At 2/8/99, 08:34 AM, John B. Reynolds wrote:
>
>
>Jay Fenello wrote:
>>
>> At 2/7/99, 06:15 PM, John B. Reynolds wrote:
>> >
>> >Milton Mueller wrote:
>> >>
>> >> The Paris draft group, on the other hand, was responsive to this
>> >> same criticism.
>> >> I commend them for this.
>> >
>> >On the other hand, the Paris group was completely unresponsive
>> to criticism
>> >that its veto provisions gave too much power to registries.
>>
>>
>> As an exercise in consensus building . . .
>>
>> How do you envision ICANN enforcing
>> policies onto the registries?
>>
>> Jay.
>>
>
>If all else fails, ICANN has the authority to remove them from its root
>zone. It's admittedly the 'nuclear option', but it's there.
Implicit in the Paris Draft is an entire system
of enforcement provisions designed to supplement
your "nuclear option" (which, btw, would harm the
innocent domain name holder's of the nuked TLD).
This is the reason for the "Pre-review" process.
If you don't like the provision as written, then
please suggest an alternate one that addresses
this enforcement issue.
Jay.
