I'm confused about what we are supporting and what we are not. The first paragraph says "We support what we consider to be the core principle underlying current policy, which is the continued functional and contractual separation of registries and registrars". The rest of the document while it talks about "ownership and marketing" seems to me that argues on keeping the separation but favoring cross-ownership. Shouldn't we start making it clear what we interpret as "separation" and "cross-ownership" ? Also about point 3, I don't believe is a good tactic to say that we are in "favor" because we are against of those who are "against", I believe we need to use our own arguments and analysis without making any reference to those who support or favor whatever it is. As far as I remember in the past we discussed that there may be particular situations where the burden of registry-registrar separation is not necessary or required. Prime example .IBM using its own TLD for its own infrastructure/biz without intentions to sell any names under that gTLD, or a NGO not looking for profit by delegating 2nd level names under its gTLD. I agree that we made it clear last time that any changes in the current policy should go through the PDP. My .02 Regards Jorge