[ALAC] (PMX: 8): Re: FW: URS follow-up

[Evan Leibovitch]

On 22 October 2012 12:15, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:

Perhaps if that is all that needs to be changed, a public comment may be
> the vehicle. Important to remember that the STI set a $300-500 window. If
> the prospective bidders can do it for $500, may still be worth looking at
> acceptable changes that can get it to approach the lower bound.
>

Who knows? If we actually sought out bidders who were not the usual
suspects, perhaps we might find orgs who possess the necessary quality of
operations yet may be able to be even less expensive.

Personally, I am amazed why a process like thus would even state a minimum
value. If there is a target than bidders will meet the target; being less
expensvive is reasonably and universally considered to be a competitive
advantage amongst bidders. IMO ICANN has botched (and continues to botch)
the ROI, continuing a bias against unknown (to ICANN) players.

- Evan

>
>
> If there is a review team to monitor the implementation change, it
> certainly demands At-Large involvement.
>
>
> The concept of an implementation team is a new one that was not
> contemplated at the time of the STI. Otherwise, would have doubtless been
> suggested then. If a group is now reconvened to make any changes (whether
> at the substantive level or process, I would expect an implementation team
> to be created to address questions that come up during implementation, with
> membership open to those involved in setting the policy, which I expect to
> include ALAC.
>
> Alan
>
>
> - Evan
>
>


-- 
Evan Leibovitch
Toronto Canada

Em: evan at telly dot org
Sk: evanleibovitch
Tw: el56