RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Single Registrant TLDs in VIWG Brussels report

[Milton L Mueller <mueller@xxxxxxx>]

This requires the SR to know _in advance_, at the time of contracting, what 
names to reserve. that is not a viable option for an ongoing registry service
--MM
________________________________________
From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf 
Of Richard Tindal [richardtindal@xxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2010 8:20 AM
To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Single Registrant TLDs in VIWG Brussels report

Jarkko/ Tero,

One of the options in my May 19 posting involves no cost or complexity.  The 
desired names would simply be added to the registry contract Schedule of 
Reserved Names.

If ICANN staff said that option was not permitted  (note:  I do not know why 
they would say that -- as registries currently reserve operational names)  then 
the incremental cost of registering 1,000 (say) names through an unaffiliated 
registrar would be in the order of a few hundred dollars per year.

It is true this would mean reviewing the registrar's agreement --- but your 
lawyers will spend at least that much time reviewing RAA provisions if you 
become your own registrar.    Plus, there are additional costs operating as 
your own registrar.

Overall, it seems you'll have more cost going down the path you want.

I welcome push back on this --  but I'm not seeing a cost-based reason for the 
exception you want.

RT



On Jun 9, 2010, at 9:31 AM, 
jarkko.ruuska@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:jarkko.ruuska@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Richard,

I fully agree with you that most of the things Single Registrant TLDs would 
want to do could be addressed as you described.
At the same time I agree with Tero that this would add unnecessary complexity 
and cost. Either in the form of making more complicated contract with ICANN or 
making the contract with possible registrars. And for me it still doesn’t make 
any sense that registry would have to sell names to registrar just buy them 
back with extra cost.

Thanks,

-jr


JARKKO RUUSKA
Head of Internet Domain Initiatives
Compatibility and Industry Collaboration,  Tampere, Finland
Nokia Corporation
Tel: +358 50 324 7507
E-Mail: jarkko.ruuska@xxxxxxxxx


From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ext Mustala, Tero (NSN - 
FI/Espoo)
Sent: 8. kesäkuuta 2010 14:15
To: ext Richard Tindal; Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Single Registrant TLDs in VIWG Brussels report

Hi Richard,

the requirement to use a separate registrar. As the number of 2nd level names 
in a typical SRSU case is small, this is also no real business opportunity to 
any registrar. It just adds costs to everybody.

regards

Tero


Tero Mustala
Principal Consultant,
CTO/Industry Environment
Nokia Siemens Networks
tero.mustala@xxxxxxx<mailto:tero.mustala@xxxxxxx>


________________________________
From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ext Richard Tindal
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 12:46 PM
To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Single Registrant TLDs in VIWG Brussels report
Hi Jarkko,

Further to this post ---  
http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-vi-feb10/msg01584.html

What is it that SR Registries might want to do that isn't adequately addressed 
by the current DAG contract?

Richard




On Jun 7, 2010, at 4:20 PM, 
jarkko.ruuska@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:jarkko.ruuska@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:


Dear all,
It is my observation that recently we haven’t really spent much time on the 
Single Registrant TLDs. However, according to previous discussion (and also 
according to the newest proposal matrix)  it is evident that Single Registrant 
TLDs could be vertically integrated and should not need to use registrars. The 
exact conditions to that need a bit of fine-tuning but are essentially 
available in the current proposals.
My understanding is that this is something almost everyone agrees on and should 
therefore be noted in our Brussels report. I would even go a step further and 
suggest that this is something we have a consensus on and it should be part of 
our recommendation to be included in the final Applicant Guidebook.
I also want to point out that Single Registrant TLDs  should be noted as an 
exception regardless whether we reach a consensus about the cross-ownership in 
general.
Thanks,
-jr
JARKKO RUUSKA
Head of Internet Domain Initiatives
Compatibility and Industry Collaboration,  Tampere, Finland
Nokia Corporation
Tel: +358 50 324 7507
E-Mail: jarkko.ruuska@xxxxxxxxx<x-msg://285/jarkko.ruuska@xxxxxxxxx>