RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Go Daddy position and proposal

["Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Right, the proposal makes no distinction between VI and CO. 

Your second question has a different answer in that from Go Daddy's
perspective VI and CO could be different, and ultimately that may make
the most sense. But that would be worked out during the process
described in our section 2.


Tim 
 
 
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Go Daddy position and proposal
From: Milton L Mueller <mueller@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, April 26, 2010 8:29 am
To: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx"
<gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>


Thanks, Tim, for your proposal. 
After reading it I assume that your use of the term "VI" really means
both Vertical Integration and Cross Ownership. 
Is there any difference in your perspectives on VI and CO? 

--MM

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-
> feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz
> Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 10:41 PM
> To: gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] Go Daddy position and proposal
> 
> I apologize for the late posting of our proposal, attached. We had not
> intended to submit one when this WG began, but after consideration of
> the other proposals it became clear that none really addressed the
> concerns we have and that it would be best to submit our own.
> 
> I'll be available to discuss or answer questions on tomorrow's call.
> 
> 
> Tim