Dear Council members, Following Chuck Gomes' factual corrections to the informational introduction of the Issues Report on Domain Tasting, I have revised the report and am re-submitting it to the Council. Please find attached the revised and final version of the Issues Report on Domain Tasting produced by ICANN staff and originally submitted to Council on 29 May, 2007. Details of factual corrections made to the 29 May version are in Annex 3 of this document. Many thanks to Chuck for his corrections (His email is copied below, FYI). Best regards, Maria Farrell _____ From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@verisign.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 10:02 PM To: Maria Farrell; Council GNSO Subject: RE: [council] Issues Report on Domain Tasting Thanks Maria and all of the staff who worked together to produce this report. I have a few comments that, although not material with regard to the staff recommendations in the report, I think are important for all to understand as the report is considered. Section 1.1 Definitions Add Grace Period (AGP) Please note that the following statement in the 3rd paragraph is misleading: "When a name is deleted by the registry during this period, money on deposit with the registry is refunded to the registrar." First of all, at least with regard to .com and .net registrations but likely with other gTLDs as well, it is very rare for a registrar to have 'money on deposit' with the registry. This is an important point for at least two reasons: 1) some people think that registries benefit financially from new registrations that are deleted in the 5-day add-grace period (AGP) and that is simply not true; 2) refunds are not required because it is simply a matter of crediting a registrars account - there is no exchange of money, only adjustments to credit limits that are back upped by instruments such as letters of credit. Section 1.2 Background Whereas the general information provided in this section seems fine, there are a few details that are missing: * In response to customer (registrar and registrant) concerns and in cooperation with ICANN staff, Network Solutions (now VeriSign) implemented the AGP for .com, .net and .org within the first year of the original ICANN agreement for those gTLDs, but the agreement was never amended to include the requirement. * When the .com, .net and .org registry agreements were re-executed in 2001, the AGP requirement was included along with other grace period provisions. * When the first gTLDs were added, the AGP requirement was included in the associated registry agreements. Section 3.2 Issue Background * The 6th bullet starts out, ". . . Chuck Gomes of VeriSign stated during ICANN's June 2006 meeting that AGP was instituted at the agreement of registrars and registries: . . . " It's a minor point, but there was only one registry at that time. Chuck Gomes "This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission." _____ From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Maria Farrell Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 11:55 AM To: 'Council GNSO' Subject: [council] Issues Report on Domain Tasting Dear Council members, Attached is the Issues Report on Domain Name Tasting requested by the At-Large Advisory Committee on 9 May (http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg03474.html <BLOCKED::http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg03474.html
).
Best regards, Maria Farrell