RE: [registrars] Please Consider the Following

["Antony Van Couvering" <avc@nameengine.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Larry Erlich [mailto:erlich@domainregistry.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 3:15 PM
> To: michael@palage.com
> Cc: Registrars List; Dan Halloran
> Subject: Re: [registrars] Please Consider the Following
> 
<snip> 
> > 
> > Now before answering please consider the following. In 
> Berlin, at the
> > constituency's first meeting, there was a motion put forth 
> by NSI, before
> > they became part of the ICANN family, that the constituency 
> be open to
> > non-ICANN accredited registrars. Ivan Pope was also a 
> strong proponent of
> > this motion. 
> 
> Ivan is still with Netnames.com? 
> They are currently not ICANN accredited, correct? 
> So it makes sense that he would be in favor of that.
> (Please correct me if I am wrong about their current
> status or Ivan's affiliation.)
> 

NetNames was bought by NetBenefit, which is ICANN-accredited.  I don't
know what Ivan said at that meeting (I didn't hear him say anything),
but I certainly stood up and gave Mike Palage some grief about the
decision, at some length.  

Many ccTLDs have perfectly good accreditation processes, which are not
ludicrously expensive, and where smaller registrars are encouraged,
though they may only do ten or twenty registrations a year (law firms,
accountants, etc.).  The UK is the obvious example.  That's good for
everyone, I should think.  Many also have cabal-like structures in which
high fees and/or silly technical requirements are imposed (Germany).
ICANN is somewhere in between, with most of the nonsense having been
mandated by NSI.  That could change, especially if the constituency
bothered to ask.

Antony