Re: [ga] Re: Last minute changes to Verisign agreements

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

Dear Names Council,

    We ask that you endorse and pass this letter along to Verisign and the Board
of Directors of ICANN.  We are not opposing the substance of the amendments and
or modifications to the agreements as we received them today, because we have not
had time to evaluate them.
    What we ask is that you grant a 30 day extension of the end of  negotiation
date so that all of us can review and give input to the agreement.
    It is our hope that we be viewed as the advisory behind ICANN, that through
our public input we can help all parties understand and accomodate public stake
holder opinion. We also believe that through this process we can help gather
support for the relationship between ICANN and Verisign.
    Thank you for any consideration you can give this important request at this
time.

The GA?

I just see time is critical here so I offer this as a starting point for a letter
to our council.

My previous letters would go elsewhere in case there is confusion.

Sincerely,

DPF wrote:

> On Mon, 2 Apr 2001 00:28:51 -0400, Peter de Blanc wrote:
>
> >to all-
> >
> >at the names council meeting a few days ago, i suggested that, in business,
> >"everything is negotiable". based on inputs from our constituencies, we
> >proposed some changes that most of us could accept in order to give a
> >"go-ahead" for "option B". Yes, this is "option C"
> >
> >It is my (personal) feeling that verisign would rather have some DNSO
> >support behind any board decision to go with option B in the face of all the
> >comments supporting "status quo" or option A.
>
> Indeed.  What has happened is a logical move by Verisign.  One could
> argue that ICANN management should have said "hey we have publicly
> stated no changes are possible and if we are going to reverse that
> undertaking we also want you to agree to more time".  This is
> certainly what I would have done if an ICANN negotiator.
>
> >Now, of course, we have another last-minute change that does not allow for
> >any DNSO input before the board's vote.
> >
> >I certainly hope there is a 30 day "cooling off" period before any decision.
>
> Indeed.  Is there any chance the Names Council could quickly pass a
> resolution asking the Board to request Verisign to agree to ask DOC
> for a 30 day extension?
>
> The changes to the agreement are welcome but it would be a terrible
> public policy example to agree to such changes with less than 24 hours
> to consider and analyse them.
>
> If Verisign will not agree to any extension I still believe Option A
> (status quo) is the safest option as at least with that we know what
> we are getting.
>
> If Verisign do agree to a 30 day delay then I have a growing
> confidence a win-win solution can be found.
>
> 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

--
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