<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
Hi all,<br>
<br>
Please see my comments below (inline)...<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Le 11/12/2019 à 01:58, Bill Woodcock a
écrit :
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:A90B9552-43D3-403B-BC1D-411138344A2A@pch.net">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">On Dec 10, 2019, at 4:49 PM, Sylvain BAYA <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:abscoco@gmail.com"><abscoco@gmail.com></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">1) Some people would be okay with a sale to Ethos specifically, if Ethos were to make a compromise or promises of some sort.
2) Some people are ok with a sale to a private entity in principle, but not to Ethos because of the specific insider dealings that led to that deal.
3) Some people are ok with a transfer to a not-for-profit entity, provided it operated .ORG in its originally intended spirit.
4) Some people presumably want ISOC to continue in its current role of .ORG beneficiary.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
5) Some people would not be ok with the sale of the PIR
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
I think (4) and (5) are maybe similar? </pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Dear Bill,<br>
Thanks for responding.<br>
Maybe ! But each carries different expectations...<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:A90B9552-43D3-403B-BC1D-411138344A2A@pch.net">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap=""> By (5) do you mean that ISOC continues operating .ORG via PIR?</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
...no, that's your point (4) and i consider that the PIR can live
without <br>
InternetSociety.ORG ; then it's an *unsalable* entity because it was
funded <br>
through a grant, with a clear purpose and MUST stay a public good.
So <br>
the rational of a separated point (5).<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:A90B9552-43D3-403B-BC1D-411138344A2A@pch.net">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">6) Some people would not be ok with the stewardship of the .ORG/PIR by any non-profit Org
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
Do you mean that some people would _only_ be happy with for-profit control of .ORG? Or is that double-negative unintentional?</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Thanks for have pointing this typos to my attention :-)<br>
Please my first intent was to write *for-profit* ; but now i should
admit...<br>
<br>
6) Some people would not be ok with the stewardship of the .ORG/PIR
by any for-profit Org<br>
7) Some people would not be ok with the stewardship of the .ORG/PIR
by any non-profit Org <br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:A90B9552-43D3-403B-BC1D-411138344A2A@pch.net">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">...in (5) i consider that the PIR was a grant (with a clear goal) to InternetSociety.ORG,
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
Mmmm, not exactly. PIR was created by ISOC as a holding company to receive the _temporary_ delegation of the .ORG domain. That was on a three-year renewable delegation. There was never a grant of anything to anyone.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
...i'm not sure if i've understood it well, but that's quite
something i have read here [1][2][3].<br>
~°~
<div>"[...]</div>
<div>
<p><strong>A. <u>BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT</u></strong></p>
<p>The <a
href="https://www.icann.org/nsi/nsi-registry-agreement-04nov99.htm">existing
<abbr title="Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
Numbers" class="gmail-">ICANN</abbr>-<abbr title="Network
Solutions Inc." class="gmail-">NSI</abbr> Registry Agreement</a>
(covering the .com, .net, <a href="http://and.org">and.org</a>
registries) provides (in <a
href="https://www.icann.org/nsi/nsi-registry-agreement-04nov99.htm#23">Section
23</a>) that the Agreement will expire on 10 November 2003,
unless <abbr title="Network Solutions Inc." class="gmail-">NSI</abbr>
(now VeriSign) <u><b>separates legal ownership of its Registry
Services business from its registrar business within 18
months of the signing of the agreement</b></u>, or May 10,
2001. If that separation occurs within the meaning of Section
23, the Registry Agreement is automatically extended for an
additional four years, or until 10 November 2007.</p>
<p><u><b>The original purpose of this provision was to create an
incentive for the separation of ownership of <abbr
title="Network Solutions Inc.">NSI</abbr>'s registry and
registrar businesses</b></u>, because that was thought
likely to be helpful in introducing and encouraging registrar
competition. <u><b>The main steps taken to encourage
competition</b></u> were the agreements by <abbr
title="Network Solutions Inc." class="gmail-">NSI</abbr> to
(1) create the Shared Registration System ("<abbr title="Shared
Registratry System" class="gmail-">SRS</abbr>"), and (2) to
open that system to all <abbr title="Internet Corporation for
Assigned Names and Numbers" class="gmail-">ICANN</abbr>-accredited
registrars. <u><b>In addition, to ensure that the <abbr
title="Network Solutions Inc." class="gmail-">NSI</abbr>
registrar business did not have any competitive advantage
because of its affiliation with the registry operator</b></u>,
<abbr title="Network Solutions Inc." class="gmail-">NSI</abbr>
was required in <a
href="https://www.icann.org/nsi/nsi-registry-agreement-04nov99.htm#21">Section
21 of the Agreement</a> (3) <u><b>to provide all accredited
registrars with equal access</b></u> to the <abbr
title="Shared Registratry System" class="gmail-">SRS</abbr>,
and (4) to create an operational firewall between its registry
business and its registrar business <u><b>that prevented any
information flow from its registry business to its registrar
business that was not equally available to all competitive
registrars</b></u>.</p>
</div>
<div>[...]<br>
<p><strong>D. <u>THE SUBSTANCE OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS</u></strong></p>
<p>The proposed amendments can be summarized as follows:</p>
<p><a name="D1" id="gmail-D1"></a>1. The existing Registry
Agreement covering .com, .net and <u><b>.org would be split
into three separate Agreements, one for each registry</b></u>.</p>
<p><a name="D2" id="gmail-D2"></a>2. The <u><b>.org Registry</b></u>
Agreement would adopt the form of the registry agreements that
will be entered into by <u><b>the new global</b></u> <abbr
title="Top Level Domain" class="gmail-">TLD</abbr> <u><b>registry
operators</b></u>. <u><b>The term of the .org Registry
Agreement would be shortened by almost one year to 31
December 2002</b></u>, at which time VeriSign would
permanently relinquish its right to operate the .org registry, <b>and
<u>an appropriate sponsoring organization representing
non-commercial organizations</u> would be sought (through
some procedure yet to be determined) to assume the operation
of the registry</b>. In addition, <b>VeriSign <u>would
establish an endowment of $5 million for the purpose of
funding the reasonable operating expenses</u> of a <u>global
registry</u> for the <u>specific use of non-profit
organizations</u></b>, and <b>would <u>make global
resolution resources available to the operator of the .org
registry</u> for <u>no charge for one year and on terms to
be determined</u> thereafter</b>, for so long as it operates
the .com registry. <b>The <u>net result</u> of this would be a
<u>.org registry returned</u>, after some <u>appropriate
transition period</u>, to its <u>originally intended
function</u> as a <u>registry operated by and for
non-profit organizations</u></b>.</p>
<p><a name="D3" id="gmail-D3"></a></p>
[...]"</div>
<div>__</div>
<div>[1]:
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="https://archive.icann.org/en/meetings/melbourne/proposed-verisign-agreements-topic.htm"><https://archive.icann.org/en/meetings/melbourne/proposed-verisign-agreements-topic.htm></a><br>
</div>
<div>[2]: <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="https://www.icann.org/news/icann-pr-2001-04-02-en"><https://www.icann.org/news/icann-pr-2001-04-02-en></a></div>
<div>[3]:
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/prelim-report-2001-04-02-en"><https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/prelim-report-2001-04-02-en></a></div>
~°~<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:A90B9552-43D3-403B-BC1D-411138344A2A@pch.net">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">by VeriSign ; under the regulatory recommendations of ICANN
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
Verisign didn’t have a choice in the matter, really… Their actions were dictated to them by ICANN. In exchange for giving up .ORG, they retained presumptive control of .COM and .NET for a while longer. .ORG was the smallest of the three, so it was a reasonable sacrifice from their point of view. ICANN (the IANA, really) performed the redelegation. So it was an action by ICANN, not a recommendation; and there was not an action by Verisign, in the sense that none of this originated with them or was performed by them.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
...it's something like that, fortunately archived here [1][2][3].<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:A90B9552-43D3-403B-BC1D-411138344A2A@pch.net">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">These may be small differences, and I’m not saying all this to be argumentative, just to try to make sure that I’ve been as good as I can be about putting information before people clearly. While I was there, I was not central to that part of the process, and my memory is not perfect, so if anyone has a better recollection, please jump in.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
...i get your point thanks, no worry :-)<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:A90B9552-43D3-403B-BC1D-411138344A2A@pch.net">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">; then should not be sold… The (6) is capturing the fact that Bill mentioned first here : "By and For non-commercial"
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
So are you saying that you believe that .ORG should not be sold? </pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Yes ! <br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:A90B9552-43D3-403B-BC1D-411138344A2A@pch.net">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Do you believe that ISOC should continue to hold it, via PIR?</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Again...problem : InternetSociety.ORG have already decided to leave
the <br>
domain name business :-/ <br>
...so, i can not force it to continue to benefit to the grant, where
it's possible <br>
to retart the 2002 process with now a membership-based non-profit
Org with <br>
.ORG's registrants as members (cPIR - common Public Interest
Registry).<br>
<br>
Please have a look below (<i>the last five points propose a base for
the cPIR</i>)...<br>
<p>
•—•<br>
|• Stop/Pause/Withdraw that *privatized* 'public interest'
transaction; and<br>
|<br>
|• Include InternetSociety.ORG's constituencies in future
decision-making<br>
| processes; or before<br>
|<br>
|• InternetSociety.ORG MUST add into the deal a condition which
could<br>
| permit to maintain the relationship between theNew.ORG and the<br>
| community of users|registrants.<br>
| How to do it ?<br>
| Again, by co-signing a document of public commitment to serve
the<br>
| community of registrants at least as the PIR.ORG was serving.
Co-signers :<br>
| TheNew.ORG (within owner), InternetSociety.ORG and the Community
of<br>
| registrants. ICANN.ORG ?<br>
|<br>
| Then (first proposed by Christian @),<br>
|• Create a membership-based non-profit Org, with .ORG's
registrants as <br>
| automatic members ;<br>
|• The policies used to operate the .ORG registry shall be
discussed and<br>
| adopted by the members, in consensus-based approach, in respect
to<br>
| the fundamental principles (ToBeDefined—Steve)<br>
|• The actual operator of the .ORG registry shall continue its
operations<br>
| during a transition period of one year (2020) ;<br>
|• The transition period shall serve to structure the cPIR
(commons Public<br>
| Internet Registry)<br>
|• The cPIR shall begin to operate the .ORG registry at the start
of the<br>
| second year (2021).<br>
•—•<br>
</p>
Hope this clarifies something.<br>
<br>
Thanks.<br>
<br>
Shalom,<br>
--sb.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:A90B9552-43D3-403B-BC1D-411138344A2A@pch.net">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
-Bill
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Best Regards !
baya.sylvain [AT cmNOG DOT cm] | <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="https://www.cmnog.cm"><https://www.cmnog.cm></a> | <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="https://survey.cmnog.cm"><https://survey.cmnog.cm></a>
Subscribe to Mailing List : <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="https://lists.cmnog.cm/mailman/listinfo/cmnog/"><https://lists.cmnog.cm/mailman/listinfo/cmnog/></a>
__
#LASAINTEBIBLE|#Romains15:33«Que LE #DIEU de #Paix soit avec vous tous! #Amen!»
#MaPrière est que tu naisses de nouveau. #Chrétiennement
«Comme une biche soupire après des courants d’eau, ainsi mon âme soupire après TOI, ô DIEU!» (#Psaumes42:2)</pre>
</body>
</html>