Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Call for agenda items

[Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Richard,

Correct.

As for the charter, didn't we just get a blank sheet of paper?

Eric

On 5/15/10 9:05 PM, Richard Tindal wrote:
> 
> I think Eric is referring to his proposal that there must be 2 or more 
> competitively selected back-end providers for each TLD.  
> 
> Though this is an interesting idea,  I don't think its in the charter of our 
> group as it's not a cross ownership issue.  
> 
> RT
> 
>  
> On May 15, 2010, at 5:21 PM, Mike O'Connor wrote:
> 
>>
>> hi Eric,
>>
>> i'm of the same view as Roberto (as always).  i read your proposal, and 
>> followed up with you off list to get an explanation.  you referred me to the 
>> original RFC that established the shared registry system (an RFC co-authored 
>> by Roberto) in lieu of an explanation.  so i went and found the RFC and 
>> still don't understand your proposal.  if Roberto is having trouble 
>> understanding it too, i think we need to defer until you can explain it 
>> better on the list.  
>>
>> so i would like to defer your slot on a plenary call until the working group 
>> has gotten through the short-term work that's in front of us, and you've 
>> come up with a proposal that at least Roberto can understand the relevance 
>> to the work we're doing.  you don't have to dumb it down to my level, 
>> although that would be helpful too.
>>
>> thanks,
>>
>> mikey
>>
>>
>> On May 15, 2010, at 7:05 PM, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
>>
>>> Can please somebody on this list translate this into a sentence that can be
>>> understood by somebody who has only basic level of English like me?
>>> I have tried hard to understand what Eric wants to discuss, but failed so
>>> far.
>>> I don't want to leave the burden of the decision to my colleague co-chair
>>> alone, but I can't include something in the agenda unless I understand what
>>> that is. This in particular considering that there is a substantial effort
>>> going on to complete Kathy's matrix, and it seems to me that there's where
>>> the attention should be concentrated.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Roberto
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx 
>>>> [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Eric 
>>>> Brunner-Williams
>>>> Sent: Sunday, 16 May 2010 01:10
>>>> To: Mike O'Connor
>>>> Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
>>>> Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Call for agenda items
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Mike,
>>>>
>>>> You are, as co-chair, seeking to avoid allocating time to 
>>>> discussing a proposal to reduce vertical integration of 
>>>> registry service providers and registry operators, for 
>>>> existing registries, as well as for registries arising out of 
>>>> applications for the standard type, and the community-based 
>>>> type, so that you may allocate that scare resource to 
>>>> discussing an imaginary application type, on equal standing 
>>>> as existing application types.
>>>>
>>>> Either allocate some time to the subject or don't, but let me 
>>>> know no later than 24 hours prior to the call time.
>>>>
>>>> Eric
>>
>> - - - - - - - - -
>> phone        651-647-6109  
>> fax                  866-280-2356  
>> web  www.haven2.com
>> handle       OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, 
>> Google, etc.)
>>
>>
> 
> 
>