RE: [ga] Last minute changes to Verisign agreements

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com>]

Roland,

If you have not already done so, take a look at Section 5.1 in the .org
agreement and Sections 5.1 and 5.2 in the .net agreement.  Terms spelled out
there answer some of your questions regarding the transition of the .org and
.net registries.

Also, the registry agreements (new and old) do not come directly from DoC.
They are between VeriSign and ICANN with terms that tie in the cooperative
agreement VeriSign has with DoC.

Chuck

-----Original Message-----
From: Roeland Meyer [mailto:rmeyer@mhsc.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 4:08 AM
To: ga dnso
Subject: Re: [ga] Last minute changes to Verisign agreements


One consequence is stated below. Since NSI has agreed to divest themselves
of the ORG and NET registries, that means that someone has to run them. Does
ICANN take that over directly? Do they contract it out to NSI? Do they sell
the franchise to someone else? Does someone have to buy them from NSI (if
so, how much)?

It gets better ... Since the registry contract comes directly from the DOC,
can ICANN even have direct say? Will DOC award the contracts to ICANN, so
they can sub it back out to NSI?

We haven't even broached those issues, in the last 48 hours. Who said
24-hours, over a weekend, was sufficient to analyze the new contract? Not
D'Crock, certainly.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roeland Meyer 
> Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 12:58 AM
> To: 'Steve Sobol'; Patrick Greenwell
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: RE: [ga] Verisign Agreement Adopted (fwd)
> 
> 
> > From: Steve Sobol [mailto:sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net]
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 12:12 AM
> > 
> > Patrick Greenwell wrote:
> >  
> > > For those of you not following this, the following decision means
> > > effectively NSI has been regranted a registry monopoly over 
> > .com (they
> > > spin out .net and .org) and they do not have to split the registry
> > > operation from the registrar operation.
> > 
> > ?!
> > 
> > uhhh, so what happens to all the alternative dotcom registrars?
> > 
> > I mean, is ICANN asking to be hauled into court or what?
> 
> Nothing of the sort. It simply means that the NSI registrar 
> can continue as-is. The prior agreement would have forced NSI 
> to divest of either the registrar or the registry. Now, they 
> get to keep both but have to divest themselves of ORG and NET 
> registries. BTW, their are legitimate COM/NET/ORG registrars. 
> They are legitimate re-sellers. If you are speaking towards 
> the independent inclusive TLD registries, that remains status 
> quo, as well.
> 
> What this will mean is that someone has to deploy ORG and NET 
> registries. How much you wanna bet that ICANN contracts NSI to do so?
> 
> 
> 
> 
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html