Re: [gnso-rap-dt] RE: Consensus call - "slamming" recommendation

[Frederick Felman <ffelman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

+1


On 5/4/10 7:52 AM, "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I support Option 2.  It is not outside the scope of ICANN, but not enough is
> known at this point in time.
>  
> 
> Jeffrey J. Neuman
> Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy
> 
> 
> The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use
> of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged
> information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this
> e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or
> copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
> communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original
> message.
>  
>  
> 
> From: owner-gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Marika Konings
> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 9:19 AM
> To: gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [gnso-rap-dt] Consensus call - "slamming" recommendation
>  
> Dear RAPWG members:
>  
> Following our discussion yesterday, please find below the two recommendations
> under consideration in relation to ³slamming². In order to measure the level
> of consensus, please indicate your preference for recommendation 1 or 2.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Marika
>  
>  *  *   *
>  
> Recommendation 1:
> The RAPWG recommends nothing and remain in the status quo.
> The WG feels this issue falls outside the scope of ICANN policy development
> and enforcement. 
> 
> Recommendation 2:
> The RAPWG recommends the GNSO monitor for this abuse in the gTLD space and
> sponsor research to determine the nature and extent of the problem. The WG
> believes this issue warrants review but notes there is not enough data at this
> time to warrant an Issues Report or PDP.
>