Hmm, I found these two items particularly interesting:
The DNSO also recommended that the WLS not be introduced before "establishment of a standard deletion practice." The rationale for this proposed condition is not well explained in the task-force report. Moreover, because the establishment of a standard deletion practice will likely be an extended process (because it may require cooperation from every registrar), this condition may have the effect of delaying WLS for an extended period.
and
...it has been proposed that registrars not be permitted to place (for customers) WLS reservations on names under registration through their sponsorship at any time after a date sixty days before the date of the name the date is deleted.
2. No preferential treatment should be given to existing SnapNames "SnapBack" reservations. VGRS originally proposed to preference its technology partner, SnapNames, by a special provision under which presently existing SnapNames' registrar-level "SnapBack" reservations would not be permitted to be reserved within the WLS. This special provision had the effect of preferentially exempting SnapNames subscribers (but not subscribers of others) from having their reservations affected by the introduction of the WLS. This special preference prompted extensive community criticism. VGRS has responded to the criticism by revising its WLS proposal so that there will not be any preference or exclusion given because of SnapBack or any other existing registrar-level reservation service.
Even if WLS is approved, though, it won't be implemented for at least 6 months, and perhaps longer, due to the appeals, and the requirement to introduce a standard redemption grace period, etc.
Of course, NSI will probably hoard expired names, in the meantime, setting up a huge landrush.
Linear Mode
