Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project

["Christopher Ambler" <cambler@iodesign.com>]

>On the other hand, MHSC has an issue with mandating a shared registry
>structure, as the only structure possible. I know that MHSC may differ from
>the official ORSC stance on this.

Image Online Design has stated that it is not opposed to the one-registry
sharing entry capabilities with many registrars model. While I personally
believe that this should be up to the registry, it makes business sense
for Image Online Design to allow registrars to act as the front-end to
the customers. Now whether that means that the registry can be a
registrar itself or not is open to debate. Some think it's fine, and some
think that it's a conflict of interest.

I don't know if ORSC has an "official" position on this or not. I suspect,
if there is a position, it would be, "let the registry choose its business
model. Period."

Mandating that the registry itself be a shared entity runs into another
issue that I will be happy to discuss just as soon as you get NSI to
agree, or a court to order it. Until then, I will not even discuss it.

Just to clarify.

Christopher