RE: [registrars] proposed ICANN/Verisign Agreement

["Maureen Ruppert" <mruppert@bulkregister.com>]

This is just a suggestion, but I would encourage those against (or for) the
proposal to be specific, citing chapter and verse of the agreement, and
specific reasons for your position. This doesn't have to be posted to the
list, obviously, but Erica should be given substantive information/data to
work with.

Maureen

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
Behalf Of Rick H Wesson
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 12:01 PM
To: Erica Roberts
Cc: registrars@dnso.org
Subject: Re: [registrars] proposed ICANN/Verisign Agreement



Erica,

I am also 100% against these Agreements, I won't be attending the ICANN
meetings but I here by give you Alice's Registry, and ICANN accredited
registrar, for showing our distane for these agreements.

best regards,

-rick


On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, Erica Roberts wrote:

> The proposed new ICANN/Verising Agreement is likely to be discussed in
many fora at the ICANN Melbourne meeting including the Names Council - see
> http://www.icann.org/melbourne/proposed-verisign-agreements-topic.htm
>
> Since there has been no objection from the Registrars, it has been claimed
that the draft agreement is supported by the Registrars.  However, to my
knowledge the Registrars Consistuency have not established any position on
this matter.  In order to ensure that the Registrars constituency is
appropriately represented in the matter, I would appreciate Registrar
comments on the proposal.
> Since this will impact most on Registrars, it would be useful if this
matter could be included in the agenda for discussion in Melb.
>
> Regards,
> erica
>