RE: [registrars] Why ICANN Exists

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

Hello All:

Just in case there was any confusion in my last post, VeriSign DID NOT sign
the registrar letter of support to the DoC.

In fact, to date 52 ICANN accredited registrars from 17 different countries,
including 8 out of the top 10 registrars have signed the Registrar letter of
support in connection with ICANN's Evolution and Reform process.
Additionally, according to SnapNames' State of the Domain 2nd Quarter
Report, these 52 registrars accounted for over 51% of the entire market
share of domain names registered in the .com, .org, .net, .biz, .info and
.name top-level domains. However, if your remove those domain names
sponsored by VeriSign owned registrars, these 52 signatories represent over
77% of the market share.

Best regards,

Michael D. Palage




-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
Behalf Of Michael D. Palage
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2002 10:42 AM
To: Rick Wesson; David Wascher
Cc: Registrars List
Subject: [registrars] Why ICANN Exists


Rick,

Actually the answer to your question is to make sure that registrars like
Alice Registry and other small to medium size registrars are still around.
In case you missed VeriSign's most recent Senate Testimony:

ICANN requires that each gTLD registry offer equal access to all gTLD
registrars accredited by ICANN. On the one hand, this requirement benefits
competition and confidence in the marketplace, although on the other, since
only ICANN can accredit registrars and ICANN has established exceptionally
low financial criteria for registrar accreditation, it has resulted in a
large number of financially weak registrars that must be serviced by every
gTLD registry.

How many registrar on this mailing list believe they would qualify or meet
VeriSign's self imposed standards of a financially stable registrar?

You assessing blame "in part" to IARegistry also is not very productive, as
the DoC has no direct role in the approval/denial of this service. What the
letter states is that the registrars recognize that ICANN is not perfect and
there are outstanding issues, but we will work within the frame work of our
existing contractual relations to resolve these issues. TUCOWS has been
working on advocating a parallel argument where contracting parties can have
their disputes resolved in a commercial manner. Something I have advocated
since last February in Dulles.

One other point, if signing the DoC letter, which over 52 registrars did,
was a sign of support for the WLS why did VRSN sign either the registry or
registrar letter.

Mike





-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
Behalf Of Rick Wesson
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2002 1:37 AM
To: David Wascher
Cc: Registrars List
Subject: Re: [registrars] WLS go ahead???



David,

On Thu, 22 Aug 2002, David Wascher wrote:

> I do not understand - if the RC voted NO and the DNSO voted NO but ICANN
is
> still going to allow WLS - then what the hell are we here for. The RC and
> the DNSO might as well pack up and go home because ICANN and VeriSign are
> going to do what they want.

A better question is, "why is ICANN there" and why did you all sign a
document telling the DoC how great it is that ICANN is there. If the WLS
moves forward it is partly our own fault.

-rick