Re: [nc-org] Comments are in.

[Elisabeth Porteneuve <Elisabeth.Porteneuve@cetp.ipsl.fr>]

Marc Schneiders <marc@schneiders.org> commented Milton's summary:
> 
> On Tue, 30 Oct 2001, at 12:14 [=GMT-0500], Milton Mueller wrote:
> 
> > 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
> 
> I have some problem with this, since so far we have come to the
> agreement, that we should not tighten matters too much in this
> regard. I would like to hear other members of the TF about this.

There are advantages and drawback in not tightening matters.
The drawback is that we avoid to face practical issues and
related problems, as raised by Thomas. We must bear in mind that
anything unsaid will be left to someone else decisions.

I am definitely in favor to face problems here and have more 
guidelines being elaborated here.

I agree with 2 and 3.

Elisabeth
--
> 
> > 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)
> 
> I agree with this.
> 
> > 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." 
> 
> I agree with this even more.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Marc@Schneiders.ORG
> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
>