RE: [registrars] FW: MUSEUM proposal

["Nevett, Jonathon" <jnevett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I too suggested that the .museum sponsor simply become accredited as a
registrar. 

 

I urge folks with comments to raise them at the meeting and to post them
with ICANN by sending an e-mail to:

 

museum-renewal-2007@xxxxxxxxx

 

As of yesterday, my letter was the only posting:

 

http://forum.icann.org/lists/museum-renewal-2007/

 

Here is the provision at issue:

 

Appendix 6

Schedule of Reserved Names

 

E.  Sponsor may register up to 5000 domain names directly with the
Registry Operator and keep these names under direct management until the
conclusion of its designation by ICANN as the sponsor for the Sponsored
TLD.  At that time all such names that are registered to the Sponsor
(but not including those in Part B below) will be transferred at the
conclusion of status of sponsor of the registry.

 

Thanks.

 

Jon

 

________________________________

From: Paul Stahura [mailto:paul.stahura@xxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 8:36 PM
To: Tim Ruiz; Nevett, Jonathon
Cc: Kurt Pritz; Tim Cole; Craig Schwartz; karen.lentz@xxxxxxxxx;
Registrar Constituency
Subject: RE: [registrars] FW: MUSEUM proposal

 

I don't think enom was one of the larger registrars either.

I agree with Tim re his suggestion about registries be allowed to have
common ownership with registrars, with appropriate separation and
confidentiality requirements, and his comment re erosion in the
Accredited Registrar concept.

 

________________________________

From: Tim Ruiz [mailto:tim@xxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 8:01 AM
To: Nevett,Jonathon
Cc: Kurt Pritz; Tim Cole; Craig Schwartz; karen.lentz@xxxxxxxxx;
Registrar Constituency
Subject: RE: [registrars] FW: MUSEUM proposal

 

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.

 

What Go Daddy did suggest as a possible alternative is that registries
might be allowed to establish, own, and operate Accredited Registrars -
as long as appropriate equal access and confidentiality requirements
were part of the arrangement.

 

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
enforcement of Accredited Registrars' obligations need to be
strengthened.

Tim 

	 

	-------- Original Message --------
	Subject: [registrars] FW: MUSEUM proposal
	From: "Nevett, Jonathon" <jnevett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
	Date: Thu, March 22, 2007 8:42 am
	To: "Registrar Constituency" <registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
	Cc: "Kurt Pritz" <pritz@xxxxxxxxx>, "Tim Cole"
<tim.cole@xxxxxxxxx>,
	"Craig Schwartz" <craig.schwartz@xxxxxxxxx>,
<karen.lentz@xxxxxxxxx>
	
	The following is an informative letter from ICANN related to the
	proposal of the .museum registry operator/sponsor to be able to
register
	up to 5,000 domain names.  This letter will help guide our
discussion on
	this topic during the upcoming meeting in Lisbon.
	
	Thanks.
	
	Jon 
	
	-----Original Message-----
	From: Kurt Pritz [mailto:pritz@xxxxxxxxx] 
	Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 8:09 AM
	To: Nevett, Jonathon
	Cc: Craig Schwartz; Tim Cole; Karen Lentz
	Subject: MUSEUM proposal
	
	Jon:
	
	The attached is intended to kick-off and inform the discussion
we are  
	to have about the MUSEUM proposal. It is meant to be informative
and  
	constructive.
	
	Thanks,
	
	Kurt Pritz
	
	ICANN
	4676 Admiralty Way, #330
	Marina del Rey. CA  90292
	
	+1.310.301.5809 (office)
	+1.310.400.4184 (mobile)