<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [registrars] PersonalNames.com
Ross,
if both of Tims conclusions can be answered with yes Schlund will
support our motion.
tom
Am 29.01.2003 schrieb Tim Ruiz:
> Ross,
>
> I think I tend to agree with you. I do have a couple of questions to clarify
> though.
>
> Given your motion was adopted:
>
> If PersonalNames were to put forward someone who was directly in the employ
> of only PersonalNames, and does not have access to registrar data from the
> registry, that individual would qualify to join this list, correct?
>
> And your motion does not preclude PersonalNames from joining the RC, only
> that whoever joins this list to represent them must meet the requirements,
> correct?
>
> Thanks,
> Tim
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
> Behalf Of Ross Wm. Rader
> Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 9:44 AM
> To: ross@tucows.com; 'Michael D. Palage'; registrars@dnso.org
> Subject: RE: [registrars] PersonalNames.com
>
>
>
> I should also clarify with this post in relation to the specific
> allegation you made regarding Afilias shareholders, specifically that
> "excluding [GNR from participating] in the registrar constituency would
> potentially require all Afilias shareholders to step down, Melbourne IT
> because of their interest in NeuStar, Register.com because of their
> interest in RegistryPro."
>
> If this were to occur, it would have to be as the result of a different
> proposal. The proposal that I set forward only limits the participation
> of individuals in the employ of a registry, not that of organizations
> with shareholdings in other organizations. Please do not extend the
> limits of the proposal to situations to which it clearly does not apply.
>
> -rwr
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ross Wm. Rader [mailto:ross@tucows.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 10:37 AM
> > To: 'Michael D. Palage'; 'registrars@dnso.org'
> > Subject: RE: [registrars] PersonalNames.com
> >
> >
> > Michael,
> >
> > Do you intend to oppose the development of this proposition
> > or its adoption by the constituency? The fact is that
> > registries possess a wealth of information about my business,
> > they accumulate it in real time and can take advantage of it
> > on a daily basis. The methods you describe are not only
> > incomplete, but are limited to quarterly occurences. Please
> > also add to the list you've set forth whether or not the
> > registrar is current in its financial accounts with the
> > registry, what the ebb and flow of its registration busines
> > is, where its data-centers are located, what level of
> > commitment it is making to the TLD from a sales and marketing
> > perspective and on and on. Suppliers, by virtue of their
> > position in the supply chain, have access to a tremendous
> > amount of information. I am simply proposing that we do not
> > allow our constituency to become an instrument of abuse by
> > the registries.
> >
> >
> >
> > -rwr
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the
> > shore like an idiot."
> > - Steven Wright
> >
> > Get Blog... http://www.byte.org/blog
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-registrars@dnso.org
> > > [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org] On Behalf Of Michael D. Palage
> > > Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 10:26 AM
> > > To: ross@tucows.com; registrars@dnso.org
> > > Subject: RE: [registrars] PersonalNames.com
> > >
> > >
> > > Ross,
> > >
> > > I have worked as a consultant with Afilias since its
> > > inception when I help put together the original 18 registrar
> > > shareholders. I have also worked with .coop and .aero in
> > > identifying registrars to provide registrar services in their
> > > respective TLDs. I really have no idea of what proprietary
> > > information that registries have regarding the operation of
> > > your business.
> > >
> > > The only documents that a registry maintains on a registrar:
> > > are names of employees to contact (some/most of these names
> > > are publicly available on the ICANN web site); signed copies
> > > of confidentiality agreements and Registry Registrar
> > > Agreements (these documents are publicly available); how much
> > > money the registrar wishes to keep in his account (all one
> > > really needs to do is look at the registrars quarterly
> > > payments to ICANN or one of the industry reports and figure
> > > the number domains and multiple by the registry fee);
> > > insurance documents (minimum terms are publicly available);
> > > and thats about it.
> > >
> > > The purpose of the structural separation between VRSN
> > > registry/registrar was to prevent the registry from tipping
> > > its hat toward new technology developments and pricing
> > > advantages. This structural separation was critically
> > > important to provide registrars a level playing field to
> > > compete and one of the reasons why in the last contract
> > > negotiations we required 90 day notice prior to any technical
> > > changes as a result of the IDN role out.
> > >
> > > In the case of PersonalNames I agree that if GNR provides any
> > > type of competitive advantage to PersonalNames that would be
> > > a violation of their Registry contract that should result in
> > > termination of their contract. However, excluding their
> > > participation in the registrar constituency would potentially
> > > require all Afilias shareholders to step down, Melbourne IT
> > > because of their interest in NeuStar, Register.com because of
> > > their interest in RegistryPro.
> > >
> > > Just trying to address your concerns because I believe the
> > > PersonalNames/GNR is not much different from
> > > NetworkSolutions/VRSN. However, I do agree with a number of
> > > registrars that it is clearly in appropriate for the
> > > registrar to tout its relationship with the registry in the
> > > website advertising. That should come down immediately in my
> > > humble opinion.
> > >
> > > Just some thoughts,
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Ross Wm. Rader [mailto:ross@tucows.com]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 10:02 AM
> > > > To: 'Michael D. Palage'; registrars@dnso.org
> > > > Subject: RE: [registrars] PersonalNames.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Michael,
> > > >
> > > > The motion does not preclude participation in the
> > > constituency because
> > > > of participation in another constituency, it precludes
> > > participation
> > > > by an individual who may be in possession of, or come into
> > > possession
> > > > of, sensitive information regarding the operation of my business.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -rwr
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the
> > > shore like an
> > > > idiot."
> > > > - Steven Wright
> > > >
> > > > Get Blog... http://www.byte.org/blog
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Michael D. Palage [mailto:michael@palage.com]
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 9:59 AM
> > > > > To: Ross Wm. Rader; registrars@dnso.org
> > > > > Subject: RE: [registrars] PersonalNames.com
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Ross,
> > > > >
> > > > > One other concern that I want to raise is that under Article X,
> > > > > Section 5, paragraph 3 of the ICANN by-laws, "No individual or
> > > > > entity shall be excluded from participation in a
> > > Constituency merely
> > > > > because of participation in another Constituency."
> > > > >
> > > > > Mike
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: owner-registrars@dnso.org
> > > > > > [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
> > > > > > Behalf Of Ross Wm. Rader
> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 9:03 AM
> > > > > > To: registrars@dnso.org
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [registrars] PersonalNames.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I would like to formally move that any representative
> > > of any ICANN
> > > > > > recognized gTLD registry in the possession of or with
> > access to
> > > > > > registry Proprietary Information
> > > > > >
> > > (http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/name/registry-agmt-apph-06ma
> > > > > > r01.htm#A-
> > > > > > 3.1 in the case of GNR) or Registry Sensitive Information
> > > > > >
> > > (http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/name/registry-agmt-apph-06ma
> > > > > > r01.htm#A-
> > > > > > 3.2 also in the case of GNR) not be permitted to
> > > > > participate in this
> > > > > > constituency at any level, in any capacity, for a period of
> > > > > one year
> > > > > > since the last receipt of such information and that our
> > > by-laws be
> > > > > > amended to reflect this.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ross Wm. Rader
> > > > > > Tucows Inc.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > From: "Michael D. Palage" <michael@palage.com>
> > > > > > To: <registrars@dnso.org>
> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 8:26 AM
> > > > > > Subject: [registrars] PersonalNames.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > As PersonalNames is now an ICANN accredited
> > registrar they are
> > > > > > eligible to
> > > > > > > subscribe to the registrar mailing list, and they
> > > have asked to
> > > > > > be added.
> > > > > > To
> > > > > > > date PersonalNames has not paid any membership dues so it is
> > > > > > not eligible
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > vote in any constituency matters.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Yesterday there were several posts asking the Registrar
> > > > > > > Executive
> > > > > > Committee
> > > > > > > to schedule a call with PersonalNames. Although the
> > Executive
> > > > > > > Committee stands ready to assist the constituency in this
> > > > > matter, I
> > > > > > > believe that
> > > > > > some
> > > > > > > dialogue between PersonalNames and the rest of the registrar
> > > > > > > community
> > > > > > might
> > > > > > > make any such call more productive.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The only PersonalNames representative that has asked to join
> > > > > > the registrar
> > > > > > > mailing list to date is Hakon Haugnes.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Michael D. Palage
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
Gruss,
tom
(__)
(OO)_____
(oo) /|\ A cow is not entirely full of
| |--/ | * milk some of it is hamburger!
w w w w
PGP signature
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|