Re: [registrars] Request to extend the 24 day comment period on the proposed Verisign agreement

[Thomas Keller <tom@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Bruce,

please include Schlund in the list of signatories.

tom

Am 28.10.2005 schrieb Bruce Tonkin:
> Hello All,
> 
> ICANN has opened at 24 day comment period, which I assume starts on 24
> October 2005, and finishes on Friday 18 Nov 2005.
> 
> I note from the ICANN bylaws - Article III, Section 6, paragraph 2:
> 
> "Where both practically feasible and consistent with the relevant policy
> development process, an in-person public forum shall also be held for
> discussion of any proposed policies as described in Section 6(1)(b) of
> this Article, prior to any final Board action."
> 
> (see: http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#III)
> 
> Now I realize we can argue whether this is a policy issue or not, but I
> think the spirit of the bylaws is that a major decision like this should
> allow for an in-person meeting.
> 
> I also note that Verisign and ICANN have been discussing this for about
> a year.
> 
> I think it is reasonable that registrars and other members of the GNSO
> community have the opportunity to discuss the proposed agreement in an
> "in-person public Forum".,  The most practical time to do this would be
> the upcoming ICANN meeting from the 30 Nov to 4 Dec 05.
> 
> I therefore propose to send the following statement to the ICANN Board.
> I would like registrars to sign-up to this statement as individual
> registrars (not enough time to run the formal registrars constituency
> voting process).  The more people that sign-on to this, the more weight
> the statement will hold.
> 
> Please advise via the mailing list, or via email to me if you would like
> to be added as a signatory.
> 
> 
> STATEMENT:
> 
> "We the undersigned registrars, request that the public comment period
> on the proposed agreement with Verisign be extended until Sunday 4 Dec
> 2005 so as to allow opportunities for in-person public discussions
> during the upcoming ICANN meeting in Vancouver.  This we believe is
> consistent with the spirit of Article III, Section 6, paragraph 2 of the
> ICANN bylaws, which states that: 
> "Where both practically feasible and consistent with the relevant policy
> development process, an in-person public forum shall also be held for
> discussion of any proposed policies as described in Section 6(1)(b) of
> this Article, prior to any final Board action."
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Bruce Tonkin
> Melbourne IT
> 
> 
> 
> 

Gruss,

tom

(__)        
(OO)_____  
(oo)    /|\	A cow is not entirely full of
  | |--/ | *    milk some of it is hamburger!
  w w w  w