We have submitted the following comment to the ccNSO DRDWG. -ed ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Eduardo Diaz <eduardodiazrivera@gmail.com> Date: Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 5:53 PM Subject: Comment on: ccNSO Working Group Paper on Delegation, Redelegation and Retirement of ccTLDs To: drd-analysis-report@icann.org To whom it may concern: This is my feedback regarding the work done by the DRDWG and published for comments. Q1: Is the methodology developed and employed adequate for the purposes of the DRDWG? Feedback1: It seems to be adequate but convoluted. Q2: Do the policy statements identified provide an adequate baseline to evaluate the actual practices of IANA and the ICANN Board relative to delegation, re-delegation and retirement of ccTLDs? Feedback2: Yes, however if IANA is directed by its own set of by-laws similar to what ICANN has, they should have been included as part of the the analysis. Q3: Are there other policy statements which are applicable to the work of the DRDWG? Should they be included in the baseline? Feedback3: Same as comment in Q2. Q4: Does the documentation identified provide an adequate representation of the actual practices of IANA and the ICANN Board relative to delegation, redelegation and retirement of ccTLDs? Q5:Should other cases be included for analyses? Q6: Is there other documentation which is applicable to the work of the DRDWG which should be analyzed? Feedback4/5/6: I would like to bring to the DRDWG attention the case of the ccTLD .pr. This ccTLD was redelegated by IANA in 2007 from University of Puerto Rico (who was the Sponsoring Organization at that time) to Gauss Research Laboratory, Inc (a new for-profit Sponsoring Organization) without the consent of the University of Puerto Rico. In this case, IANA made the redelegation without informing ICANN Board for they said (IANA) that it was made to and quote: “...reflect a structural reorganization...”. The DRDWG should analyze: Was the action taken based on current policy?, Is a full-redelegation vs. an administrative one clearly defined?, Should there be policies in place to prevent making decisions based on a possible policy interpretation and/or when appropriate due diligence is not performed? More recently, we received the following words from Kim Davies clarifying some aspects of the 2007 .pr redelegation: “With respect to the administrative change of the Sponsoring Organisation of .PR in 2007, such change met the criteria for such a change at that time. As it is a requirement that the Sponsoring Organisation does not object to such a change, ICANN was satisfied that the University of Puerto Rico did not disapprove of that change at that time. Other than that, it is ICANN's practice to keep working dialogue between the parties in executing root zone changes in confidence. You should contact the University or Gauss if you wish them to disclose documentation concerning that request. Kim Davies Internet Assigned Numbers Authority Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 6:34 PM” I have included the letter from the University of Puerto Rico stating that they did not authorized the redelegation and an email communication from David Conrad explaining why IANA allowed the re-delegation without any announcement or ICAN's board approval. Q7:Was the methodology properly applied to the cases? Feedback7: Yes, however in a couple of instances, for example 2.4.4 where it says in the last sentence : “This is of interest to the DRDWG. ” there should be a definition or clarification as to what this statement means. Overall I believe that the DRDWG has done an excellent and important job here. Eduardo Diaz ISOC-PR -- NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If you have received this communication by error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message. -- NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If you have received this communication by error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message.