Re: [wg-review] Funding the Restructured DNSO

[Sotiropoulos <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>]

DPF wrote:
> 
> Verisign and ICANN have made
> very clear that no amendments can or will be considered.  In the two
> weeks we have available we should concentrate on analysing the
> proposal as it stands, not suggesting how we would like it changed
> because this is not possible (to my regret).

I think David's point is quite valid and we would
be better served to focus our efforts on the
existing agreement and to point out the pros and
cons inherent within it than to suggest
alterations.  After all, the BoD and VeriSign
stressed the fact that changes were not an
option.  Therefore, any substantive comments and
remarks relating to the agreement's
shortcomings/benefits are most certainly the most
effective way to proceed in this matter.  

The Registrars have done an admirable job of
pointing out some crucial elements of the proposed
deal, which they argue will negatively impact
their business and the ICW. (Thanks to Danny
Younger for posting the link to the WG:
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/registrars/Arc01/doc00013.doc) 
I think we can take our cue from this position
paper, and draft our own report on the possible
effects of the New Deal should it be implemented.

Regards,

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
	Hermes Network, Inc.
--
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