Re: [wg-review] [DNDEF]

[Andy Gardner <andy@navigator.co.nz>]

At 1:40 pm -0800 1/19/01, Eric Dierker wrote:
>Andy Gardner wrote:
>
>> >
>> >ICANN Accredited Registrars are far easier to control than non-ICANN
>> >Accredited
>> >Registrars.
>>
>> What?
>>
>> Can you please give me an example of a non-ICANN acredited registrar?
>>
>> Andrew P. Gardner
>> barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
>> We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
>> Get active: http://www.domain-owners.org http://www.tldlobby.com
>>
>
>In that I assume the rest of the subject matter of your message is a dead
>issue I
>still wanted to address this one issue you raised.
>
>ICANN uses the definition of a registry basically as "an entity which is
>accredited
>by us to register domain names".  Certainly under this definition the
>answer is
>clearly there are only accredited registries.  However many ccTLDs operate
>within
>their national right without designating or accrediting any registry and
>yet the
>domain names are still registered, and fully functional.  Who is the
>accredited
>Registry for half the ccTLDs?, is a very interesting question, just look
>at the top
>8 being marketed in the U.S..

Not registries. REGISTRARS.

A whole different kettle of fish.

-- 
Andrew P. Gardner
barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
Get active: http://www.domain-owners.org http://www.tldlobby.com
--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html