Re: [registrars] telecon

[Larry Erlich <erlich@domainregistry.com>]

Register.com is a large company and
should be able to supply other
attendees for the meeting. We are a small
company on the other hand and I am the
only one qualified to discuss this matter.
Additionally, I would not be able to
attend on Monday, only Friday. Elana
additionally said that it would be difficult
to attend, she didn't say "impossible".

I would vote for Friday meeting
at this point.

Larry Erlich

http://www.DomainRegistry.com


Bhavin Turakhia wrote:
> 
> i agree with rob on the following counts
> 
> 1. one day wont make too much of a difference
> 
> 2. there are more than one party affected..... rob, register.com and other
> registrars who may be at inet
> 
> rest, i am ok with either of the dates.....
> 
> bhavin
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
> > Behalf Of Rob Hall
> > Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 9:45 PM
> > To: Michael D. Palage; Ross Wm. Rader; Registrars@Dnso.Org
> > Subject: RE: [registrars] telecon
> >
> >
> > Mike,
> >
> > I disagree.
> >
> > While I think that in general I agree with your points about
> > accommodation,
> > in this case, I do not think it wise to proceed without Elana or
> > Register.com (or any other registrar that is attending INET or traveling)
> > being there.  I know that in response to my earlier posting, I received 2
> > out of office notices from other registrars that aren't back until next
> > week.  We are talking about delaying by 1 business day.  If they
> > had asked
> > to delay for weeks, that would be different.  I do not believe
> > their intent
> > is to push this meeting off, but rather to participate in it.
> >
> > Following the complaints about being blindsided at the registrars
> > constituency meeting, I am sensitive to the perception that it may be
> > happening again.
> >
> > As this matter clearly involves Register.com as one of the principal
> > registrars involved, I think it only fair that the rest of group
> > be able to
> > hear their side as opposed to only being presented with one side of the
> > argument.
> >
> > In this case, I think holding the meeting Monday will be more productive
> > and certainly more conducive to working together towards a
> > solution that we
> > all can live with.
> >
> > I think that making this small accommodation will go along way in healing
> > some of the wounds created at the last meeting.  The only way we
> > can solve
> > this is to work together.  Any actions that would further
> > entrench the two
> > sides will only make any possible consensus resolution take longer,
> > something none of us want.
> >
> > In closing, I think the request for a Monday meeting should be
> > granted, and
> > views heard from all sides.  We need to move forward in a positive
> > way.  The fact that Register.com is anxious to be involved in the
> > discussions and on the call is a good sign and a small step to moving
> > forwards progressively.
> >
> > Rob.
> >
> >
> >
> > At 11:55 AM 6/7/2001 -0400, Michael D. Palage wrote:
> > >Rob:
> > >
> > >As I stated earlier to Elana, this is primarily for the benefit of those
> > >smaller registrars that do not have travel budgets and which were not in
> > >Stockholm.  I understand that you share some concerns raised by Elana on
> > >this issue, but I respectfully must move forward unless there is
> > significant
> > >push back from other registrars in the constituency.
> > >
> > >Recently some people have raised constructive comments about my plate
> > >overflowing and that it is difficult to get everything done.
> > Respectfully,
> > >the problems arise when certain registrars ask for special
> > treatment. Case
> > >in point. I wasted three hours of my time attempting to reschedule the
> > >Registrar meeting last week to the afternoon. This involved
> > interfacing with
> > >ICANN, the local event planners, etc.
> > >
> > >The registrar constituency spoke in Stockholm and the message was move
> > >forward now not latter. This message has been reinforced by
> > numerous emails
> > >that I have received this week. Therefore, I will respectfully keep the
> > >teleconference scheduled for Friday. The exact time will be set
> > within the
> > >next hour.
> > >
> > >Thanks again for your comments but I believe the totality of the
> > >circumstance argue in favor of moving forward.
> > >
> > >Best regards,
> > >
> > >Mike
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
> > > > Behalf Of Rob Hall
> > > > Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 11:01 AM
> > > > To: Ross Wm. Rader; Registrars@Dnso.Org
> > > > Subject: Re: [registrars] telecon
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Ross et al,
> > > >
> > > > Given that the INET conference is still on in Stockholm, and that many
> > > > people may still be there or traveling back from it, does it not
> > > > make sense
> > > > to have the telethon on Monday ?
> > > >
> > > > I realize that there is some sensitivity to the urgency of this, but I
> > > > think we will be more productive with the registrars directly involved
> > > > being able to attend the telecon.
> > > >
> > > > Rob.
> > > >
> > > > At 06:48 AM 6/7/2001 -0400, Ross Wm. Rader wrote:
> > > > > >> Elana:
> > > > > >>could we please switch to Monday, June 11th. I am travelling
> > > > on Friday and
> > > > >it would be difficult to joint telecon. Given that we have
> > been heavilly
> > > > >involved, I'd >>really appreciate being able to join. Thank you.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >For the official record I would like to note that the
> > adoption of this
> > > > >stance by various registrars is costing our organization thousands of
> > > > >dollars *per day*, inconveniencing thousands of registrants and
> > > > placing an
> > > > >undue and unnecessary burden on the technical systems of our
> > > > registrar and
> > > > >the registry. Further delay in resolving this issue only
> > compounds the
> > > > >problem and advantages those that have chosen to work outside of
> > > > appropriate
> > > > >conduct and accepted process.
> > > > >
> > > > >-rwr
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >Tucows Inc.
> > > > >t. 416.538.5492
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Rob Hall                                voice  (613) 768-5100
> > > > President                                  fax  (613) 820-0777
> > > > Momentous.ca Corp.
> > > > rob@momentous.ca                      www.momentous.ca
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > iti,s
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Rob Hall                                voice  (613) 768-5100
> > President                                  fax  (613) 820-0777
> > Momentous.ca Corp.
> > rob@momentous.ca                      www.momentous.ca
> >
> >
> >
> > iti,s
> >

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Larry Erlich - DomainRegistry.com, Inc.
215-244-6700 - FAX:215-244-6605 - Reply: erlich@DomainRegistry.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------