At 12:03 AM 6/8/99 GMT, William X. Walsh wrote:
>On Mon, 7 Jun 1999 16:50:22 +0100, Jeff Williams
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Further we find that NSI is still a far
>>better alternative as a result of these reasons (See above).
>
>NSI is only better because they made sure that this was not true
>competition, by placing restrictions on registrars that insure that
>the registrars cannot being even the smallest level of competition to
>NSI.
register.com is bound by the *ICANN* registrar accrediation agreement
which forces pre-pay (courtesy of the TM crowd).
Perhape you missed the high point of the Berlin conference where
Conrades, out of the blue, asked NSI why they wouldnt sign the
ICANN registrar agreement.
Their response can be summarized as "this agreement came out
of nowhere; it was not a product of the Internet community
or the DNSO or the registrar constituency of same."
They appear not to agree with it. To say they're forcing it
down everybodys throats is just not true. *Quite* the
opposite.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Remember, amateurs built the Ark. Professionals built the Titanic.
