Fw: [council] Petition

["Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard@aim.be>]

In view of this posting, Chuck or Registrars could you comment back to the
NC list and clarify the situation.
Philip
NC Chair

----- Original Message -----
From: <DannyYounger@cs.com>
To: <council@dnso.org>
Sent: 03 October 2001 23:23
Subject: [council] Petition


VeriSign (the registrar) has finally posted comments to the registrar list
regarding the issue of intra-registrar transfers:
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/registrars/Arc01/msg01287.html

The implications of Bruce Beckwith's statement (as noted by Ross Rader in a
follow-up message) are that VRSN will only deal with the registrar's
consensus document (other than voting not to ratify it) if it is pursued as
a
consensus policy within the ICANN framework.

I have the following comments to make:

First, I have no reason to believe that the Registrar constituency will be
capable of internally resolving this issue.
Second, only a consensus policy can bind all participants within the ICANN
process.
Third, the registrant community needs this issue resolved in a timely
manner.

Please note that our ByLaws state that "Constituencies or GA participants
may
propose that the NC consider domain name policies or recommendations."  As a
GA participant, and as one concerned with the need to rapidly resolve an
issue that has impacted registrants worldwide,  I am now formally
petitioning
the Council to initiate procedures that will lead to the formulation of a
domain name policy that addresses the issue of intra-registrar transfers.
This matter has been on the table for over three months already without
resolution; it's time to get on with the job.

Best regards,
Danny Younger