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

["Ron Andruff" <randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I would add two things to the discourse.  The first is to reduce the
capitalized letters in Objective 1 to a normal font so that the sentence can
be properly read.  The second is to be mindful that all five objectives
should be read holistically.  When I read them all together I understand the
scope they are setting and Objective 5 makes more sense.  It still needs
work, but the whole narrative makes more sense.

 

Kind regards,

 

RA

 

Ronald N. Andruff

RNA Partners, Inc.

 

 

  _____  

From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Neuman, Jeff
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2010 3:46 PM
To: Marika Konings; Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] RE: Please participate - straw poll on objective 5

 

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