« NC: Reform Discussion (3) - NCDNHC | Main | NC: Reform Discussion (5) - IPC »

NC: Reform Discussion (4) - registries.

Cary Karp: Two aspects of blue-print require change. Request different way of discussion for those constituencies which have contractual relationship with ICANN. Registries and registrars can more easily be aggregated than any of the other constituencies. Cochetti: Both speaking on behalf of constituency which operates unanimously. Section 5 of blueprint suggests non-binding arbitration. Constituency finds approach inadequate. [incomprehensible] Jordyn Buchanan (?): GNSO constituencies ought to have voice which should be heared beyond gTLD policy. Separation of SOs.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://log.does-not-exist.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/266

About

This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on June 26, 2002 1:00 PM.

The previous post in this blog was NC: Reform Discussion (3) - NCDNHC.

The next post in this blog is NC: Reform Discussion (5) - IPC.

Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Powered by
Movable Type 3.35