Re: PAB [Fwd: DNSO Important update: The "Merged" Draft]

[John C Klensin <klensin@MCI.NET>]

On Tue, 26 Jan 1999 21:50:04 +0000 (GMT) William Allen 
Simpson <wsimpson@greendragon.com> wrote:

>...
>     3.  Registrars: a DNSO member who is a registrar of
>     generic/global or country-code TLDs (defined as an entity with a
>     direct contractual relationship with a registry as defined
>     above),

I think it got lost in the previous comments (mine and, I 
think, Bob's), but I believe that it would be a mistake for 
the registrars to be contractually tied to the registries 
(absent the CORE model).  ICANN should be qualifying the 
registrars and presumably building contracts with them, not 
the registries (the latter model has tremendous potential 
for abuse).

I don't know that this point, which is certainly 
controversial, needs to be settled now, but the language 
chosen shouldn't bind us to one solution or the other.  You 
could even say "direct contractual relationship with a 
registry or with ICANN" if we can't come closer to 
agreement.

    john