Dear All, Please find attached the comments from the IPC on the staff proposals in relation to IRTP Part B Recommendation #8 and #9 part 2. As these comments were received after the closing of the public comment forum and the submission of the proposals to the Council, these are provided to you directly for your consideration. ICANN Staff is planning to provide its feedback on the IPC comments separately so that you have the opportunity to review our opinion on these comments also as part of your deliberations. With best regards, Marika From: "Winterfeldt, Brian" <bwinterfeldt@steptoe.com<mailto:bwinterfeldt@steptoe.com>> Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2012 18:02:12 -0800 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>> Cc: "Murray, Emily" <emurray@steptoe.com<mailto:emurray@steptoe.com>>, "Barry, Korey" <Kbarry@steptoe.com<mailto:Kbarry@steptoe.com>> Subject: RE: Staff Proposals - IRTP Part B Recommendation #8 and #9 part 2 Dear Marika, Thank you very much for your response. Please find attached the IPC’s comments on the above-mentioned issues, which have now been approved by the IPC. We would greatly appreciate it if the comments could be considered and if the proposals could be revised, if warranted. We sincerely appreciate your flexibility and consideration during the busy year-end and holiday period. Best regards, Brian Brian J. Winterfeldt, Esq. Steptoe & Johnson LLP From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>> Date: January 4, 2012 3:43:52 AM EST To: "Winterfeldt, Brian" <bwinterfeldt@steptoe.com<mailto:bwinterfeldt@steptoe.com>> Subject: Re: Staff Proposals - IRTP Part B Recommendation #8 and #9 part 2 Dear Brian, As the proposals have already been submitted to the GNSO Council and the public comment forum has been closed, it might make more sense to raise the IPC's comments as part of the Council's deliberations on the proposals, unless the Council prefers that Staff considers the IPC comments first and revises the proposals, if necessary, based on the comments. Best regards, Marika From: "Winterfeldt, Brian" <bwinterfeldt@steptoe.com<mailto:bwinterfeldt@steptoe.com>> Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2012 20:56:37 -0800 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>> Subject: RE: Staff Proposals - IRTP Part B Recommendation #8 and #9 part 2 Dear Marika, I hope you enjoyed the holiday break! Unfortunately due to everyone's hectic schedule surrounding the holidays, we were a bit delayed in composing comments on both of these recommendations on behalf of the IPC. Accordingly, we are planning to submit comments on behalf of the IPC later this week on these issues. Please let us know if that is okay, or if we are too late to do so. Thank you and looking forward to working together in 2012! Best, Brian Brian J. Winterfeldt, Esq. Steptoe & Johnson LLP From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Marika Konings Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2012 6:45 AM To: council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] Staff Proposals - IRTP Part B Recommendation #8 and #9 part 2 Dear All, First of all, best wishes for 2012! As you may recall, the GNSO Council resolved in June of last year in relation to two of the IRTP Part B recommendations (recommendation #8 concerning the standardization and clarification of Whois status messages regarding Registrar Lock status and recommendation #9 part 2 concerning a new provision to lock and unlock domain names) to request ICANN staff to provide proposals. In consultation with the IRTP Part B Working Group, ICANN Staff prepared these proposals which were subsequently put out for public comment (see http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-22nov11-en.htm). As no comments were received as part of the public comment forum, these proposals are now submitted to the GNSO Council for its consideration (see attached). If you have any questions, please let me know. With best regards, Marika