Return to Proposed Revisions to NSI Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: EPo
Date/Time: Sat, March 31, 2001 at 1:34 PM GMT
Browser: Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.0b1 using Macintosh
Score: 5
Subject: GA position on Verisign contract



After thorough discussion, the GA has shown rough consensus
in favour to option A, i.e. to keep the current contract.

A straw poll conducted between the 15 and 20 March has given
the following results:
- 24 in favour of the current contract (option A)
- 2 in favour of the new contract (option B)
- 1 neither of the above

The reasons for the choice, as expressed by some participants,
are mainly:

1) "horizontal" separation between Registrar and Registry,
foreseen in option A, is perceived as a better deal than
"vertical" separation among TLDs, and a better safeguard
against a monopolistic position.

2) The switchover to option B is perceived as a change
in policy, done without previous consultation of the DNSO
(whose mission is to provide recommandations on policy),
and moreover within very strict deadlines, absolutely
inappropriate to evaluate in depth the implications of
such change. For instance, some of the details of the
new proposal, like some attachments, are still unknown
at time of writing. Also, this change in policy is considered

3) The financial advantages for the Internet community
of option B are not balancing off the drawbacks above,
as it is understood that the investment will be done by
VeriSign at its discretion, based on a commercial logic
that is perfectly legitimate but out of the control
of the Internet community.
The benefits for the Internet community are therefore not
identifiable at this point in time, and it may be even
assumed that other competingoperators might invest
comparable amounts of money in the infrastructure as well,
if granted similar contracts by ICANN.

4) The other claimed advantage of option B, i.e. a different
management of .org, is minimal in value if of any value
at all, because years of practice of sale of names without
enforcement of the original charter have irreversibly
altered the content of .org

Moreover, should a charter be enforced by ICANN and/or
agreed with the .org registry (and this regardless on
whether the registry changes owner, i.e. independently
from option A or B being chosen), the GA is opposed to
any action to cancel existing registrations. Any
action of this type would be contrary to the legitimate
interest of bona-fide owners of .org names.

Roberto Gaetano
GA Chairman





Link: GA position on Verisign contract, by Robero Gaetano, DNSO GA Chair

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy