When is Verisign's registry contract up for renewal

Sun Sep 21 07:28:57 UTC 2003

On Sat, Sep 20, 2003 at 11:23:04PM -0700, Henry Linneweh wrote:
> My view would concur with this, these are really old battles starting back in the 
> netsol days and now the verisign has taken the same short sighted path.
>  
> It is time that neutral party is in charge
> -Henry R Linneweh

	I was thinking this earlier this week.

	This is a public-trust that should be operated by people
whose sole job is to keep it up and working, not by a dual-role
entity as it is today.

	Perhaps we can get someone to make a not-for-profit
for this sole role.

	- Jared

> Paul Vixie <vixie at vix.com> wrote:
> 
> > > ICANN can seek specific performance of the agreement by Verisign, or
> > > seek to terminate Verisign's contract as the .COM/.NET registry operator
> > > and transfer the operation to a successor registry.
> > 
> > Quiet honestly I'd like to see all of the GTLD servers given to neutral
> > companies, ones that ARE not registrars. [...]
> 
> frankly i am mystified as to why icann awards registry contracts to
> for-profit entities. registrars can be for-profit, but registries should
> be non-profit or public-trust or whatever that specific nation's laws allow
> for in terms of requirements for open accounting, uniform dealing, and
> nonconflict with the public's interest.
> -- 
> Paul Vixie
-- 
Jared Mauch  | pgp key available via finger from jared at puck.nether.net
clue++;      | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/  My statements are only mine.