William, Gene,
William wrote:
> There is NO possible justification for granted a seat in the registrar
> constituency to each and every "subregistrar" of CORE, unless they are
> willing to admit any and all subregistrars off the other registry
> members as well.
>
> CORE gets one seat. Or the definition must be broadened.
>
Believe it or not, we agree ;>).
My suggestion was to build the constituency initially with the
ICANN-accredited registrars (BTW, not only the 5 testbed, but all the 30+
accredited - see: http://www.icann.org/REGIS.html, and the list is not
up-to-date).
We could then discuss on when and how to broaden the definition.
What I see as a priority for broadening the definition, is not the inclusion
of "subregistrars", but the Registrars who do not do business in gTLDs (and
therefore are not interested in being accredited), but do business in one or
more ccTLDs.
As far as Gene Marsh's issue:
Interesting, but what constituancy covers additional registrars for
new TLDs as they become available? ICANN has specifically
designated
the 5 and future registrars for .com, .net and .org. Hmmmm.
I assume that ICANN's accreditation process will be put in place for
registration in the future gTLDs as well.
This should therefore not be a problem. Accredited registrars for *any* gTLD
will qualify.
Regards
Roberto
