RE: [registrars] Conference Call for Interested RC Members

["Michael D. Palage" <michael@palage.com>]

Bruce:

Will you read a prepared statement like Chuck did today to the registry
constituency, or can we have the author himself, Rodger, do some Q&A. He can
consider it a warm up for the Senate hearings on Wednesday. In additional it
would help to have someone from VeriSign management answer some of the
unanswered questions that Ross and others have been asking but which never
seem to get a final answer. Including my own - where did VeriSign obtained
my wife's whois data for your wonderful expiration mailing, considering she
was opted out of RCOM's bulk whois?

Actually I would encourage the registrars to listen in on this call and hear
how VeriSign believes that they are at a competitive disadvantage because of
the growing ccTLD market and shrinking CNO zone files. Bruce perhaps Rodger
could share the actual number of promo name that your registrar pumped into
the zone files with the register a .com and get a .net and .org for free. Or
better yet could VeriSign please tell us why in paragraph 18 of the .com
agreement this is the only section in all of the ICANN registry contracts in
which a provision is tied to ccTLDs acceptance of ICANN? Kudos to Phil.

Could those registrars on the list please provide to me the number of jobs
in the U.S. that have been created as a result of competition introduced at
the registrar level. I would like to provide this evidence to the DoC so
that they can see what ICANN has done in connection with introducing and
promoting competition.  Our friends at VeriSign have been talking on the
Hill about how the U.S. is losing soooo many jobs overseas because of the
growing ccTLD movement. Could Rodger shed a little light on how VRSN's role
in the bastardization of ccTLDs into gTLDs like .tv, .cc, and .bz has lead
to this erosion of jobs. Do the words pot, kettle, black come to anyone
else's mind?

I was in DC today with a number of registrars trying to provide people with
an accurate perspective of ICANN restructuring. I will be providing a
summary to the list of action items that I believe should be taken to
protect competition in the name space.

Best regards,

Mike














-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
Behalf Of Beckwith, Bruce
Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 9:29 PM
To: 'registrars@dnso.org'
Subject: [registrars] Conference Call for Interested RC Members


	Fellow Registrar Constituency members:

	As we have discussed during RC conference calls, both for the whole
Constituency and within the smaller working group looking at ICANN Reform,
VeriSign has been carefully studying the ICANN Reform issue since it was
raised by Dr. Lynn in his paper "President's Report: ICANN - The Case for
Reform".  We have come to some preliminary conclusions on this topic, and
would be pleased to discuss them with any constituency member that is
interested in participating during a call on Monday.

	I have scheduled a conference call for Monday, June 10, at 16:30 or
4:30 pm DST US East Coast, or 20:30 UTC (trying to make it most convenient
for all registrars).
	Please see
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?day=10&month=6&year=200
2&hour=16&min=30&sec=0&p1=179 for local times in other locations.

	US Toll Free:   1 888-656-8230
	International:  +1 712-257-3712
	Passcode:     43871

	We would estimate the call to be approximately 30 minutes in length,
give or take a few minutes depending on the number of questions.  We
sincerely welcome your feedback before we finalize our conclusions.

	Regards,

	Bruce