Re: [registrars] Registrar Meeting

["Richard Lindsay" <richard@interq.ad.jp>]

*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro*
Greetings,

I would probably find it very difficult to attend a meeting
scheduled this soon.  If there is consensus that a meeting
should be held, I would request that at least it be held
at the very beginning or end of the week.  A meeting on
a Wednesday would use a whole week of travel for those
of us not in North America.

I believe many of these issues can be discussed on the
mailing list, and an agenda for the Yokohama meeting
developed from those discussions.  We also should
be able to schedule a number of teleconferences in between
now and Yokohama.  I would certainly hope that a meeting
before the ICANN meetings would not detract from the
importance of a large Registrar constituency turnout at
the ICANN meeting.

Regards,
Richard

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael D. Palage" <mpalage@infonetworks.com>
To: "Registrars@Dnso.Org" <registrars@dnso.org>
Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2000 4:52 AM
Subject: [registrars] Registrar Meeting


> I have spoken with several registrars over the past couple of days with
> regard to the growing number of issues that are confronting the
> constituency. Although we are scheduled to meet in Yokohama next month, it
> does not appear that there will be a large turnout. This factor coupled
with
> the time differential makes participation via a telephone bridge even less
> attractive. Therefore, I propose having a meeting in DC June 21st.  The
> propose of this meeting will be to discuss the following:
>
> (1) Recent problems with regard to domain name hijacking and other issues
> involving transfer requests
> Note: Several registrars have discussed providing an invitation to law
> enforcement personal (FBI etc.) that have been currently investigating
these
> hijacking issues.
>
> (2) What is it that Registrars do: sell a product or provide a service.
> There are several registrars that have a different viewpoint on this topic
> and it needs to be discussed. For those advocates of the product viewpoint
> please read the Umbro and the sex.com opinions.
>
> (3) Code of Conduct issues. I would like to thank Richard Lindsey for
> getting out a draft document based on the original work of Jeff
Shrewsbury.
> I think we collectively need to speed the progress of this document.
>
> (4) Registrar funding and structure.  Funding is a growing problem. The
$250
> that I have collected to date was for last year's NC bill (total $5,000).
> According to the budget adopted by the NC we will to pony up ($19,000).
> Structure is a problem when you consider that there is a growing
distinction
> between large Registrars and smaller to mid-size Registrars. Will all
> registrars be required to pay the same fees, or will voting rights have to
> be impacted. These are fundamental issues that we as an organization must
> answer if we are to grow as an industry.
>
> (5) A Registrar Statement on Working Group B & C issues. The staff report
is
> due out next week. I strongly believe that a joint Registrar Statement
would
> be beneficial.
>
>
> I have several people looking into room availability and telephone
> conference facilities.  Several registrars have also expressed an interest
> in contributing financially to host the event.
>
> I look to take the progress achieved at this meeting to springboard our
> efforts in Yokohama.
>
> Please provide feedback ASAP as time is short.
>
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
>