Re: [ga] .ORG Names
On 22:11 14/03/01, Kendall Dawson said: At 11:05 AM 3/15/2001 -0800, Dave Crocker wrote: Dear Dave, one is always betrayed by his friend. What is interesting is that the real boss of the ICANN is ... http://www.icann.org/nsi/sclavos-letter-28feb01.htm Stratton Clavos, President and CEO of VeriSign What he says is what I say, not what you want to make us believe. I quote and comment: <quote> Feb. 28, 2001 Dr. Vinton G. Cerf Senior Vice President, Internet Architecture and Technology WorldCom Mail Stop F2 4-115 22001 Loudoun County Parkway Ashburn, Virginia 20147 Re: .Com, .Net and .Org Agreements Dear Vint: <unquote> Interesting to note that President and CEO Stratton Clavos writes to WorldCom, VP and not to ICANN, Chair. Tells a lot about the real dependance of ICANN. <snip> <quote> We would agree to terminate our operation of the registry for .org on December 31, 2002 and to cooperate with ICANN in transitioning .org to management by a new, non-profit organization representing the global universe of non-profit organizations. <unquote> To cooperate with iCANN seems OK. If the "new, non-profit org... tions" is a quote of a demand of the iCANN this is OK. But it seems that NSI which decided to open ".org" a few years ago, is here deciding to close it to reduce competition to ".com" and ".info". <quote> Among the issues to be determined in this transition is whether .org should be limited to registrations only by non-commercial entities, and if so, what transition arrangements need to be established for those existing registrants that would not qualify under that limitation. <unquote> This seems acceptable since VeriSign is to manage until the end of 2002. Except that Stratton knows the ICANN bylaws and knows that these matters can only be decided as part of a consensus or of an emergency procedure. There is no notion of emegency in this text. It seems the consensus is to do as if iCANN had the power (or the duty?) to proceed aside of its bylaws, DNSO etc... <quote> ICANN has agreed that, at a minimum, existing registrants would be permitted to remain in the new .org registry for one renewal cycle under its new management. In addition, and as another part of the transition process, all ICANN-accredited registrars would continue to be permitted to register qualifying names in the .org TLD for three years after termination of our operation of the .org registry, during which period the new registry could develop whatever registration policies for the future it thought appropriate. <unquote> It seems that the minimum of one year is imposed by NSI, the protection of the Registrars too? as if it was against the position of the iCANN? But who is the iCANN since the letter is sent to Vint: Vint, BoD, Louis, Joe, Mike? <quote> Our objective is to provide a permanent and affordable home on the Internet for the non-profit sector and in so doing make a major effort to close the digital divide on a worldwide scale. <unquote> This looks odd. It look like if Stratton was really one of us, trying to impose the iCANN a position we would have defended. Or doing his job, playing on common sense to defend his business interests? a) it really shows iCANN is protecting nobody's interest but of a few Staff people. b) that decisions are taken by Stratton. He says VeriSign's objectives are to provide ... He does not says that VeriSign supports iCANN's objectives. c) this rings strange to me. It is like if Stratton was informing VP Cerf that Staff had agreed. <quote> To see this through, we also would agree to support the new non-profit .org registry operator, and provide it with a contribution of $5 million that would be used for an endowment to help cover its operating expenses. Further, we also agree to make available to the party designated by ICANN as successor operator of the .org registry the use of global resolution and distribution facilities at no charge for one year. <unquote> Seems that ".org" is quite a competition to ".info"! Several millions of dollars to get rid of it ! How do you want Vint to resist. The world is fighting iCANN for a few times $ 50.000. What would the world say if they known Vint has refused millions and millions given to the developping countries and UN... IMHO conclusions seem to be: 1. Stratton Clavos believes he his the boss 2. the .org DN holders are under this plan given one year by NSI generosity before being politically incorrect, taking DNs out of the mouth of starving countries. Good commercial image for them.... Thx! And that they have iCANN AND VeriSign against them... 3. Clint is cute: he put that letter in the icann.org archives (it should be in WorldCom's") so we may see it and better understand. You may recall the letter of Esther Dyson to Ralph Nader. Welcome in the Club Vint. 4. McLauglin is quite slow infomed and Joe Sims is suffering Elseihmer. Stratton's letter is a fax of Feb 28th. The mails from Joe Sims and Andy from March 5. Even in 2001 it makes 6 days. They say that what Stratton writes to Vint is "misreporting & hyperventilation about domain name stuff". Interesting reading anyway. Jefsey
|