March 2013 - ispcp - lists.icann.org

the comments on Stéphane's post about the RAA process are interesting
by Mike O'Connor March 11, 2013

March 11, 2013

hi all, some of you probably saw this post by Stéphane "Mishandling the Registrar Contract Negotiations" when it came out. but you may have missed the interesting comments that have built up behind it. http://www.circleid.com/posts/20130308_mishandling_the_registrar_contract_n… mikey PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)

2 1

Proposed Modification of GNSO PDP Manual to Address the Suspension of a PDP
by Mike O'Connor March 11, 2013

March 11, 2013

hi all, i was reviewing this proposal today and realized that it would have been helpful when we were deciding to suspend the DSSA last December. as it was, we went ahead and suspended it on our own, without checking back with our respective ACs and SOs. having a more formal process would have given us the opportunity to bring broader attention to that decision. so i could either write a personal comment of support as co-chair of that working group, or i could write one for us and use that as an example. i'm not envisioning a really long comment, just an expression of support. thoughts? mikey Begin forwarded message: > From: "ICANN News Alert" <communications(a)icann.org> > Subject: ICANN News Alert -- Proposed Modification of GNSO PDP Manual to Address the Suspension of a PDP > Date: March 7, 2013 8:09:24 PM CST > To: <mike(a)haven2.com> > > > News Alert > > http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-07mar13-en.htm > > Proposed Modification of GNSO PDP Manual to Address the Suspension of a PDP > 7 March 2013 > > Forum Announcement: Comment Period Opens on Date: 7 March 2013 > Categories/Tags: > Policy Processes > Reviews/Improvements > Purpose (Brief): The Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) is recommending a modification of the GNSO Policy Development Process (PDP) Manual, which is an integral part of the GNSO Operating Procedures, to address the possible termination or suspension of a PDP. > Public Comment Box Link: http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/pdp-suspension-07mar13-en.htm > > > This message was sent to mike(a)haven2.com from: > ICANN | 12025 Waterfront Drive Suite 300 | Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 > Email Marketing by > > Manage Your Subscription > PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)

3 2

Links to GNSO weekend working sessions
by WUKnoben March 11, 2013

March 11, 2013

FYI Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Glen de Saint Géry Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 3:51 PM To: gnso-chairs(a)icann.org Subject: [gnso-chairs] Links to GNSO weekend working sessions GNSO Working Session Beijing Saturday 2013-04-06 https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/GNSO+Working+Sessio… GNSO Working Session Beijing Sunday 2013-04-07 https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/GNSO+Working+Sessio… Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Notes from ICANN's expert working group on gTLD Directory Services meeting - 26-27 February
by Mike O'Connor March 10, 2013

March 10, 2013

hi all. ICANN just posted the notes from the Whois-replacement expert group. here's the link https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/40932713/Public+Report+of+… mikey PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)

1 0

RV: [council] Proposed 2013 RAA Posted for Comment
by Novoa, Osvaldo March 8, 2013

March 8, 2013

All, I think you should all be aware of this situation and consider if we should post any comment on the proponed RAA. I think we should. Best regards, Osvaldo ________________________________ De: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] En nombre de Volker Greimann Enviado el: Viernes, 08 de Marzo de 2013 12:10 CC: council(a)gnso.icann.org List Asunto: Re: [council] Proposed 2013 RAA Posted for Comment To complete the set of documents, I am fowarding the statement of the RrSG Negotiation Team on the current state of the negotiations. Please note that the proposal currently envisioned by ICANN will effectively move the policy development process from the GNSO to the board. Most of the still contentious areas of the agreement are additions ICANN staff made this February after having let the negotiations languish in pause-mode for three months after the Toronto meeting and contain items that were never discussed with the registrar negotiation team since first proposed, due to other "matters of higher urgency". This agreement is a portent of things to come and of a move away from the multi-stakeholder model to a top-down structure. Registrar Stakeholder Group Negotiating Team (Registrar NT) statement regarding RAA negotiations After nearly 18 months of negotiations with ICANN over a new Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA), formal negotiations have concluded. The posting of a "proposed" 2013 RAA by ICANN for public comment signals that ICANN staff believes that negotiations have concluded and the remaining issues will not be resolved. The Registrars' NT disagrees. To be clear, this is NOT the outcome that registrars wanted, and they remain ready and willing to continue negotiations. Prior to the Toronto ICANN meeting (October 2012), all parties acknowledged that they were very close to agreement on all remaining issues. The process appeared to be reaching a favorable conclusion and when ICANN CEO Fadi Chehadé communicated his desire to have RAA negotiations wrapped up by the end of 2012, registrars felt it was an ambitious timeframe, but one worth pursuing for the benefit of all parties. When negotiations finally resumed in February 2013 much to the surprise of registrars, the few remaining issues were not the only items under discussion. ICANN staff presented a list of 10 brand new items for inclusion in the agreement, under the pretext of enhancing the "public interest." Furthermore, these new items came along with an arbitrary deadline and decision to link the 2013 RAA to the new gTLD timeline. Among these new demands was a Registrant Rights and Responsibilities document (R3), a temporary privacy accreditation program and a requirement that registrars accept and implement recommendations of the WHOIS Expert Working Group, which had yet to be formed and whose work is just beginning. Although registrars were surprised by these new demands, registrars worked in good faith with ICANN to accommodate its intentions. For example, registrars consulted with their members to fine-tune the R3 document to make it easier to understand and readily translatable in other languages. Some of the other new items for inclusion transcend the RAA and could affect the entirety of the multi-stakeholder model. For example, ICANN insisted on including a proposed Revocation (or "blow up") Clause that would have given them the ability to unilaterally terminate all registrar accreditations. After major pushback, ICANN staff relented and in its place proposed giving the ICANN Board the ability to unilaterally amend the RAA. This is identical to what ICANN inserted into the proposed new gTLD registry agreement-a clause met with strong opposition not only from the Registry Stakeholder Group but from the broader ICANN community. The effect of such a clause in the primary agreements between ICANN and its commercial stakeholders would be devastating to the bottom-up, multi-stakeholder model. First, it will effectively mean the end of the GNSO's PDP, as the Board will become the central arena for all controversial issues, not the community. Second, it creates an imbalance of authority in the ICANN model, with no limits on the scope or frequency of unilateral amendments, and no protections for registrars and more important registrants. In addition to the new items for inclusion there was a surprise announcement that all new gTLD registries must only use registrars that have signed the 2013 RAA, a transparent effort by ICANN to arbitrarily link the new gTLD program to the outcome of RAA negotiations. This requirement would create separate "classes" or "levels" of registrars, which is unprecedented in the DNS industry. There can and must be only one meaning of "ICANN-Accredited." All of the items that have been agreed to over the past 18 months would, by themselves, produce an RAA that is vastly improved over the current 2009 version. If adopted, that RAA would significantly raise performance requirements for every ICANN accredited registrar and bring dramatic improvements to the domain name ecosystem. Nearly all of the Law Enforcement requests that were endorsed by the GAC have been included, as well as the major items that were requested by the GNSO are included in that RAA. That RAA would bring registrant verification. That RAA would bring enhanced compliance tools. Registrars must emphasize that the key differences between that RAA and the one currently proposed by ICANN are not issues raised by Law Enforcement, GAC or the GNSO but by ICANN staff. It now moves to the greater ICANN community to review these competing draft RAAs, and registrars look forward to those public discussions. We welcome engagement with all stakeholders on the new 2013 RAA, and what it means for registrars, registrants, and the management of the DNS as a whole. https://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/proposed-raa-07mar13-en.htm Proposed 2013 RAA Posted for Comment Comment / Reply Periods (*) Comment Open Date: 7 March 2013 Comment Close Date: 28 March 2013 - 23:59 UTC Reply Open Date: 29 March 2013 Reply Close Date: 19 April 2013 - 23:59 UTC Important Information Links Public Comment Announcement<https://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-07mar13-en.htm> To Submit Your Comments (Forum)<mailto:comments-proposed-raa-07mar13@icann.org> View Comments Submitted<http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-proposed-raa-07mar13/> Brief Overview Originating Organization: ICANN Categories/Tags: * Contracted Party Agreements Purpose (Brief): ICANN is seeking public comments on a Proposed 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA), particularly on areas where ICANN and the Registrar Negotiating Team have not been able to reach agreement in principle. This represents the first time in the nearly 18 months of negotiations that community comment is formally sought on this document. Current Status: ICANN and the Registrar Negotiating Team commenced negotiation on amendments to the RAA in October 2011. While the documents posted today show many areas of agreement, there are differences between the ICANN and Registrar positions are highlighted. In addition, further discussion is still ongoing regarding some of the specifications to the agreement. Next Steps: After review of the comment received, the proposed 2013 RAA will be reviewed to determine if further changes are warranted. In addition, ICANN and the Registrar NT are likely to continue discussions regarding the areas where the specifications remain open. The ultimate goal is to have a 2013 RAA completed and approved in the near future. Staff Contact: Samantha Eisner, Senior Counsel Email Staff Contact<mailto:samantha.eisner@icann.org?subject=More%20information%20on%20the%20Proposed%202013%20RAA%20Posted%20for%20Comment%20public%20comment%20period> Detailed Information Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose: After nearly 18 months of negotiations, ICANN is posting a new version of the proposed 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA) for public comment. The Registrar Negotiating Team (NT) has continued to engage in good faith negotiations to understand ICANN's perspective with respect to the outstanding issues, and to share the often divergent positions within the Registrar Stakeholder Group. Recently, additional revisions were proposed by ICANN's Negotiating Team stemming from the call by ICANN's CEO, Fadi Chehadé, to work to improve the image of the domain industry and to protect registrants through a further updated contractual framework. The Registrar NT considered each of these new issues, and worked towards finding solutions where appropriate. The RAA posted today reflects hard-fought concessions on many of key issues raised throughout the negotiations, and highlights issues remaining in order for the final 2013 RAA agreement to be reached. Throughout the RAA and its Specifications, there are portions where two versions of draft text appear side by side. These highlight areas where ICANN and the Registrars have not been able to reach agreement in principle on an issue, therefore both positions are provided for comment. Unless otherwise noted, the remainder of the document reflects agreements in principle among ICANN and the Registrar NT. A fuller discussion of the status of negotiations and areas of difference is available in ICANN's RAA Posting Memorandum<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/memo-07mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 66 KB]. Section II: Background: The current round of negotiations over the RAA began in October 2011. ICANN and the Registrar Negotiation Team have presented updates to the community at each of ICANN's public meetings since that time. Information on the history of the negotiations, including previously released documentation, is available at the community wiki at https://community.icann.org/display/RAA/Negotiations+Between+ICANN+and+Regi…. This includes the group of documents posted in June 2012, which demonstrated the progress to date in the negotiations. Section III: Document and Resource Links: There are multiple documents for review as part of this posting. The new RAA is anticipated to be a base document with a series of specifications attached. This posting includes all documents that are currently anticipated to be part of the 2013 a. As noted above, a fuller discussion of the status of negotiations and areas of difference is available in ICANN's RAA Posting Memorandum<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/memo-07mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 66 KB]. The base RAA documents: * Proposed 2013 RAA, Annotated to Show Differences Between ICANN and Registrar Positions<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-agreement-07mar1…> [PDF, 281 KB] * Redline showing changes between Proposed 2013 RAA and the June 2012 RAA Posting<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-agreement-03jun1…> [PDF, 205 KB] * Redline showing changes between Proposed 2013 RAA and the 2009 RAA<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-agreement-2009-r…> [PDF, 259 KB] * A Summary of Changes from the June 2012 RAA Posting<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-agreement-summar…> [PDF, 268 KB] is also available. The Specifications and Addendums: For the Consensus and Temporary Policy Specification, the Data Retention Specification, and the Whois Accuracy Program Specification, each is available in annotated format to show where differences remain with the registrars, as well as redlines showing the differences in the documents from the 2012 posting. * Proposed Consensus and Temporary Policy Specification, Annotated to Show Differences Between ICANN and Registrar Positions<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-consensus-tempor…> [PDF, 121 KB] * Redline showing changes between to the Consensus and Temporary Policy Specification and the June 2012 Version<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-consensus-tempor…> [PDF, 95 KB] * Proposed Data Retention Specification, Annotated to Show Differences Between ICANN and Registrar Positions<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-data-retention-0…> [PDF, 113 KB] * Redline showing changes between to the Data Retention Specification and the June 2012 Version<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-data-retention-r…> [PDF, 118 KB] * Proposed Whois Accuracy Program Specification, Annotated to Show Differences Between ICANN and Registrar Positions<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-whois-accuracy-0…> [PDF, 116 KB] * Redline showing changes between to the Whois Accuracy Program Specification and the June 2012 Version<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-whois-accuracy-r…> [PDF, 142 KB] For the remaining specifications to the RAA, the versions below are provided as ICANN's latest proposal. The Registrar Negotiation Team is still considering each of these specifications: * Proposed Registrant Rights and Responsibilities Specification<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-registrant-right…> [PDF, 48 KB] * ICANN Proposed Specification on Proxy/Privacy Services<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-privacy-proxy-07…> [PDF, 70 KB] * ICANN Proposed Additional Registrar Operation Specification<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-additional-opera…> [PDF, 78 KB] * ICANN Proposed Registrar Information Specification<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-registrar-inform…> [PDF, 76 KB] * ICANN Proposed Whois Specification<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-whois-07mar13-en…> [PDF, 160 KB] * ICANN Proposed Compliance Certificate<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-compliance-certi…> [PDF, 64 KB] * ICANN Proposed Transition Addendum <https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-transition-adden…> [PDF, 63 KB] Section IV: Additional Information: None ________________________________ (*) Comments submitted after the posted Close Date/Time are not guaranteed to be considered in any final summary, analysis, reporting, or decision-making that takes place once this period lapses. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org ________________________________ El presente correo y cualquier posible archivo adjunto está dirigido únicamente al destinatario del mensaje y contiene información que puede ser confidencial. Si Ud. no es el destinatario correcto por favor notifique al remitente respondiendo anexando este mensaje y elimine inmediatamente el e-mail y los posibles archivos adjuntos al mismo de su sistema. Está prohibida cualquier utilización, difusión o copia de este e-mail por cualquier persona o entidad que no sean las específicas destinatarias del mensaje. ANTEL no acepta ninguna responsabilidad con respecto a cualquier comunicación que haya sido emitida incumpliendo nuestra Política de Seguridad de la Información This e-mail and any attachment is confidential and is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not intended recipient please inform the sender immediately, answering this e-mail and delete it as well as the attached files. Any use, circulation or copy of this e-mail by any person or entity that is not the specific addressee(s) is prohibited. ANTEL is not responsible for any communication emitted without respecting our Information Security Policy.

2 1

Re-Submitting a Motion Revised 20 February
by WUKnoben March 7, 2013

March 7, 2013

All, on request of the GNSO council the Standing Commitee of Improvements (SCI) was investigating whether and under which circumstances and conditions permission should be granted that council members may re-submit a motion which the council in the past already dealt with. Since so far there is no consensus on one way or the other attached you’ll find the options the SCI came up with. Please take a look and let us know which one you’d prefer if any Regards Wolf-Ulrich

2 1

Fw: [council] Reminder: Whois Registrant ID Study Webinar Invitation
by WUKnoben March 5, 2013

March 5, 2013

FYI Best regards Wolf-Ulrich Knoben From: Glen de Saint Géry Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 11:22 AM To: mailto:council@gnso.icann.org Subject: [council] Reminder: Whois Registrant ID Study Webinar Invitation http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-04mar13-en.htm Whois Registrant ID Study Webinar Invitation 4 March 2013 You are invited to a review of the findings of the Registrant ID Study Draft Report, recently published for public comment. The authors of the report (NORC) and ICANN Policy Staff will provide a briefing on Wednesday 6 March at 12.00 UTC and Wednesday 6 March at 19.00 UTC to summarize the findings from the WHOIS Registrant ID Study. The webinar will cover the methodology used to compile the data and provide an analysis of the findings. The two sessions will be identical, scheduled to accommodate different time zones. Each session, scheduled to run 90 minutes, will be conducted in English only. The meeting will be run in Adobe Connect with a slide presentation along with a dial-in conference bridge for audio. During the course of the webinar, questions may be submitted using the chat function of Adobe Connect. Participants also will have the opportunity to ask questions at the end of each session. If you are not able to participate in either of the live sessions, a recording of the session will be made available shortly after the meeting. The policy staff always is available to answer questions that you email to policy-staff(a)icann.org. In order to participate, please RSVP via email to the GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org) to receive the call details. Please indicate which call you would like to join, Wednesday at 12.00 UTC or Wednesday at 19.00 UTC (to convert those times into your local time, see: http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedform.html) We will send you an email reminder before the event with log-in and dial-in details. Please DO NOT RSVP to any other ICANN staff members e-mail address. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0