[registrars] Registries must use Registrars

["Rob Hall" <rob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ward,

2 things:

1.  .jp is a country code and therefore does not use ICANN certified
registrars.  They can do basically whatever they like for how a domain
is registered.  Most of the progressive countries use a similar
Registrar model to ICANN.

2.  This is not a pre-list of reserved names.  That already happened to
my understanding, and is in previous appendicies.  For example, ICANN
reserves ICANN.tld in all new TLD's.  Most registries reserve DNS.tld
and WWW.tld etc.

I believe this to be something different than a reserved list.  I think
this may be that the Registry doesn't want to use Registrars for the
first 5,000 names.  This should not be allowed.

I have heard registies say they are worried about having no Registrars.
But that has never happened.  To make matters worse, Registries now want
in their contracts that they have the right to pick and choose which
Registrars they want to take.  Now we have a Registry wanting to deal
directly with Registrants.  I believe that would break the competitive
model currently in place.  Registries are a monopoly that should have a
competitive layer of Registrars dealing with Registrants.  Period.

While I might be open to as a last resort, if a Registry can't find even
one Registrar to do business with them, the ability for them to deal
directly, it would only be in that rare case.  And certainly not if they
have said no to dealing with a Registrar who wants to deal with them.
Until that happens (and I believe it never will), I don't believe we
should be building it into ICANN contracts.

And I will state here and now, that we will be a Registrar for any TLD
that can't find anyone else to work with. We will do whatever is
necessary to Register domains within their new tld and help them grow.
I bet we are not alone.  

To allow a Registry to end-run around the competitive layer of
Registrars is wrong, and should never be considered.  

The Registrar constituency must stand strong, as we have seen what
happens when one little break in the dam sneaks into a Registry
contract.  Every other Registry wants the same clause, and
consideration.

We must not allow this to occur.

Rob.



-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ward Benjamin
Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2007 2:38 PM
To: Robert F. Connelly
Cc: Registrars Constituency
Subject: Re: [registrars] FW: [alerts] ICANN News Alert -- Proposed
.MUSEUM sTLD Registry Agreement Posted for Public Comment



I agree. However, I have seen this before with .jp domains and JPRS. If
I remember that case involved the registry taking all country and Japan
prefecture and city names.

Thanks,
Ben

Robert F. Connelly wrote:
> At 09:09 AM 3/3/2007 Saturday  -0500, Nevett, Jonathon wrote:
>> FYI ? please pay particular attention to Appendix S, which permits 
>> the .museum Sponsor to register up to 5,000 names directly with the 
>> Registry Operator.
> 
> Dear Jon:  One basic "rule* from time immemorial was that the 
> registries were not to be registrars.  Regards, BobC
>