Re: [nc-org] Comments are in.

["Milton Mueller" <Mueller@syr.edu>]

Yes, our policy toward this needs to be more clearly defined.
I haven't defined it yet, still seeking comment from the Task
Force.

>>> "Ken Stubbs" <kstubbs@digitel.net> 10/30/01 12:31PM >>>
your second comment here appears to broaden the scope with respect to
"stipulations" on the registrar..

i find no problems with the registry stipulating "contractually" adherence
to specific guidlines on branding practices but the term : " practices of
the registrar" as mentioned in your paragraph below need to be more clearly
delineated before i could make any other specific comments.

ken stubbs


----- Original Message -----
From: "Milton Mueller" <Mueller@syr.edu>
To: <nc-org@dnso.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 12:14 PM
Subject: [nc-org] Comments are in.


>
> The deadline for comments on the dot ORG
> policy has passed. There was a small number
> of comments, mostly supportive.
>
> The two areas where modifications might be needed are:
>
> 1. The proposal might contain more detailed guidelines
> regarding the sponsoring organization and its methods,
> as proposed in the comments of Thomas Roessler
> http://www.dnso.org/dnso/dnsocomments/comments-dotorg/Arc01/msg00002.html 
>
> 2. The proposal might be modified to make it clear
> that the sponsoring organisation retains the right
> to make stipulations regarding the practices of the
> registrar. The statement explicitly asked for comment
> on this and there were no comments against
> making such stipulations, and there were several
> comments in favor. (Bailey, Ress, Pruett)
>
> 3. There was also a comment asking the statement
> to make sure that the new sponsoring org
> "keep the cost of registration as low as possible,
> consistent with the need to provide effective service."
>
>
>
>
>