ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[registrars]


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

RE: [registrars] FW: MUSEUM proposal

  • To: "Nevett,Jonathon" <jnevett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [registrars] FW: MUSEUM proposal
  • From: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 08:00:43 -0700
  • Cc: Kurt Pritz <pritz@xxxxxxxxx>, Tim Cole <tim.cole@xxxxxxxxx>, Craig Schwartz <craig.schwartz@xxxxxxxxx>, karen.lentz@xxxxxxxxx, Registrar Constituency <registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Reply-to: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: Web-Based Email 4.9.22

<div>
For the record, Go Daddy was NOT one of the larger registrars that Kurt
refers to. While I don't see this as a disaster it does concern me. It is simply, by Kurt own's admission, a way to work around Musedoma's contractual requirement to use Accredited Registrars.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>
What Go Daddy did suggest as a possible alternative is that registries
might be allowed to establish, own,&nbsp;and operate Accredited Registrars - as long as appropriate equal access and confidentiality requirements were part&nbsp;of the arrangement.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>
What we don't want to see is an errosion of the Accredited Registrar
concept. I think recent events have made it clear that not only is the Accreditation concept valid and necessary, but compliance and&nbsp;enforcement of Accredited Registrars' obligations need to be strengthened.<BR><BR>Tim <BR></div>
<div   name="wmMessageComp"><BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 8px; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid">-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject: [registrars] FW: MUSEUM proposal<BR>From: "Nevett, Jonathon" &lt;jnevett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx&gt;<BR>Date: Thu, March 22, 2007 8:42 am<BR>To: "Registrar Constituency" &lt;registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx&gt;<BR>Cc: "Kurt Pritz" &lt;pritz@xxxxxxxxx&gt;, "Tim Cole" &lt;tim.cole@xxxxxxxxx&gt;,<BR>"Craig Schwartz" &lt;craig.schwartz@xxxxxxxxx&gt;, &lt;karen.lentz@xxxxxxxxx&gt;<BR><BR>
The following is an informative letter from ICANN related to
the<BR>
proposal of the .museum registry operator/sponsor to be able to
register<BR>
up to 5,000 domain names. &nbsp;This letter will help guide our
discussion on<BR>this topic during the upcoming meeting in Lisbon.<BR><BR>Thanks.<BR><BR>Jon <BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: Kurt Pritz [mailto:pritz@xxxxxxxxx] <BR>Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 8:09 AM<BR>To: Nevett, Jonathon<BR>Cc: Craig Schwartz; Tim Cole; Karen Lentz<BR>Subject: MUSEUM proposal<BR><BR>Jon:<BR><BR>
The attached is intended to kick-off and inform the discussion we are
&nbsp;<BR>
to have about the MUSEUM proposal. It is meant to be informative and
&nbsp;<BR>constructive.<BR><BR>Thanks,<BR><BR>Kurt Pritz<BR><BR>ICANN<BR>4676 Admiralty Way, #330<BR>Marina del Rey. CA &nbsp;90292<BR><BR>+1.310.301.5809 (office)<BR>+1.310.400.4184 (mobile) </BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>




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