Antony and all, Antony, you bring up some very good points here for several reasons, as I am sure you have already thought of, as have others... More below your comments, Antony... Antony Van Couvering wrote: > I'd like to add to the question: > > Is a registrar -- as opposed to a registry -- going to have to have official > sanction from ICANN? There are lots of registrars for ccTLD domains -- are > they going to have to cease doing business until they negotiate contracts > either with these domains, or with ICANN? > > This is a question of some importance: > > 1. Constituency questions within the DNSO depend on it We find the need of constituencies in any DNSO a canard, and therefore unnecessary. However a better concern would be for all of those that are currently registrars currently. Are they soon to be forced to use the SRS system for registering Domains in any Name space? If so, what is the justification and does this not violate the presidential mandate of "Do no harm" as well as the constructs of the White Paper? If the SRS registration system is to be the "ONLY" registration to be used, does this not constitute a Restraint of Trade? > > 2. If contracts are required, it will severely disadvantage registrars of > ccTLDs who don't have the resources to change their business model from > direct-to-consumer to sales-via-3rd-parties (unless the consumers are > themselves considered registrars -- which is even more of a problem). Why is having consumers as registrars a problem? And again would this not constitute a restraint of trade as well to restrict ANY stakeholder from becoming a registrar? We agree with Antony's assumption that to require contracts, if too specific, would represent a "Damage" to those existing registrars. > > 3. If ICANN-registrar contracts are required, what will they look like? If > there are any technical requirements, successful systems like that of > Nominet's in the UK, where just about anyone can be a registrar -- including > law firms, company formation businesses, etc. -- will be threatened. We agree with Antony's conclusion here. Is the ICANN seeking to force any potential Registrar or existing Registrar to use a common registration software product (SRS)? > > > I think it would be very helpful to have some guidance on this. > > Antony > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jay Fenello > > Sent: Friday, January 29, 1999 3:20 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Cc: Esther Dyson; Becky Burr > > Subject: Supplier vs. Consumer Registrars > > > > > > > > The DNSO structure envisioned by CENTRE > > features a constituency based Names Council. > > This constituency is split between Domain Name > > Service Suppliers, and Domain Name Service > > Consumers. > > > > This distinction blurs when we examine > > what constitutes a Registrar. Some have > > argued that almost any ISP can claim to be > > a Registrar. Others have argued that only > > those contractually bound with ICANN or one > > of it's agents can be considered a Registrar. > > > > Before we answer this question, I would > > like to know the difference. What additional > > rights and responsibilities will an official > > ICANN registrar have from that of an ISP > > providing registration services? > > > > Perhaps Esther or Becky can give us some > > insight. > > > > Jay. > > > > Regards, -- Jeffrey A. Williams CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng. Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC. E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Contact Number: 972-447-1894 Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208 __________________________________________________ To receive the digest version instead, send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___END____________________________________________
