Re: [ga] New contracts

[DPF <david@farrar.com>]

On Thu, 8 Mar 2001 06:48:00 -0000, you wrote:

>Same.  NSI/Verisign have already said that they would like an
>extension.  I would be amazed if the USG disagreed is NSi and ICANN
>agree to a 2 month extension.  So all that leaves is whether the ICANN
>BoD will agree to ask for an 2 month extension.
>
>I would hope that the DNSO Names Council will recommend to the BoD
>that such an extension is desirable.
>
>Before asking the NC to support a two month extension, it is worth
>remembering that if the draft Verisign/ICANN proposal is not agreed by April
>1, the current contract will apply and Verisign must divest themselves of
>either the Registry or Registrar function.

I may not have made clear what I mean by extension.  Rather than be
rushed into agreeing into the proposal by 1 April I propose that
instead ICANN and Verisign agree at this stage to a minor change in
the existing contract - specifically changing the date they must
separate out their registry and registrar ownership from 18  May to 18
July.  This would then give us an extra two months (until 1 June) to
fully explore the ramifications of signing *.com to Verisign pretty
much for ever with a presumptive right of renewal.

DPF
--
david@farrar.com
ICQ 29964527
--
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