I'm a little dense at times, but it seems to me this is really not an answer unless the implication is that since Staff determined no change to the RRA was necessary (and hence no change to the Registry Agreement), use of the RSEP was not necessary. Is that the case? Tim -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [council] 20 Nov Council call - staff response to Afilias RSEP question From: Liz Gasster <liz.gasster@icann.org> Date: Tue, December 09, 2008 12:47 pm To: "Rosette, Kristina" <krosette@cov.com>, GNSO Council <council@gnso.icann.org> Kristina and all, At the last GNSO Council meeting, during the discussion on the issues report on registration abuse provisions, Kristina Rosette asked whether Afilias was required to use the Registry Services Evaluation Process (RSEP) to implement their anti-abuse policy or whether Afilias could have implemented it unilaterally. Following is staff’s response to that question: Afilias contacted ICANN about their proposed anti-abuse policy and following a review of the RSEP and their Registry Agreement, ICANN staff determined that the proposed anti-abuse policy did not require a modification to the Registry-Registrar Agreement (RRA) which is part of the Registry Agreement. It should be noted, however, that the RSEP is required for all registry services as defined in the Registry Agreement. It is also worth noting that Afilias implemented their Abusive Use Policy pursuant to section 3.5.2 of their Registry-Registrar Agreement <http://www.icann.org/en/tlds/agreements/info/appendix-08-08dec06.htm>, which allows Afilias to require registrars to comply with: "operational standards, policies, procedures, and practices for the Registry TLD established from time to time by Afilias in a non-arbitrary manner and applicable to all registrars, including affiliates of Afilias, and consistent with ICANN's standards, policies, procedures, and practices and Afilias’ Registry Agreement with ICANN." Please let us know if you have further questions. Thanks, Liz