RE: [gnso-pednr-dt] Proposed agenda for PEDNR WG call

[Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>]

Tim, I agree with you 100%. Unfortunately, as 
recently as the PEDNR workshop in Sydney, when I 
said something very close to your words, the 
reply from at least one large registrar was 
"Well, I'm not so sure about that..."
Alan

At 18/08/2009 11:57 AM, Tim Ruiz wrote:

> Michele,
>
> Keep in mind that with or without 3.12 of the new agreement Registrars
> cannot evade compliance by blaming their resellers. If the names are
> regsitered through their accreditation, the Registrar is responsible for
> compliance with all RAA requirements and applicable consensus policies.
> The new 3.12 simply requires Registrars to require their resellers to
> include certain requirements in their registration agreements.
>
> If a reseller is not compliant with a certain policy, it would be the
> Registrar who is ultimately responsible.
>
> Tim
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [gnso-pednr-dt] Proposed agenda for PEDNR WG call
> From: "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" <michele@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Tue, August 18, 2009 10:29 am
> To: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>,
> "gnso-pednr-dt@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-pednr-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
>
>
>
> On 18 Aug 2009, at 16:07, James M. Bladel wrote:
>
> >
> > Thanks, Marika.
> >
> > Before we dive too deeply into questions about resellers, I'd
> > encourage
> > folks to review the new Registrar Accreditation Agreement (adopted
> > early
> > by many major registrars). Specifically, it contains provisions
> > addressing the relationship between registrars and resellers,
> > beginning
> > with the new language in Sec. 3.12.
> >
> > http://www.icann.org/en/registrars/agreements.html
> >
> > With this in mind, I would propose that we make no distinction between
> > "resellers" and "registrars" for the purposes of this PDP.
>
>
> The problem with the new RAA is two fold:
>
> 1 - Not all registrars have signed it as yet. The biggest ones have,
> but it would be useful to get a breakdown of the actual numbers on RAA
> 1 vs RAA 2 (where "2" is the more recent iteration)
>
> 2 - A LOT of registrars who have resellers will not have signed
> contracts with the resellers AND imposing a change in the relationship
> after the agreement (if any) has been in force for an extended period
> of time could be problematic
>
>
> >
> >
> > + Roll-call
> > + Finalization of PEDNR public comment announcement
> ok
>
> > + Review of constituency input template
> ok
>
> > + Continue discussion on registrar survey ­ which information iss
> > required to answer charter questions?
>
> Can we try to avoid the subject of price entirely this evening. I
> think it's been done to death at this stage :)
>
>
> > + Discussion of example of a â??so-called reseller that is likely a
> > Registrarâ?? provided by Garth Bruen
>
> It might be prudent not to discuss this unless someone from
> DemandMedia is involved in the conversation and it's not as if they're
> hard to contact. If the WG is going to spend its (and my) time on some
> kind of witch hunt of registrars then I can't see how it's going to
> progress anything and I can't imagine I'd be alone in that view
> (though I could be wrong ...)
>
>
> > + Schedule for next and further meetings
> >
> >
>
> Mr Michele Neylon
> Blacknight Solutions
> Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection
> http://www.blacknight.com/
> http://blog.blacknight.com/
> http://mneylon.tel
> Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
> US: 213-233-1612
> UK: 0844 484 9361
> Locall: 1850 929 929
> Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
> Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763
> -------------------------------
> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business
> Park,Sleaty
> Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845