Sir, this time you're incorrect.Because of the clear consensus that maintaining
exclusivity on being a registrar was a bad thing, we have committed to opening our
registry to registrars within 30 to 60 days of being entered into the roots. I believe
we can do even better than that, but I will not make a promise I cannot keep.
NeuStar,
on the other hand, wants exclusivity for 6 months, then a 3 month testbed, and then
accepts registrars in 9 months.
Afilias had no provision for non-member registrars,
and their proposal is still confusing on this matter, though their answer to ICANN's
question seemed to indicate that they would accept non-member ICANN accredited registrars
at some undefined time in the future.
This is yet another point where Image Online
Design clearly has the proposal that is what the Internet public wants. We proposed
it differently, but listened to valid criticism, and changed our plans to reflect
the consensus of the public.
Which other applicant has done that? None that I know
of.
Of course, ICANN criticized our application, saying that we wanted exclusivity
for up to a year, which just isn't true. They did note, in a footnote, our willingness
to reduce this time to 30 days, but then blasted it as too big of a change! We're
damned if we do, and damned if we don't!
Of course, the massive change to NeuStar's
application, due to the last-minute pull-out of Melbourne IT went practically un-noticed
by the ICANN staff report, and their application was passed for further negotiation,
even though it is word-for-word the same as other JVTeam applications with Melbourne
IT's participation.
Why can a small change to accept consensus be so criticized,
yet the rendering of the vast majority of NeuStar's application as moot goes unquestioned?
Christopher
Ambler