.blogware.com
> My Blogware: http://www.byte.org
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.3-nr1 (Windows XP)
> 
> iD8DBQFDCfyM6sL06XjirooRAqE8AJwKkozCuM0gcgRuU/erux5p+VuL0ACePCZc
> xrvAVaLg97jeqcK/bcvmczU=
> =4LZz
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> 




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