Another Last Call: BC Position - Baseline Registry Operations Report
Another Last Call before closing on a BC comment. Attached is the draft BC position regarding the report on Baseline Registry Operations. Berry Cobb circulated the draft back on 23-Mar (see below). I¹ve signaled my agreement. Absent objections by COB tomorrow, we will file as consensus BC comments on 1-Apr-2010. --Steve On 3/23/10 3:16 AM, "Berry Cobb" <berrycobb@infinityportals.com> wrote: BC, Attached is the first draft of the CBUC position statement for the Baseline Registry Operation report released by ICANN. Overall, I feel KPMG performed well and provided meaningful views of the data. It is ashamed that more participants were not a part of the sample data. My Registry operations experience is limited, so I ask the BC team to take a strong look at the report and the initial comments I provided. I especially invite our members that have direct Registry operations experience to enhance our position about this study and its future use by the gTLD Evaluation teams. This material is sure to have a direct impact to the next Draft Applicant Guidebook version 4 to be released just prior to Brussels. In a quick review, the following are what I believe to be sections of the DAGv3 where this study could influence the Application Evaluation Criteria, or the Application Process both of which will be used by the gTLD Evaluation teams. 1.2.2 Required Documents for Application 1.4.2 Application Form 2.1.2 Applicant Reviews 2.1.3 Registry Services Review 2.2.1 Technical/Operational or Financial Extended Evaluation 2.2.2 DNS Stability Extended Evaluation 2.2.3 Registry Services Extended Evaluation The comment period closes April 1st, so I ask for your quick turn-around. As Steve DelBianco eluded to in our last BC call, there are a large number of comment period closings converging at once. I thank you for your quick response. I will compile all feedback and incorporate changes on 3/30/2010. Berry Cobb Infinity Portals LLC San Jose, CA mailto:berrycobb@infinityportals.com http://infinityportals.com <http://infinityportals.com/> 866.921.8891
On content - AIM supports this position. Again a couple of observations on style. 1. The paper is formatted in a particular style. It is good. But before we adopt a style lets be sure we are consistent. Is this style what we now want for all BC papers going forward? If YES - good, lets adopt and change the new registry agreement position into this style If NO - revert to the current style. 2. How do we describe ourselves? For years we have been known informally as the Business Constituency or BC despite ICANN's official title for us upon which we were never consulted! If we want to change to calling ourselves CBUC, fine, but again lets be consistent in all communication going forward. I would point out that our own Charter uses the terminology Business Constituency or BC. If we do change to CBUC, there will be a number of changes on the website to consider as well. Philip
Philip, Thank you for the feedback. I agree on the format, and I will take the action to work with Steve to get one defined and sent for review by the BC/CBUC. I also agree about the use of BC vs. CBUC. I usually take the more literal use of acronyms. I look to the Chairs and Executive committee for official guidance. With the new structure of the GNSO, I felt it minimizes confusion by using the four character version, especially when viewing the entire GNSO organization structure. I can go either way and will update documents once defined. Thanks again. B Berry Cobb Infinity Portals LLC 866.921.8891 ________________________________-- Quoting Philip Sheppard <philip.sheppard@aim.be>:
On content - AIM supports this position.
Again a couple of observations on style.
1. The paper is formatted in a particular style. It is good. But before we adopt a style lets be sure we are consistent. Is this style what we now want for all BC papers going forward? If YES - good, lets adopt and change the new registry agreement position into this style If NO - revert to the current style.
2. How do we describe ourselves? For years we have been known informally as the Business Constituency or BC despite ICANN's official title for us upon which we were never consulted! If we want to change to calling ourselves CBUC, fine, but again lets be consistent in all communication going forward. I would point out that our own Charter uses the terminology Business Constituency or BC. If we do change to CBUC, there will be a number of changes on the website to consider as well.
Philip
participants (3)
-
berrycobb＠infinityportals.com -
Philip Sheppard -
Steve DelBianco