Thanks Paul. Barbara Knight Director of Registry Compliance bknight@Verisign.com m: 703-622-1071 t: 703-948-3343 12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA 20190 VerisignInc.com<http://www.verisigninc.com/> From: Paul Diaz [mailto:pdiaz@pir.org] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 5:48 PM To: James Bladel; Knight, Barbara Cc: Lars Hoffmann; gnso-irtpd@icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-irtpd] RE: For your (final?) review Hi James, The RySG does not require unanimity to express its support. Rather than say "RySG does not fully support," the WG might consider noting that there was some concern about specific recommendations, but no outright opposition (assuming the conditions below). As Barbara noted, she's interacting with the few Registry reps that have raised concerns. IMO, Rec #15 would require a lot more effort than anyone is prepared to undertake at this time. Since IRTP-D merely recommends "avoiding" policy specific sanctions, there's always room for some other WG to take this issue up in the future. Barbara, you might want to challenge the person who raised this issue if the wording is sufficient (i.e. flexible for the future) or offer some edit. Rec #5 is still under discussion; hopefully we'll have clarity by Monday's call. Barbara has explained the WG's logic behind the recommendation. Perhaps its time to directly ask if any RySG member really opposes the measure, or just wishes the status quo remains? Absent outright opposition, I think it's fair to say the RySG generally supports the IRTP-D's recommendations. Unfortunately, I have a pre-existing schedule conflict and won't be able to join you on the 22nd, but I wanted to thank and congratulate everyone for seeing the IRTP PDPs through to the end. It's hard to believe this all started in 2008 ...er, maybe not! Best, P On Sep 19, 2014, at 4:31 PM, James M. Bladel <jbladel@godaddy.com<mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com>> wrote: Thanks, Barbara. I'm curious: What would be involved if the RySG does not "fully support" a recommendation, due to a single member's disagreement? How would this be reflected in our report? Does the RySG only support (and vote on council) if their membership is unanimous? Thanks- J. From: "Knight, Barbara" <BKnight@verisign.com<mailto:BKnight@verisign.com>> Date: Friday, September 19, 2014 at 16:28 To: Lars Hoffmann <lars.hoffmann@icann.org<mailto:lars.hoffmann@icann.org>>, "gnso-irtpd@icann.org<mailto:gnso-irtpd@icann.org>" <gnso-irtpd@icann.org<mailto:gnso-irtpd@icann.org>> Subject: [gnso-irtpd] RE: For your (final?) review Lars, Thank you for sending the updated report. I circulated a previous version of the report to the RySG and have received some limited feedback this week. Based on the feedback received, there are two recommendations for which the RySG is unable to voice full support at this time. The first is Recommendation #15 - "As a guidance to future policy development processes, this Working Group recommends that policy specific sanctions be avoided wherever possible." One member of the RySG provided feedback that since there are more sanctions available now, that it may make sense for the policy-making effort to link specific violations to specific sanctions rather than transfering this responsibility to ICANN staff. The second is Recommendation #5 - "The WG recommends that the statute of limitation to launch a TDRP be extended from current 6 months to 12 months from the initial transfer." This item is still under discussion. I will let the WG know as soon as possible whether or not the concerns raised with regard to this recommendation have been resolved or if it will be necessary to note that the RySG is unable to fully support this recommendation as well. Thanks. Barbara Knight Director of Registry Compliance bknight@Verisign.com<mailto:bknight@Verisign.com> m: 703-622-1071 t: 703-948-3343 12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA 20190 VerisignInc.com<http://www.verisigninc.com/> From: owner-gnso-irtpd@icann.org<mailto:owner-gnso-irtpd@icann.org> [mailto:owner-gnso-irtpd@icann.org] On Behalf Of Lars Hoffmann Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 1:21 PM To: gnso-irtpd@icann.org<mailto:gnso-irtpd@icann.org> Subject: [gnso-irtpd] For your (final?) review Dear all, Please find attached the Final Report including the Executive Summary. There are very few changes (all redlined) to the version I sent out on Tuesday and to which no comments/changes/amendments were submitted. To clarify the Groups' Recommendation two small amendments are suggested (redlined) to the explanations of Recommendations #1 and #18. If you have any comments/suggested edits, please submit these asap. Please also find below the agenda for Monday's call. Many thanks and have a good weekend! Best wishes, Lars Draft Agenda - IRTP Part D Working Group Meeting - 22 September 2014 1. Roll Call/SOI Update 2. Reviewing final changes 3. Agreeing on consensus level 4. Review next steps and - if necessary - confirm next meeting

James, As per my previous email, there has been some discussion within the RySG relating to recommendations #5 and #15. In my previous communication, I provided a summary of the discussion relating to recommendation #15. With regard to #5, which calls for extending the statute of limitations for filing a dispute from 6 months to 12, the discussion surrounded the goal of the recommendation in striking a balance between registrant protections and legal certainty. The question was raised as to whether extending the statute would enhance registrant protection. It was pointed out that if this is, indeed, the goal, it should be supported by data. As we have discussed on previous WG calls, having supporting data has long been a hot topic so I can understand this concern amongst the RySG. Those individuals who have expressed concerns may opt, at a future point in time, to submit a minority statement expressing their concerns. However, at this time, the RySG generally supports the IRTP-D final report. Thanks. Barbara Knight Director of Registry Compliance bknight@Verisign.com m: 703-622-1071 t: 703-948-3343 12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA 20190 VerisignInc.com<http://www.verisigninc.com/> From: James M. Bladel [mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 7:49 PM To: Paul Diaz Cc: Knight, Barbara; Lars Hoffmann; gnso-irtpd@icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-irtpd] RE: For your (final?) review Thanks Paul. We still have the option of lowering our consensus level from "Full Consensus/Unanimous" to "Consensus," but will wait to hear back from Barbara. And to the Chair of IRTP-A: it's been a long and interesting road, but we are finally nearing the end. ;) Thanks- J. Sent via iPhone. Blame Siri. On Sep 19, 2014, at 17:48, "Paul Diaz" <pdiaz@pir.org<mailto:pdiaz@pir.org>> wrote: Hi James, The RySG does not require unanimity to express its support. Rather than say "RySG does not fully support," the WG might consider noting that there was some concern about specific recommendations, but no outright opposition (assuming the conditions below). As Barbara noted, she's interacting with the few Registry reps that have raised concerns. IMO, Rec #15 would require a lot more effort than anyone is prepared to undertake at this time. Since IRTP-D merely recommends "avoiding" policy specific sanctions, there's always room for some other WG to take this issue up in the future. Barbara, you might want to challenge the person who raised this issue if the wording is sufficient (i.e. flexible for the future) or offer some edit. Rec #5 is still under discussion; hopefully we'll have clarity by Monday's call. Barbara has explained the WG's logic behind the recommendation. Perhaps its time to directly ask if any RySG member really opposes the measure, or just wishes the status quo remains? Absent outright opposition, I think it's fair to say the RySG generally supports the IRTP-D's recommendations. Unfortunately, I have a pre-existing schedule conflict and won't be able to join you on the 22nd, but I wanted to thank and congratulate everyone for seeing the IRTP PDPs through to the end. It's hard to believe this all started in 2008 ...er, maybe not! Best, P On Sep 19, 2014, at 4:31 PM, James M. Bladel <jbladel@godaddy.com<mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com>> wrote: Thanks, Barbara. I’m curious: What would be involved if the RySG does not “fully support” a recommendation, due to a single member’s disagreement? How would this be reflected in our report? Does the RySG only support (and vote on council) if their membership is unanimous? Thanks— J. From: "Knight, Barbara" <BKnight@verisign.com<mailto:BKnight@verisign.com>> Date: Friday, September 19, 2014 at 16:28 To: Lars Hoffmann <lars.hoffmann@icann.org<mailto:lars.hoffmann@icann.org>>, "gnso-irtpd@icann.org<mailto:gnso-irtpd@icann.org>" <gnso-irtpd@icann.org<mailto:gnso-irtpd@icann.org>> Subject: [gnso-irtpd] RE: For your (final?) review Lars, Thank you for sending the updated report. I circulated a previous version of the report to the RySG and have received some limited feedback this week. Based on the feedback received, there are two recommendations for which the RySG is unable to voice full support at this time. The first is Recommendation #15 - “As a guidance to future policy development processes, this Working Group recommends that policy specific sanctions be avoided wherever possible.” One member of the RySG provided feedback that since there are more sanctions available now, that it may make sense for the policy-making effort to link specific violations to specific sanctions rather than transfering this responsibility to ICANN staff. The second is Recommendation #5 – “The WG recommends that the statute of limitation to launch a TDRP be extended from current 6 months to 12 months from the initial transfer.” This item is still under discussion. I will let the WG know as soon as possible whether or not the concerns raised with regard to this recommendation have been resolved or if it will be necessary to note that the RySG is unable to fully support this recommendation as well. Thanks. Barbara Knight Director of Registry Compliance bknight@Verisign.com<mailto:bknight@Verisign.com> m: 703-622-1071 t: 703-948-3343 12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA 20190 VerisignInc.com<http://www.verisigninc.com/> From: owner-gnso-irtpd@icann.org<mailto:owner-gnso-irtpd@icann.org> [mailto:owner-gnso-irtpd@icann.org] On Behalf Of Lars Hoffmann Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 1:21 PM To: gnso-irtpd@icann.org<mailto:gnso-irtpd@icann.org> Subject: [gnso-irtpd] For your (final?) review Dear all, Please find attached the Final Report including the Executive Summary. There are very few changes (all redlined) to the version I sent out on Tuesday and to which no comments/changes/amendments were submitted. To clarify the Groups’ Recommendation two small amendments are suggested (redlined) to the explanations of Recommendations #1 and #18. If you have any comments/suggested edits, please submit these asap. Please also find below the agenda for Monday’s call. Many thanks and have a good weekend! Best wishes, Lars Draft Agenda – IRTP Part D Working Group Meeting - 22 September 2014 1. Roll Call/SOI Update 2. Reviewing final changes 3. Agreeing on consensus level 4. Review next steps and – if necessary – confirm next meeting

0€ *†H†÷
 €0€

10 +0€ *†H†÷

 €$€‚
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01CFD63F.F1ACA160" This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01CFD63F.F1ACA160 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ‚Lars, Thank you for suggesting the addition of the language below in Section 4.2.7.1 as I believe that this will address the data point. Since it will be difficult to know / measure the incidents where no IRTP was launched due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, perhaps we could amend your suggested language as below. Please note that I modified it a bit to reference the TDRP instead of the IRTP and referenced the dispute vs. the policy to make it a bit clearer. Thanks again for the suggestion. . The period of time between the occurrence of an alleged non-compliant transfer and the launch of the TDRP process - including those incidents where no dispute was launched or the dispute was rejected due to the expiration of the statute of limitations. Barbara Knight Director of Registry Compliance bknight@Verisign.com m: 703-622-1071 t: 703-948-3343 12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA 20190 <http://www.verisigninc.com/> VerisignInc.com From: Lars Hoffmann [mailto:lars.hoffmann@icann.org] Sent: Monday, September 22, 2014 4:11 AM To: Knight, Barbara; James M. Bladel; Paul Diaz Cc: gnso-irtpd@icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-irtpd] RE: For your (final?) review Dear Barbara, all, I just wanted to confirm whether you are referring to a formal minority view as outlined in the GNSO Operating Procedures. If so, these are normally included as part of the Final Report and as such would need to be included before the report is published (which was foreseen for today). It is unfortunate of course that this comes so late into the process, but at the same time, it is probably worth for the WG to consider how to deal with this issue as a formal minority statement on the statue of limitations could also trigger requests from others such as ALAC and Thomas Rickert to include a similar minority statement on extending the statue of limitations to 15 months. Of course, if you are not referring to a formal minority statement but comments that some RySG members may make as part of the Council deliberations or public comment forum prior to Board consideration, then there may not be any need for further WG consideration. Regardless, one possible way to address the concern might be to consider an amendment to 4.2.7.1 (p.35) of the Final Report. This is the section, in which the proposed issues for a future review of the IRTP are listed. Maybe an additional bullet point might address the RySG concerns and assure that future changes to (or reversals of) policy regarding the statute of limitations are based on relevant data points: * The period of time between the occurrence of an alleged non-compliant transfer and the launch of an IRTP process - including those incidents where there no IRTP was launched due to the expiration of the statute of limitations. Maybe this would address some of the concerns raised? Best wishes, Lars From: <Knight>, Barbara Knight <BKnight@verisign.com> Date: Monday, 22 September 2014 05:17 To: James Bladel <jbladel@godaddy.com>, Paul Diaz <pdiaz@pir.org> Cc: Lars HOFFMANN <lars.hoffmann@icann.org>, "gnso-irtpd@icann.org" <gnso-irtpd@icann.org> Subject: RE: [gnso-irtpd] RE: For your (final?) review James, As per my previous email, there has been some discussion within the RySG relating to recommendations #5 and #15. In my previous communication, I provided a summary of the discussion relating to recommendation #15. With regard to #5, which calls for extending the statute of limitations for filing a dispute from 6 months to 12, the discussion surrounded the goal of the recommendation in striking a balance between registrant protections and legal certainty. The question was raised as to whether extending the statute would enhance registrant protection. It was pointed out that if this is, indeed, the goal, it should be supported by data. As we have discussed on previous WG calls, having supporting data has long been a hot topic so I can understand this c‚oncern amongst the RySG. Those individuals who have expressed concerns may opt, at a future point in time, to submit a minority statement expressing their concerns. However, at this time, the RySG generally supports the IRTP-D final report. Thanks. Barbara Knight Director of Registry Compliance bknight@Verisign.com m: 703-622-1071 t: 703-948-3343 12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA 20190 <http://www.verisigninc.com/> VerisignInc.com From: James M. Bladel [mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com] Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 7:49 PM To: Paul Diaz Cc: Knight, Barbara; Lars Hoffmann; gnso-irtpd@icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-irtpd] RE: For your (final?) review Thanks Paul. We still have the option of lowering our consensus level from "Full Consensus/Unanimous" to "Consensus," but will wait to hear back from Barbara. And to the Chair of IRTP-A: it's been a long and interesting road, but we are finally nearing the end. ;) Thanks- J. Sent via iPhone. Blame Siri. On Sep 19, 2014, at 17:48, "Paul Diaz" <pdiaz@pir.org> wrote: Hi James, The RySG does not require unanimity to express its support. Rather than say "RySG does not fully support," the WG might consider noting that there was some concern about specific recommendations, but no outright opposition (assuming the conditions below). As Barbara noted, she's interacting with the few Registry reps that have raised concerns. IMO, Rec #15 would require a lot more effort than anyone is prepared to undertake at this time. Since IRTP-D merely recommends "avoiding" policy specific sanctions, there's always room for some other WG to take this issue up in the future. Barbara, you might want to challenge the person who raised this issue if the wording is sufficient (i.e. flexible for the future) or offer some edit. Rec #5 is still under discussion; hopefully we'll have clarity by Monday's call. Barbara has explained the WG's logic behind the recommendation. Perhaps its time to directly ask if any RySG member really opposes the measure, or just wishes the status quo remains? Absent outright opposition, I think it's fair to say the RySG generally supports the IRTP-D's recommendations. Unfortunately, I have a pre-existing schedule conflict and won't be able to join you on the 22nd, but I wanted to thank and congratulate everyone for seeing the IRTP PDPs through to the end. It's hard to believe this all started in 2008 ...er, maybe not! Best, P On Sep 19, 2014, at 4:31 PM, James M. Bladel <jbladel@godaddy.com> wrote: Thanks, Barbara. I'm curious: What would be involved if the RySG does not "fully support" a recommendation, due to a single member's disagreement? How would this be reflected in our report? Does the RySG only support (and vote on council) if their membership is unanimous? Thanks- J. From: "Knight, Barbara" < <mailto:BKnight@verisign.com> BKnight@verisign.com> Date: Friday, September 19, 2014 at 16:28 To: Lars Hoffmann < <mailto:lars.hoffmann@icann.org> lars.hoffmann@icann.org>, " <mailto:gnso-irtpd@icann.org> gnso-irtpd@icann.org" < <mailto:gnso-irtpd@icann.org> gnso-irtpd@icann.org> Subject: [gnso-irtpd] RE: For your (final?) review Lars, Thank you for sending the updated report. I circulated a previous version of the report to the RySG and have received some limited feedback this week. Based on the feedback received, there are two recommendations for which the RySG is unable to voice full support at this time. The first is Recommendation #15 - "As a guidance to future policy development processes, this Working Group recommends that policy specific sanctions be avoided wherever possible." One member of the RySG provided feedback that since there are more sanctions available now, that it may make sense for the policy-making effort to link specific violations to specific sanctions rather than transfering this responsibility to ICANN s‚Õtaff. The second is Recommendation #5 - "The WG recommends that the statute of limitation to launch a TDRP be extended from current 6 months to 12 months from the initial transfer." This item is still under discussion. I will let the WG know as soon as possible whether or not the concerns raised with regard to this recommendation have been resolved or if it will be necessary to note that the RySG is unable to fully support this recommendation as well. Thanks. Barbara Knight Director of Registry Compliance <mailto:bknight@Verisign.com> bknight@Verisign.com m: 703-622-1071 t: 703-948-3343 12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA 20190 <http://www.verisigninc.com/> VerisignInc.com From: <mailto:owner-gnso-irtpd@icann.org> owner-gnso-irtpd@icann.org [ <mailto:owner-gnso-irtpd@icann.org> mailto:owner-gnso-irtpd@icann.org] On Behalf Of Lars Hoffmann Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 1:21 PM To: <mailto:gnso-irtpd@icann.org> gnso-irtpd@icann.org Subject: [gnso-irtpd] For your (final?) review Dear all, Please find attached the Final Report including the Executive Summary. There are very few changes (all redlined) to the version I sent out on Tuesday and to which no comments/changes/amendments were submitted. To clarify the Groups' Recommendation two small amendments are suggested (redlined) to the explanations of Recommendations #1 and #18. If you have any comments/suggested edits, please submit these asap. Please also find below the agenda for Monday's call. Many thanks and have a good weekend! Best wishes, Lars Draft Agenda - IRTP Part D Working Group Meeting - 22 September 2014 1. Roll Call/SOI Update 2. Reviewing final changes 3. Agreeing on consensus level 4. Review next steps and - if necessary - confirm next meeting ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01CFD63F.F1ACA160 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ‚<html xmlns:v=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" = xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" = xmlns:w=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" = xmlns:m=3D"http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" = xmlns=3D"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><META = HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; = charset=3Dus-ascii"><meta name=3DGenerator content=3D"Microsoft Word 14 = (filtered medium)"><style><!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:Helvetica; panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;} @font-face {font-family:Wingdings; panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;} @font-face {font-family:Wingdings; panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;} @font-face {font-family:Tahoma; panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {mso-style-priority:99; color:blue; text-decoration:underline;} a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {mso-style-priority:99; color:purple; text-decoration:underline;} p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate {mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char"; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; font-size:8.0pt; font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";} p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph {mso-style-priority:34; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";} span.BalloonTextChar {mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char"; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-link:"Balloon Text"; font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";} span.apple-converted-space {mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;} span.EmailStyle20 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D;} span.EmailStyle21 {mso-style-type:personal-reply; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D;} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; font-size:10.0pt;} @page WordSection1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;} div.WordSection1 {page:WordSection1;} /* List Definitions */ @list l0 {mso-list-id:1578789044; mso-list-type:hybrid; mso-list-template-ids:582655160 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 = 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693;} @list l0:level1 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:\F0B7; mso-level-tab-stop:none; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; font-family:Symbol;} @list l0:level2 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:o; mso-level-tab-stop:none; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; font-family:"Courier New";} @list l0:level3 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:\F0A7; mso-level-tab-stop:none; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; font-family:Wingdings;} @list l0:level4 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:\F0B7; mso-level-tab-stop:none; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; font-family:Symbol;} @list l0:level5 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:o; mso-level-tab-stop:none; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; font-family:"Courier New";} @list l0:level6 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:\F0A7; mso-level-tab-stop:none; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; font-family:Wingdings;} @list l0:level7 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:\F0B7; mso-level-tab-stop:none; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; font-family:Symbol;} @list l0:level8 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:o; mso-level-tab-stop:none; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; font-family:"Courier New";} @list l0:level9 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:\F0A7; mso-level-tab-stop:none; mso-level-number-position:left; text‚-indent:-.25in; font-family:Wingdings;} @list l1 {mso-list-id:2001273347; mso-list-template-ids:-1652815004;} @list l1:level1 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:\F0B7; mso-level-tab-stop:.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Symbol;} @list l1:level2 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:o; mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Courier New"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @list l1:level3 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:\F0A7; mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;} @list l1:level4 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:\F0A7; mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;} @list l1:level5 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:\F0A7; mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;} @list l1:level6 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:\F0A7; mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;} @list l1:level7 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:\F0A7; mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;} @list l1:level8 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:\F0A7; mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;} @list l1:level9 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:\F0A7; mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;} ol {margin-bottom:0in;} ul {margin-bottom:0in;} --></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapedefaults v:ext=3D"edit" spidmax=3D"1026" /> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapelayout v:ext=3D"edit"> <o:idmap v:ext=3D"edit" data=3D"1" /> </o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=3DEN-US link=3Dblue = vlink=3Dpurple><div class=3DWordSection1><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497= D'>Lars,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497= D'>Thank you for suggesting the addition of the language below in = Section 4.2.7.1 as I believe that this will address the data = point.  Since it will be difficult to know / measure the incidents = where no IRTP was launched due to the expiration of the statute of = limitations, perhaps we could amend your suggested language as = below.  Please note that I modified it a bit to reference the TDRP = instead of the IRTP and referenced the dispute vs. the policy to make it = a bit clearer.  Thanks again for the = suggestion.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497= D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=3DMsoListParagraph = style=3D'text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2'><![if = !supportLists]><span = style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Symbol;color:#1F497D'><span = style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>·<span style=3D'font:7.0pt "Times New = Roman"'>         = </span></span></span><![endif]><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'=

The period of time between the occurrence of an alleged non-compliant = transfer and the launch of the TDRP process – including those = incidents where no dispute was launched or the dispute was rejected due = to the expiration of t‚he statute of limitations.</span><span = style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497= D'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497= D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><p class=3DMsoNormal = style=3D'line-height:10.5pt'><b><span = style=3D'font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";color:#006A= AA'>Barbara Knight</span></b><span = style=3D'font-size:8.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";color:#6B6D= 71'><br>Director of Registry = Compliance<br>bknight@Verisign.com<br><br>m: 703-622-1071 t: = 703-948-3343<br>12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA 20190<br><br><a = href=3D"http://www.verisigninc.com/"><span = style=3D'font-size:9.0pt;color:#006AAA;text-decoration:none'>VerisignInc.= com</span></a> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497= D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div = style=3D'border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in = 0in 0in'><p class=3DMsoNormal><b><span = style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span>= </b><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> = Lars Hoffmann [mailto:lars.hoffmann@icann.org] <br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, = September 22, 2014 4:11 AM<br><b>To:</b> Knight, Barbara; James M. = Bladel; Paul Diaz<br><b>Cc:</b> gnso-irtpd@icann.org<br><b>Subject:</b> = Re: [gnso-irtpd] RE: For your (final?) = review<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= Dear Barbara, all,<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= <o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><div><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= I just wanted to confirm whether you are referring to a formal minority = view as outlined in the GNSO Operating Procedures. If so, these are = normally included as part of the Final Report and as such would need to = be included before the report is published (which was foreseen for = today). It is unfortunate of course that this comes so late into the = process, but at the same time, it is probably worth for the WG to = consider how to deal with this issue as a formal minority statement on = the statue of limitations could also trigger requests from others such = as ALAC and Thomas Rickert to include a similar minority statement on = extending the statue of limitations to 15 months. Of course, if you are = not referring to a formal minority statement but comments that some RySG = members may make as part of the Council deliberations or public comment = forum prior to Board consideration, then there may not be any need for = further WG consideration.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= <o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= Regardless, one possible way to address the concern might be = to consider an amendment to 4.2.7.1 (p.35) of the Final Report. = This is the section, in which the proposed issues for a future review of = the IRTP are listed. Maybe an additional bullet point might address the = RySG concerns and assure that future changes to (or reversals of) policy = regarding the statute of limitations are based on relevant data = points:<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><ul type=3Ddisc><li class=3DMsoNormal = style=3D'color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;m= so-list:l1 level1 lfo1'><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>The period = of time between the occurrence of an alleged non-compliant transfer and = the launch‚ of an IRTP process – including those incidents where = there no IRTP was launched due to the expiration of the statute of = limitations.<o:p></o:p></span></li></ul></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= Maybe this would address some of the concerns = raised?<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= Best wishes,<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= Lars<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= <o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= <o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= <o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'=  <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= <o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div = style=3D'border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in = 0in 0in'><p class=3DMsoNormal><b><span = style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= From: </span></b><span = style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= <Knight>, Barbara Knight <<a = href=3D"mailto:BKnight@verisign.com">BKnight@verisign.com</a>><br><b>D= ate: </b>Monday, 22 September 2014 05:17<br><b>To: </b>James Bladel = <<a href=3D"mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com">jbladel@godaddy.com</a>>, = Paul Diaz <<a = href=3D"mailto:pdiaz@pir.org">pdiaz@pir.org</a>><br><b>Cc: </b>Lars = HOFFMANN <<a = href=3D"mailto:lars.hoffmann@icann.org">lars.hoffmann@icann.org</a>>, = "<a = href=3D"mailto:gnso-irtpd@icann.org">gnso-irtpd@icann.org</a>" = <<a = href=3D"mailto:gnso-irtpd@icann.org">gnso-irtpd@icann.org</a>><br><b>S= ubject: </b>RE: [gnso-irtpd] RE: For your (final?) = review<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= <o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><div><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497= D'>James,</span><span style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497= D'>As per my previous email, there has been some discussion within the = RySG relating to recommendations #5 and #15.  In my previous = communication, I provided a summary of the discussion relating to = recommendation #15.  With regard to #5, which calls for extending = the statute of limitations for filing a dispute from 6 months to 12, the = discussion surrounded the goal of the recommendation in striking a = balance between registrant protections and legal certainty.  The = question was raised as to whether extending the statute would enhance = registrant protection.  It was pointed out that if this is, indeed, = the goal, it should be supported by data.  As we have discussed on = previous WG calls, having supporting data has long been a hot topic so I = can understand this concern amongst the RySG.  </span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497= D'> </span><span style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497= D'>Those individuals who have expressed conce‚rns may opt, at a future = point in time, to submit a minority statement expressing their = concerns.  However, at this time, the RySG generally supports the = IRTP-D final report.  Thanks.</span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497= D'> </span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=3DMsoNormal = style=3D'line-height:10.5pt'><b><span = style=3D'font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";color:#006A= AA'>Barbara Knight</span></b><span = style=3D'font-size:8.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";color:#6B6D= 71'><br>Director of Registry Compliance<br><a = href=3D"mailto:bknight@Verisign.com">bknight@Verisign.com</a><br><br>m: = 703-622-1071 t: 703-948-3343<br>12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA = 20190<br><br><a href=3D"http://www.verisigninc.com/"><span = style=3D'font-size:9.0pt;color:#006AAA;text-decoration:none'>VerisignInc.= com</span></a></span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497= D'> </span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><div><div = style=3D'border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in = 0in 0in'><p class=3DMsoNormal><b><span = style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black'>= From:</span></b><span = style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black'>= James M. Bladel [<a = href=3D"mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com">mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com</a>] = <br><b>Sent:</b> Friday, September 19, 2014 7:49 PM<br><b>To:</b> Paul = Diaz<br><b>Cc:</b> Knight, Barbara; Lars Hoffmann; <a = href=3D"mailto:gnso-irtpd@icann.org">gnso-irtpd@icann.org</a><br><b>Subje= ct:</b> Re: [gnso-irtpd] RE: For your (final?) review</span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'color:black'>Thanks = Paul. <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'color:black'>We still have the option = of lowering our consensus level from "Full = Consensus/Unanimous" to "Consensus," but will wait to = hear back from Barbara. <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'color:black'>And to the Chair of = IRTP-A:  it's been a long and interesting road, but we are finally = nearing the end. ;)<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'color:black'>Thanks-<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'color:black'>J. <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'color:black'><br><br>Sent via iPhone. = Blame Siri.  <o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal style=3D'margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span = style=3D'color:black'><br>On Sep 19, 2014, at 17:48, "Paul = Diaz" <<a href=3D"mailto:pdiaz@pir.org">pdiaz@pir.org</a>> = wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><blockquote = style=3D'margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'color:black'>Hi James, = <o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'color:black'>The RySG does not require = unanimity to express its support. Rather than say "RySG does ‚not = fully support," the WG might consider noting that there was some = concern about specific recommendations, but no outright opposition = (assuming the conditions below).<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'color:black'>As Barbara noted, she's = interacting with the few Registry reps that have raised concerns. IMO, = Rec #15 would require a lot more effort than anyone is prepared to = undertake at this time. Since IRTP-D merely recommends = "avoiding" policy specific sanctions, there's always room for = some other WG to take this issue up in the future. Barbara, you might = want to challenge the person who raised this issue if the wording is = sufficient (i.e. flexible for the future) or offer some = edit.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'color:black'>Rec #5 is still under = discussion; hopefully we'll have clarity by Monday's call. Barbara has = explained the WG's logic behind the recommendation. Perhaps its time to = directly ask if any RySG member really opposes the measure, or just = wishes the status quo remains? Absent outright opposition, I think it's = fair to say the RySG generally supports the IRTP-D's = recommendations.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'color:black'>Unfortunately, I have a = pre-existing schedule conflict and won't be able to join you on the = 22nd, but I wanted to thank and congratulate everyone for seeing the = IRTP PDPs through to the end. It's hard to believe this all started in = 2008 ...er, maybe not!<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'color:black'>Best, = P<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'color:black'>On Sep 19, 2014, at 4:31 = PM, James M. Bladel <<a = href=3D"mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com">jbladel@godaddy.com</a>> = wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'color:black'><br><br><br><o:p></o:p></span></p><div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= Thanks, Barbara.</span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'=  </span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= I’m curious:  What would be involved if the RySG does not = “fully support” a recommendation, due to a single = member’s disagreement?  How would this be reflected in our = report?   Does the RySG only support (and vote on council) if their = membership is unanimous?</span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'=  </span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= Thanks—</span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'=  </span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= J.</span><span = style=3D'color:blac‚k'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'=  </span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'=  </span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div = style=3D'border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in = 0in 0in'><p class=3DMsoNormal><b><span = style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= From:<span class=3Dapple-converted-space> </span></span></b><span = style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= "Knight, Barbara" <<a = href=3D"mailto:BKnight@verisign.com"><span = style=3D'color:purple'>BKnight@verisign.com</span></a>><br><b>Date:<sp= an class=3Dapple-converted-space> </span></b>Friday, September 19, = 2014 at 16:28<span = class=3Dapple-converted-space> </span><br><b>To:<span = class=3Dapple-converted-space> </span></b>Lars Hoffmann <<a = href=3D"mailto:lars.hoffmann@icann.org"><span = style=3D'color:purple'>lars.hoffmann@icann.org</span></a>>, "<a = href=3D"mailto:gnso-irtpd@icann.org"><span = style=3D'color:purple'>gnso-irtpd@icann.org</span></a>" <<a = href=3D"mailto:gnso-irtpd@icann.org"><span = style=3D'color:purple'>gnso-irtpd@icann.org</span></a>><br><b>Subject:= <span class=3Dapple-converted-space> </span></b>[gnso-irtpd] RE: = For your (final?) review</span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'=  </span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497= D'>Lars,</span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal style=3D'line-height:18.0pt'><span = style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497= D'>Thank you for sending the updated report.  I circulated a = previous version of the report to the RySG and have received some = limited feedback this week.  Based on the feedback received, there = are two recommendations for which the RySG is unable to voice full = support at this time.  The first is Recommendation #15 - “As = a guidance to future policy development processes, this Working Group = recommends that policy specific sanctions be avoided wherever = possible.”  One member of the RySG provided feedback that = since there are more sanctions available now, that it may make sense for = the policy-making effort to link specific violations to specific = sanctions rather than transfering this responsibility to ICANN = staff.  The second is Recommendation #5 – “The WG = recommends that the statute of limitation to launch a TDRP be extended = from current 6 months to 12 months from the initial = transfer.”  This item is still under discussion.  I will = let the WG know as soon as possible whether or not the concerns raised = with regard to this recommendation have been resolved or if it will be = necessary to note that the RySG is unable to fully support this = recommendation as well.  Thanks. </span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497= D'> </span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal style=3D'line-height:10.5pt'><b><span = style=3D'font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";color:#006A= AA'>Barbara Knight</span></b><span = style=3D'font-size:8.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";color:#6B6D= 71'><br>Director of Registry Compliance<br><a = href=3D"mailto:b‚knight@Verisign.com"><span = style=3D'color:purple'>bknight@Verisign.com</span></a><br><br>m: = 703-622-1071 t: 703-948-3343<br>12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA = 20190<br><br><a href=3D"http://www.verisigninc.com/"><span = style=3D'font-size:9.0pt;color:#006AAA;text-decoration:none'>VerisignInc.= com</span></a></span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497= D'> </span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><div = style=3D'border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in = 0in 0in'><div><p class=3DMsoNormal><b><span = style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black'>= From:</span></b><span class=3Dapple-converted-space><span = style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black'>=  </span></span><span = style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black'>= <a href=3D"mailto:owner-gnso-irtpd@icann.org"><span = style=3D'color:purple'>owner-gnso-irtpd@icann.org</span></a><span = class=3Dapple-converted-space> </span>[<a = href=3D"mailto:owner-gnso-irtpd@icann.org"><span = style=3D'color:purple'>mailto:owner-gnso-irtpd@icann.org</span></a>]<span= class=3Dapple-converted-space> </span><b>On Behalf Of<span = class=3Dapple-converted-space> </span></b>Lars = Hoffmann<br><b>Sent:</b><span = class=3Dapple-converted-space> </span>Friday, September 19, 2014 = 1:21 PM<br><b>To:</b><span class=3Dapple-converted-space> </span><a = href=3D"mailto:gnso-irtpd@icann.org"><span = style=3D'color:purple'>gnso-irtpd@icann.org</span></a><br><b>Subject:</b>= <span class=3Dapple-converted-space> </span>[gnso-irtpd] For your = (final?) review</span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= Dear all,</span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'=  </span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= Please find attached the Final Report including the Executive Summary. = There are very few changes (all redlined) to the version I sent out on = Tuesday and to which<span = class=3Dapple-converted-space> </span><b>no = comments/changes/amendments were submitted</b>. </span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'=  </span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= To clarify the Groups’ Recommendation two small amendments are = suggested (redlined) to the explanations of Recommendations #1 and = #18.</span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'=  </span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= If you have any comments/suggested edits, please submit these = asap.</span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'=  </span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p‚ Æ = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= Please also find below the agenda for Monday’s call. Many thanks = and have a good weekend!</span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= Best wishes,</span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= Lars</span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'=  </span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><b><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= Draft Agenda – IRTP Part D Working Group Meeting - 22 September = 2014</span></b><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'=  </span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= 1. Roll Call/SOI Update</span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= 2. Reviewing final changes</span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= 3. Agreeing on consensus level </span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p = class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'= 4. Review next steps and – if necessary – confirm next = meeting </span><span = style=3D'color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></div></div></div= </div><p class=3DMsoNormal><span = style=3D'color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></blockquot= e></div></div></div></body></html> ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01CFD63F.F1ACA160--  ‚0‚0‚
apËIŒ_˜E)ç°ŠÙP[z0  *†H†÷

0Ê10 UUS10U VeriSign, Inc.10UVeriSign Trust Network1:08U1(c) 1999 VeriSign, Inc. - For authorized use only1E0CU<VeriSign Class 2 Public Primary Certification Authority - G30 991001000000Z 360716235959Z0Ê10 UUS10U VeriSign, Inc.10UVeriSign Trust Network1:08U1(c) 1999 VeriSign, Inc. - For authorized use only1E0CU<VeriSign Class 2 Public Primary Certification Authority - G30‚
"0  *†H†÷


‚
0‚
‚

¯

ÂÕ,Ûg¹-å”'Ý¥Ÿà°M³aV<Ö|ÃôÍ>†Ë¢ˆâáØ€iŵâ¿ÁŠGP^F9‹Õ–ºµo¿Î'žG›1zØÙÓ7‹­,GðŽ§ 0ë÷< ÜrFî¥È[ÃÉViLÅÁ‘{Õ›ŒïÃH>F` …*Ր¶Í‹ Ì2Ý·ý@U²PV®ÌwMÇ M§1vïh’ŠV²­i£RÐËÄ#=™þLècŽÆŽö1öÒúåvݵ’£IÍÍ
ÍhÍ©iº£ë œ€ ŠÁ ÅÑFLmÒ¬f?–Œà„Ô6ÿ"YÅù`š_}òö%BaÄJž>‰

0  *†H†÷

‚

4&<ÀMCIœé!’×fœ·ÞÅžÐä]_v"À&ù„::ùŒµûì`ñèΰÈݧ0ó˜ß€æ€1ßÓFÜr ?®î<€3?9¬pxsK™+ß0ÂT°š;U¡þ(ÍBœtn€Û'D§ÎD]Ԑ˜ B”±,Ðt£"cc̓µûÁmbkiuý]pA¹õ¿|ߟÁ2s"!‹X{‘zºãdH°û6%ڕÐñ$Ý€kF#9TõŽb ”Š›æ%âBEªž­Ÿ©B”Ïr9á±Cà(Ï·çZlkI³ÿã|‰‹3]¬3קùÚ:UÉXùªïZ¶ÏKKß*0‚`0‚H 
v…ËšàÌÒÅM95³0  *†H†÷

0Ê10 UUS10U VeriSign, Inc.10UVeriSign Trust Network1:08U1(c) 1999 VeriSign, Inc. - For authorized use only1E0CU<VeriSign Class 2 Public Primary Certification Authority - G30 110607000000Z 210606235959Z0É10 UUS10U Symantec Corporation10USymantec Trust Network1503U,Class 2 Managed PKI Individual Subscriber CA1C0AU:Symantec Class 2 Shared Intermediate Certificate Authority0‚
"0  *†H†÷


‚
0‚
‚

·ø?+ƒ# …ŠMI
Q:ÚÝP3Ÿã€:>£afL4ÂètpuI¥·Iìݳ’œÝy â¹úž9<Ÿ…ãŒïmy£Š·¿œLŸ>˜Ž¬Û|š+ì(0_)3MDÕpèV"™Š>B[ë#§c-,°.?ó)Í6‰„’ÇWp[p…æ8¡|Pã78ˆe[kË9*±‚ªÿ ?£Û‘Evf£kó…#^Nم]u§ ÷ÁtàåʔBešÂ7z‹šP¬¿—tgwÑ2§¯Ë“©%BŽ0t â%ËtgUËüAP €|Mù©5ùE§1ñ€»¢É>Îv9á*ÿvPçèQ"ß-Ïž3

£‚?0‚;0U

ÿ0

ÿ
04U-0+0) ' %†#http://crl.verisign.com/pca2-g3.crl0U

ÿ
0)U"0 €010UVeriSignMPKI-2-560UØH)š_*’âúž{ïo`ƒøžžÜ0ðU#è0å¡Ð€Í0Ê10 UUS10U VeriSign, Inc.10UVeriSign Trust Network1:08U1(c) 1999 VeriSign, Inc. - For authorized use only1E0CU<VeriSign Class 2 Public Primary Certification Authority - G3‚apËIŒ_˜E)ç°ŠÙP[z04+


(0&0$+
0
†http://ocsp.verisign.com0lU e0c0a`†H
†øE
0R0&+

http://www.symauth.com/cps0(+
0http://www.symauth.com/rpa0  *†H†÷

‚

Š*›@Éìÿ³ˆèEÚ4Ñ(-·¥…g1ÍÁæÕ)†8¬âðYá¡EÎ$xïiÁ°La¢HÙhOºþuT7ºXiêÁv¥6Bêžfx ٕj$yTÍÞZŠ;®•rÐ%ØÒFŸ40§€žñVÎ lgÉMOy‡‰â.€Öží&ae¢ÐÅâó(¹+Ii‚gìÕé4€.Üb"€…MHãj”òÍýägÈIŒªÕÇç<އ±k]\äk ôO™Ëܵ[Ì2ùjätÀ*X7y³ûÍÃ4oávÝc‹N'’G›ŸÞ …ü¢/e}Ì:¬TkVgÄ"#+pVÃñ®w\'Á90‚{0‚c 
iþ¶µÁÌÝ#Ã,{ÛÐ0  *†H†÷

0É10 UUS10U Symantec Corporation10USymantec Trust Network1503U,Class 2 Managed PKI Individual Subscriber CA1C0AU:Symantec Class 2 Shared Intermediate Certificate Authority0 140218000000Z 150218235959Z0p1#0! *†H†÷

BKnight@verisign.com10UKnight, Barbara10U ENTERPRISE IT10U VeriSign, Inc.0‚
"0  *†H†÷


‚
0‚
‚

תœwïvžå«_/ÔN ~Ó³Œ`ŠqZÛ²¿Ñ/žJ(4ʉjÊÐ0
1ç<ØÊêD%s÷ñb»ÎނäOŽ4ˆ¯%;ÑAêš©)ò—Êb¡§}aZ4:l O<Ÿ+4HÃËEKƒ:ÉñŠCpÁ$hdÑaåŸ\ñúT6aÏ Œ4¢ªÿ€ezI:A”,U†öٍՖ×fž3ÊN†ã÷ëBg@È£˜›™‡j0€ßÙ5:‚]¬†¿”ªUÜ”Ó^y ÐÔÄՆ„ë…€f#ÿ0A”56¿Æ"çuùAPÇ8™Þ•Éž.ˆƒ) þ%:¹:"Îô‘

£‚µ0‚±0U

ÿ00U

ÿ 0U%

ÿ0 +
0UV…Jh-qð}bªÝÕ«Âɹù0JUC0ABKnight@verisign.com ) +

‚7 bknight@vcorp.ad.vrsn.com0U#0€ØH)š_*’âúž{ïo`ƒøžžÜ0‚
q+


‚
c0‚
_0'+
0
†http://pki-ocsp.symauth.com0‚
2+
0†‚
$ldap://directory.verisign.com/CN%20%3D%20Symantec%20Class%202%20Shared%20Intermediate%20Certificate%20Authority%2COU%20%3D%20Class%202%20Managed%20PKI%20Individual%20Subscriber%20CA%2COU%20%3D%20Symantec%20Trust%20Network%2CO%20%3D%20Symantec%20Corporation%2CC%20%3D%20US?cACertificate;binary0]UV0T0R P N†Lhttp://pki-crl.symauth.com/ca_07bb7d6477cf4f6be96af1b36cabd316/LatestCRL.crl0lU e0c0a`†H
†øE
0R0&+

http://www.symauth.com/cps0(+
0http://www.symauth.com/rpa0B *†H†÷
5030 *†H†÷ 0 `†H
e
0 `†H
e
0 `†H
e
*0, `†H
†øE
0`†H
†øE



‹ñÆ 24766409 `†H
†øE
+0)
$aHR0cHM6Ly9wa2ktcmEuc3ltYXV0aC5jb20=0  *†H†÷

‚

£ÎxÈӎë5‡–.A·ýeÖd Ìa”‰PS™vÛĕÏÌ$ú«Ê£L;Ë÷W©sŒ*Îåä‘1“ÖòÈ#Hi¶­K.%£ŽèÌØ9Ӈ³Š}÷ºÜªšQTeŠ&2_t4ì$‡Ã€¡×‹õïÍNÅ}œŒ.Š¶¬º¿œæ¶CÀ€u`ˆXáÖ0˲E`KÑïø¯9KODÉœÍ*Eé}‚ý›Ç-`éxÐpŒ PÁlܛ~1Á¥;vs:8¡A5*_Ž-«>ñ|éŒ(ò~3 ÚòðñVÔ?³ŸAp9‡žÃ*üŠ@R\ƒ±°ã§|[é#.—Eø1‚0‚

0Þ0É10 UUS10U Symantec Corporation10USymantec Trust Network1503U,Class 2 Managed PKI Individual Subscriber CA1C0AU:Symantec Class 2 Shared Intermediate Certificate Authorityiþ¶µÁÌÝ#Ã,{ÛÐ0 + ‚ý0 *†H†÷
1 *†H†÷

0 *†H†÷
1 140922123352Z0# *†H†÷
1œK㎌†[€€Ø²ÊôŠ)Z0· *†H†÷
1©0Š0 `†H
e
*0 *†H†÷ 0 `†H
e
0 `†H
e
0*†H†÷ €0 *†H†÷ 
@0+0 *†H†÷ 
(0+0 `†H
e0 `†H
e0 `†H
e
0 *†H†÷ 0ï +

‚71á0Þ0É10 UUS10U Symantec Corporation10USymantec Trust Network1503U,Class 2 Managed PKI Individual Subscriber CA1C0AU:Symantec Class 2 Shared Intermediate Certificate Authorityiþ¶µÁÌÝ#Ã,{ÛÐ0ñ*†H†÷
1á Þ0É10 UUS10U Symantec Corporation10USymantec Trust Network1503U,Class 2 Managed PKI Individual Subscriber CA1C0AU:Symantec Class 2 Shared Intermediate Certificate Authorityiþ¶µÁÌÝ#Ã,{ÛÐ0  *†H†÷


‚
5zÖLJqñðâYö5ÔB8·SÖ-§‡„VwA¹b]8Qøo€ì»Íä%}e¥4ÞJãbß@·áøUXHŽLŽ§µ?ûþoRgðáҘNÈ5»ö/{Žèâ…Òa`I™Äœ¥ÕiXR(œ™wæ¹Î¶™Z›JÝg˜Ž}Ûm><ßá`ç» ?TÃjšÖRðÜu”%ÝyÕuš¿d6'ßœcteš£Ì‚9ô#u° ·r3~­ÎV(Ë!›hË£U_^FÞõV1Ü[ˆÐùËí΂kz"Ùq’@2()ÍÁD5ÎmûU“Yå<«PñWúìĔ’d W†"·Ý‘ÓÌ]-