RE: [Fwd: [registrars] proposed ICANN/Verisign Agreement]

["John Tai (Dotster Inc)" <jtai@dotster.com>]

I am in favor of such call as suggested


JT

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
Behalf Of Elana Broitman
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 12:02 PM
To: Paul M. Kane; Registrars List
Subject: Re: [Fwd: [registrars] proposed ICANN/Verisign Agreement]


I am available to join such a call.  I would second one as soon as possible,
since many in the U.S. may be leaving for Australia soon.

----- Original Message -----
From: Paul M. Kane <Paul.Kane@REACTO.com>
To: Registrars List <registrars@dnso.org>
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 7:49 PM
Subject: Re: [Fwd: [registrars] proposed ICANN/Verisign Agreement]


> In light of the substantive change of direction of the proposed ICANN/NSI
agreement and the relatively few Registrars who will be in Melbourne would
it be an idea to
> hold a tel conf
>
> May I invite your comments, both supporting comments and opposing commnets
must be substantive and may I draw your attention to section "D" of
> http://www.icann.org/melbourne/proposed-verisign-agreements-topic.htm
>
> The NC will be discussing this issue on Sunday....
>
> Thanks
>
> Paul
>
>
> > Subject: Re: [registrars] proposed ICANN/Verisign Agreement
> > Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 10:49:04 -0500
> > From: Larry Erlich <erlich@domainregistry.com>
> > Organization: DomainRegistry.com, Inc.
> > To: Erica Roberts <erica.roberts@bigpond.com>
> > CC: registrars@dnso.org
> > References: <022201c0a538$a9e3bcc0$8dd4fea9@pcax10series>
> >
> > We are 100% against this, and we are planning
> > to do whatever is necessary to prevent
> > this from happening.
> >
> > We will be filing a formal objection
> > which we will try and post to the list.
> >
> > Erica, below you said:
> >
> > "Since there has been no objection from the Registrars, it has been
> > claimed that the draft agreement is supported by the Registrars."
> >
> > Who exactly has made this claim?
> >
> > Larry Erlich
> >
> > http://www.DomainRegistry.com
> >
> > 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 t
> > > 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
> > >
> > >     ---------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 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
> >
> > --
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > Larry Erlich - DomainRegistry.com, Inc.
> > 215-244-6700 - FAX:215-244-6605 - Reply: erlich@DomainRegistry.com
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>