ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-vi-feb10]


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

[gnso-vi-feb10] RE: Please participate - straw poll on objective 5

  • To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>, "Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx" <Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] RE: Please participate - straw poll on objective 5
  • From: "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 15:46:14 -0400

All,

I am having a REAL hard time responding to this poll because I don't understand 
the objective and how it relates to the other objectives.  In addition, I have 
no idea if we vote for objective 5, even the amended one, how that relates to 
the timeframes in the charter.  Third, I do not see anywhere in the charter 
where there is time to consult the experts necessary to even figure out the 
answers to the amended version 5.  Fourth, I look at the other objectives which 
reference the latest version of the DAG which given the recent board resolution 
seem to be out dated.   Finally, in the amended version of Objective 5 and I it 
seems to be implicit in that objective that ICANN has in fact collected enough 
information to be able to make an assessment on "HOW (a) INTERNET USERS IN 
GENERAL AND (b) REGISTRANTS OF DOMAIN NAMES, AND (c) THE RETAIL AND WHOLESALE 
MARKETS FOR DOMAIN NAMES ARE EFFECTED BY THE CHANGES TO the current 
restrictions and/or practices concerning registry-registrar separation and 
equivalent, non-discriminatory access."  I do not believe that ICANN has 
collected this information at all!

So, I guess my vote will have to be "None of the Above" or "I am completely 
confused as to why we are doing this exercise".


Isn't the only real objective now Objective 1:  "Objective 1: To make policy 
recommendations that provide clear direction to ICANN staff and new gTLD 
applicants on whether, and if so under what conditions, contracts for new gTLD 
registries can permit vertical integration or otherwise deviate from current 
forms of registry-registrar separation, and equivalent access and 
non-discriminatory access."



The other objectives may be work items under that Work Item (I.e., documenting 
existing practices, articulating the changes proposed ...), but not independent 
objectives in and of themselves.


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-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Marika Konings
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2010 3:13 PM
To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] Please participate - straw poll on objective 5

Dear All,

As discussed in today's VI PDP WG meeting, please find below the link to the 
straw poll on objective 5. Please complete the survey by close of business 
Wednesday 24 March at the latest.

Link to survey: http://www.zoomerang.com/Survey/WEB22AE9E3HKG7

With best regards,

Marika


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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy