Thanks for this draft Amy.
One question: why would section 6 not apply to applicants affiliated with registrars (Track 2)? All the questions in that section remain relevant, it seems to me.
(The track terminology is a bit confusing since Track 1 is the only track that does not exist during the Initial Application Window.)
Steve
Steven J. Metalitz |
Partner, through his professional corporation
T: 202.355.7902 |
met@msk.com
Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp
LLP
|
www.msk.com
1818 N Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS.
THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE
IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU.
From: gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl-bounces@icann.org]
On Behalf Of theo geurts
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 9:36 AM
To: gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl@icann.org; Michele Neylon - Blacknight
Subject: Re: [Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl] Materials for 12 Sept PP IRT Meeting
Hi all,
I think the approach can be simplified.
-
We have a bunch of current requirements.
-
New requirements.
Fast track the current privacy providers (this can be done in advance).
If correct, compliance should know which Registrars are in good standing and have data of the current requirements in combination with Registrars due to the previous audits.
No need to to pre-screen this all.
New requirements, this can be dealt with the future compliance audits.
This will save everyone heaps of time and thus money, plus the bulk has now been dealt with in a short time frame.
I expect that non-affiliated privacy providers can be on-boarded in a similar fashion.
The WG did not make recommendations on fees and lengthy application processes.
The current proposal will most likely not survive the comment period; this is something, we as an IRT, have to keep in mind.
Thanks,
Theo Geurts
On 11-9-2017 13:29, Michele Neylon - Blacknight wrote:
Amy
Thanks for sharing this.
I have several concerns.
Firstly the fees that are being proposed.
I cannot understand why or how ICANN can justify charging $4k / year for this to a provider.
From our perspective this makes zero sense, as there is no value being provided by ICANN and the cost is very high – you’re essentially doubling how much I pay ICANN per year.
Background screening – this seems to be complete overkill for an “affiliated” provider.
In our case for example ICANN is going to be dealing with the same person you’ve always dealt with.
If you insist on subjecting us to this kind of scrutiny I don’t mind, but I just see it as being a waste of resources.
6.5 – I thought there was no clear agreement on different labelling of whois privacy in whois?
8.3 – where on earth did that come from?
Regards
Michele
--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845
From: <gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Amy Bivins <amy.bivins@icann.org>
Reply-To: "gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl@icann.org" <gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl@icann.org>
Date: Friday 8 September 2017 at 14:55
To: "gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl@icann.org" <gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl@icann.org>
Subject: [Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl] Materials for 12 Sept PP IRT Meeting
Dear Colleagues,
Our next Privacy/Proxy IRT meeting is scheduled for this upcoming Tuesday, 12 September at 1400 UTC. I hope you all can make it.
On this call, I will walk you through the updated Applicant Guide, and then there will be time for Q&A and your feedback on the document. The most significant changes you’ll note in this discussion draft v2 is a proposed streamlining of the application for providers that are affiliated with an ICANN-accredited registrar, privacy/proxy provider (not applicable in the initial application window), or a gTLD registry operator. We’ve also added a fees proposal.
Please review prior to our meeting, and we look forward to discussing on Tuesday. Please share any feedback you have prior to our call on-list.
Have a great weekend!
Amy
Amy E. Bivins
Registrar Services and Engagement Senior Manager
Registrar Services and Industry Relations
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Direct: +1 (202) 249-7551
Fax: +1 (202) 789-0104
Email: amy.bivins@icann.org
_______________________________________________Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl mailing listGdd-gnso-ppsai-impl@icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl