[ga] Board Decisions

["Patrick Corliss" <patrick@quad.net.au>]

On Thursday, March 15, 2001 5:13 PM (local time)
William X. Walsh <william@userfriendly.com> wrote:
Subject: Re[2]: [ga] Re: Board descisions


> So I ask you for the third time, and the second time just this
> evening, what do you find in this agreement that makes it preferable
> over the existing one, and how do you see those benefits overweighing
> the drawbacks that have been addressed here (And ignored by you) ?

Hi William

In Melbourne, I saw two separate presentations made by Joe Sims.  In both of
these Joe describes both Plans and outlined their advantages and disadvantages
to ICANN and the community.   Schlavos separately outlined the advantages to
Verisign of Plan B.

I do not want to make that particular case at the moment (for or against) but
would like to draw out some aspects for consideration by the list.

Some of the issues included that it would bring Verisign into line with all of
the new registries.  It would also separate the .com, .net and .org agreements.
Dates were also shortened and caps removed.  Verisign agreed to provide $5
million to the new .org operator and $200 million in R&D type funding.  There's
also the changes to the registry-registrar separation.

My feeling was that the most important consideration was that Verisign would
have a "presumptive right" to renew .com.  Thus if Verisign managed the TLD
properly, it would be expected for them to continue with .com in perpetuity.

I would also say that some of the new arrangements were imposed by ICANN staff
(rather than requested by Verisign) as a trade-off for this presumptive right to
renew.  This includes the separation into three agreements and the loss of .org
and the possible loss of .net.

It should not be assumed that Verisign wants to "give away" .org.  Rather they
want to "keep" .com and were prepared to make significant sacrifices to achieve
that result.

Personally I believe that .com will be less valuable than people might think
given the introduction of new TLDs.  However, except for .biz, they are not very
attractive.  And even .biz is not general purpose because of its apparent focus
on "business" operations.

For those looking for a "hidden agenda" I would focus on the .com part of the
deal and ask ICANN when they plan to introduce more TLDs in a genuine
competitive framework.

My view is that it will be another few years yet before the proof of concept is
seen to be sufficiently well-tested to allow the introduction of more TLDs.

 So Verisign will continue to get a good run with .com for many years to come.

Best regards
Patrick Corliss



--
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