ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-restruc-dt]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [gnso-restruc-dt] Q11-Q13 Related to SG group definitions.

  • To: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>, <gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [gnso-restruc-dt] Q11-Q13 Related to SG group definitions.
  • From: "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 10:31:16 -0400

The point Philip is that the appropriate place for this is in the
Registries Stakeholder Group charter and NOT the ICANN Bylaws.

Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq.: 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.



-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 10:23 AM
To: Philip Sheppard; gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-restruc-dt] Q11-Q13 Related to SG group defintions.


Article III of the proposed RySG Charter contains the following:

"The RySG will provide for observer status . . . for entities that have
applied, or indicated an intention to apply, for a contract with ICANN
to provide gTLD registry services in support of one or more gTLDs." 

Chuck

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard
> Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 3:36 AM
> To: gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gnso-restruc-dt] Q11-Q13 Related to SG group defintions.
> 
> 
> 
> I liked the theoretical model Chuck posits and his 
> expectation of multiple applications for new registry and 
> registrar constituencies.
> These are a little absent at present and maybe we could focus 
> of the intent of the two ones on this list.
> 
> Registries - do you intend to NOT allow as observers 
> applicant registries ?
> 
> Registrars - where do you believe resellers (those with 
> contracts with registrars) should sit ?
> 
> Philip
> 
> 





<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy