Re: [council] Request for GNSO to consider processes forintroducing new registry services
Hello Bruce, Milton,
maybe the first step in the process should be to determine whether the "new
service"
is a registry service and therefore in the scope of ICANN or not.
Best,
tom
Am 06.10.2003 schrieb Bruce Tonkin:
>
> Hello Milton,
>
> >
> > So we are being asked to conduct "prior review" of all new
> > registry services?
>
> I believe that we are being asked to develop a procedure that ICANN can
> use for introducing new registry services whatever they may be.
>
> E.g a possible procedure might look like:
> (1) Registry operator notifies ICANN of potential new service
> (2) ICANN refers to procedure for introducing new services which might
> include seeking public comment, and seeking a report from the Security
> and stability committee and/or IAB
> (3) ICANN approves or rejects permission for new service
> (4) Registry operator announces date when service will go live
>
> The GNSO develops policies, but does not act on each implementation of
> the policy. E.g The GNSO revised the Transfers Policy that registry and
> registrars must comply with, but we don't act to approve or reject
> individual registrant transfer requests that would be far too slow.
>
> Regards,
> Bruce
>
>
Gruss,
tom
(__)
(OO)_____
(oo) /|\ A cow is not entirely full of
| |--/ | * milk some of it is hamburger!
w w w w