Re: [ga] Re: VeriSign Proposal a Done Deal??

[Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>]

Even More,

My family and I grew up where you had to apply and get USG contracts to use
their resources - running the Colorado River, skiing on Forest Service land,
heck
our recent Interior Secretary Bruce Babbit was one of my first ski coaches.

Well by golly you did not get one of those deals and without getting approval
through public hearings and new agreements change the deal, or add to it.

Here we have a global gift to global public.  VRSN does not have a right to
change it unilaterally.

The Public is entitled to decide this matter as it is a public resource.

Sincerely,
Eric

Roberto Gaetano wrote:

> Chuck Gomes wrote:
> >
> >Since 1996, there have been potential domain name holders who have
> >requested some sort of wait list service in case domain names are
> >released into the available pool.  The service at the registrar level
> >was a response to this demand.  Putting the service at the registry
> >level improves the value of the service for potential registrants.
>
> The more I think about this, the less I like it.
> In 1996 the situation was rather different, as there was no distinction
> between the Registrar and the Registry.
> One of the pillars of a healthy competition was, IMHO, the separation of the
> roles (you might remember that for this very reason I did strongly oppose
> the new contract allowing Verisign to do both for .com).
> Here we have yet another proof of how unwise was that choice, because there
> is an obvious (to me, at least) conflict of interest between the Registrar
> and the Registry in offering competing services.
> Incidentally, if Verisign (the Registry) registers an expired name to the
> first-in-queue, skipping the Registrars, who will be the Registrar that will
> be commercially in contact with the Registrant for future services? Or will
> Verisign (the Registry) operate also as Registrar, and this independently
> from Verisign (the Registrar)? Obviously, to have Verisign (the Registrar)
> inheriting the Registrar function for the Registrants in the queues operated
> by Verisign (the Registry) will be unfair practice.
>
> >
> >The value to the Internet community therefore seems rather obvious to
> >me. But, if there is none as you suggest, then the service will be a
> >failure.  On the other hand, if there is demand and hence value, it will
> >succeed.  The level of success will depend on how much demand and value
> >there is.  The best way to test it is to let the market prove it one way
> >or other.
>
> I disagree that the commercial success should be the only measure.
> Let's take the extreme example of the smugglers of cigarettes and spirits:
> they provide a doubtless value to the customers by selling directly foreign
> goods, skipping part of the value chain that will include resellers and
> taxes, but the commercial success is not a good enough reason to allow the
> practice.
>
> Regards
> Roberto
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
> http://www.hotmail.com
>
> --
> 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