RE: [registrars] WLS Update

["Patricio Valdes" <valdes@parava.net>]

This totally sucks...........

We the Registrars that are not happy about this should all get together and
do something about this.

Its obvious that the bottom line for ICANN is the money.

What happened to the Deletion and Transfer issues? Its been 18 months and
still nothing. If it were the other way around, Transfers benefiting
Verisign, something would have been implemented a long time ago.

This decision will have a serious repercussion on us as I am sure it will
have on many of the other Registrars.

So much for ICANN and their rules and regulations.

I wish I could write down what I am currently thinking about them, but that
would only make me be like them ..........



Patricio Valdes
Parava Networks


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
Behalf Of Michael D. Palage
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2002 1:06 PM
To: 'Registrars List'
Subject: [registrars] WLS Update


Board minutes from today's call -
http://www.icann.org/minutes/prelim-report-23aug02.htm

WLS was approved but will not be operational until 2003.

Net-Net no one is likely to be happy which is one definition that I have for
consensus.

Mike


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
Behalf Of Christopher Kruk
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2002 1:15 PM
To: Bhavin Turakhia; 'Rick Wesson'; 'David Wascher'
Cc: 'Registrars List'
Subject: RE: [registrars] WLS go ahead???


Bhavin, I agree with your sentiments. From a Registrar's business and
operational perspective, I would think a high priority should be placed on
achieving stability for basic Registrar services such as transfers,
deletions, whois, etc. I personally didn't pay much attention to the WLS
issue since I considered it a service proposal that would go through a
lengthy advisory process following a resolution of the more pressing issues
on the table.

Now I see postings with subject lines like "WLS go ahead???" and I'm very
concerned as I hope many other Registrars are if this is happening so
quickly. I can understand if there was a high customer demand but I don't
see it. Has anyone else?

 >Aaah ..... What came first ... The chicken or the egg
In this case, I think the rooster came first ;)

Roger and out,
  -Chris




At 09:20 PM 8/23/02 +0530, Bhavin Turakhia 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.
>
>Aaah ..... What came first ... The chicken or the egg :) ..... It is
>indeed after ICANN was formed that the Registrars came into being.
>However I am in full agreement with Rick. Maybe I should withdraw my
>support for the ICANN letter. Infact on second thoughts now I am
>wondering if it was the peer movement that made me sign it. For I have
>not seen ICANN move towards reforming any issue. Its funny how decisions
>that favour Verisign (read WLS) got taken right away while we are still
>deliberating on the Transfers issue, or the Delete hoarding issue of
>Verisign, without any assistance/resolution there.