<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>Dear Rafael</div><div>Even though I may know the answer but I leave it to Beckie,GNSO or other to provide answers to your detailed questions regarding Carve-out</div><div>Regards</div><div>Kavousd</div><div><br>Sent from my iPhone</div><div><br>On 5 Feb 2016, at 10:58, Perez Galindo, Rafael <<a href="mailto:RPEREZGA@minetur.es">RPEREZGA@minetur.es</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@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;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Avenir Next";
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
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
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0cm;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0cm;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Texto de globo Car";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EstiloCorreo18
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.TextodegloboCar
{mso-style-name:"Texto de globo Car";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Texto de globo";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EstiloCorreo22
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:1769884195;
mso-list-template-ids:-1207301236;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:36.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:72.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:108.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:144.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:180.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:216.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:252.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:288.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:324.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:1888837964;
mso-list-template-ids:-734910544;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Dear all<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Before we can conduct our internal consultations in order to try to get support for this proposal, there are still a couple of elements in Becky’s idea that remain unclear, and hence we kindly ask for clarification, in
order get a full picture and avoid possible unintended side-effects. The questions are:
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">1. We have previously discussed it, but we still fail to understand why this “carve-out” is only applicable to the GAC. If this measure is foreseen to avoid the “two-bites-at-the-apple” situation, for instance the GNSO
is as well in a position of being “judge and part” when it comes to decisions of the Board based on a PDP. In these cases, the GNSO is part (has proposed a policy and the Board has accepted it) and judge (through its participation in the EC, it can participate
through its vote in the rejecting of the challenge to this policy). This situation is unfair to the rest of SO/ACs. What are the reasons for such a privilege? In this vein, although the GAC has a “mutually agreeable procedure to TRY to find a solution”, it
CANNOT force the Board to act according to its advice, therefore a Board decision based on GAC Advice is as free as a Board decision based on GNSO or CCNSO PDP or GNSO Guidance (all three with a 2/3 threshold for rejection by ICANN Board). Why is the GAC singled
out then? <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">2. If this “carve-out” were to be accepted, how would the exclusion of the GAC from a community decision-making process be triggered? Who would decide on such things? Who would control the legality of such a decision?
The carve-out refers generically to “Board decisions” to “implement GAC advice”. But we need to bear in mind that Board decisions very often rely on many different inputs for any decision (a PDP, advice from advisory committees, including the GAC, legal advice,
etc.), and rarely only stem exclusively from GAC advice. Would this “carve-out” mean that where there is a Board decision based on such multiple sources, only one of them being a GAC advice, the GAC would be excluded from any community power related to such
a Board decision? How do we make sure that if such a “carve-out” is accepted it has not these effects, and ONLY applies when the Board acts based ONLY on GAC advice?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">3. What happens if a Board decision is based on GAC advice which in turn is based on international law, relevant national law and/or important reasons of public policy? We should remember that under Rec11 GAC will be
obliged to act under a “no formal objection rule” (full consensus). Should the community be able to overturn such a Board decision without giving the possibility to the GAC to intervene in such a process (based on a GAC consensus)?
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Thank you for possible clarifications.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Best<br>
Rafael<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:gray"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">De:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> <a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a> [<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>]
<b>En nombre de </b>James Gannon<br>
<b>Enviado el:</b> jueves, 04 de febrero de 2016 20:50<br>
<b>Para:</b> Mueller, Milton L; Burr, Becky; Kavouss Arasteh; <a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a>; Mathieu Weill; Thomas Rickert; León Felipe Sánchez Ambía<br>
<b>Asunto:</b> Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Aresteh proposal to resolve Recommendation 1 and 11 issues<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Also lending my support.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">James<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>> on behalf of "Mueller, Milton L" <<a href="mailto:milton@gatech.edu">milton@gatech.edu</a>><br>
<b>Date: </b>Thursday 4 February 2016 at 2:23 p.m.<br>
<b>To: </b>"Burr, Becky" <<a href="mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz">Becky.Burr@neustar.biz</a>>, Kavouss Arasteh <<a href="mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com">kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com</a>>, "<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a>"
<<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a>>, Mathieu Weill <<a href="mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr">mathieu.weill@afnic.fr</a>>, Thomas Rickert <<a href="mailto:thomas@rickert.net">thomas@rickert.net</a>>,
León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <<a href="mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx">leonfelipe@sanchez.mx</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Aresteh proposal to resolve Recommendation 1 and 11 issues<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I also support this compromise proposal
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">--MM
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a> [<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Burr, Becky<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, February 3, 2016 6:19 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Kavouss Arasteh <<a href="mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com">kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com</a>>;
<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a>; Mathieu Weill <<a href="mailto:Mathieu.Weill@afnic.fr">Mathieu.Weill@afnic.fr</a>>; Thomas Rickert <<a href="mailto:thomas@rickert.net">thomas@rickert.net</a>>;
León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <<a href="mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx">leonfelipe@sanchez.mx</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [CCWG-ACCT] Aresteh proposal to resolve Recommendation 1 and 11 issues
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Thank you Kavouss for this suggested approach. We have all been working very hard and in good faith for over a year to develop a consensus proposal. My understanding is that
this is designed to resolve all open issues in Recommendation 1 and 11. I am supportive of this package deal, as described below (the description below was also included in Kavouss’ email). </span><span style="font-family:"Avenir Next","serif";color:black">I</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> appreciate
the collaborative spirit we have brought to the table and hope we can use our Dedicated Rec. 11 call tomorrow to reach consensus!</span><span style="color:black">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:36.0pt">
<span style="font-family:"Avenir Next","serif";color:black">1. Modify </span><span style="font-family:"Avenir Next","serif";color:#3366FF">Rec #1/Annex 1</span><span style="font-family:"Avenir Next","serif";color:black"> and </span><span style="font-family:"Avenir Next","serif";color:#3366FF">Rec
#2/Annex 2</span><span style="font-family:"Avenir Next","serif";color:black"> </span><span style="color:black">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:36.0pt">
<span style="font-family:"Avenir Next","serif";color:black">· Add the following to the end of Paragraph 23 in </span><span style="font-family:"Avenir Next","serif";color:#3366FF">Rec #1/Annex 1</span><span style="font-family:"Avenir Next","serif";color:black">: </span><span style="color:black">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote style="margin-left:30.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<blockquote style="margin-left:30.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p><i><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Avenir Next","serif";color:black">The GAC may not, however, participate as a decision maker in the Empowered Community’s consideration of the exercise a community power for the purpose of challenging or blocking
the Board’s implementation of GAC Advice. In such cases, the GAC remains free to participate in community deliberations in an advisory capacity, but its views will not count towards or against otherwise agreed thresholds needed to initiate a conference call,
convene a Community Forum, or exercise a specific Community Power. This carve out preserves the ICANN Board’s unique obligation to work with the GAC try to find a mutually acceptable solution to implementation of GAC Advice supported by consensus (as defined
in Rec. #11) while protecting the community’s power to challenge such Board decisions.</span></i><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:36.0pt">
<span style="font-family:"Avenir Next","serif";color:black">· Modify the Table in </span><span style="font-family:"Avenir Next","serif";color:#3366FF">Rec. #2/Annex 2</span><span style="font-family:"Avenir Next","serif";color:black"> to reflect this carve
out and add the following language to cover situations that would otherwise require the support of four SOs or ACs:</span><span style="color:black">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote style="margin-left:30.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<blockquote style="margin-left:30.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p><i><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Avenir Next","serif";color:black">The CCWG-Accountability also recommends that in a situation where </span></i><i><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Avenir Next","serif";color:#3366FF">the GAC may not
participate as a Decisional AC because the community power is proposed to be used to challenge the Board’s implementation of GAC Advice </span></i><i><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Avenir Next","serif";color:black">and the threshold is set at four
in support, the power will still be validly exercised if three are in support and no more than one objects. </span></i><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote style="margin-left:30.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Avenir Next","serif";color:black"> 2. Modify Recommendation 11 to reflect 60% threshold for rejection of GAC advice by Board, with note to drafters that
supermajority requirement is not intended to create any presumption or modify the standard applied by the Board in reviewing GAC Advice. </span><span style="color:black">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:18.0pt">
<span style="font-family:"Avenir Next","serif";color:black"> 3. During dedicated Recommendation 11 meetings (4 February and 8 February)</span><span style="color:black">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-left:30.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<ul type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1">
<span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Avenir Next","serif""> Discuss and accept Recommendation 1 with change described above as first final reading;</span><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">
</span><o:p></o:p></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1">
<span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Avenir Next","serif""> Discuss and accept Recommendation 2 with change described above as first final reading; and</span><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">
</span><o:p></o:p></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1">
<span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Avenir Next","serif"">Discuss and accept Recommendation 11 with changes described above as first final reading.</span><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">
</span><o:p></o:p></li></ul>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:18.0pt">
<span style="font-family:"Avenir Next","serif";color:black">4. Submit the package deal to the CCWG for <u>final consideration</u> (2<sup>nd</sup> final reading) at its conference call scheduled for 9 February, noting delicate balance requiring compromise
on all sides to reach consensus and recommending adoption “as is” (assuming consensus on Dedicated Recommendation 11 calls). </span><span style="color:black">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:36.0pt">
<span style="font-family:"Avenir Next","serif";color:black"> </span><span style="color:black">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:black">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:12.0pt;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;color:black">J. Beckwith Burr</span></b><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#3366FF"><br>
</span></b><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#008656">Neustar, Inc.</span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#7D7D7D">/Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer<br>
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006</span><span style="font-size:9.0pt;color:gray"><br>
</span><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#008656">Office:</span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#7D7D7D">+1.202.533.2932
</span><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#008656">Mobile:</span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#7D7D7D">+1.202.352.6367
</span><strong><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#7D7D7D">/</span></strong><span style="color:black"><a href="http://www.neustar.biz"><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#008656">neustar.biz</span></b></a>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Kavouss Arasteh <<a href="mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com">kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com</a>><br>
<b>Date: </b>Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 4:56 PM<br>
<b>To: </b>Accountability Community <<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a>>, Becky Burr <<a href="mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz">becky.burr@neustar.biz</a>>, Mathieu Weill <<a href="mailto:Mathieu.Weill@afnic.fr">Mathieu.Weill@afnic.fr</a>>,
Thomas Rickert <<a href="mailto:thomas@rickert.net">thomas@rickert.net</a>>, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <<a href="mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx">leonfelipe@sanchez.mx</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b><no subject> </span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Dear Esteemed and respectful CCWG Colleagues</span></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> First of all, allow me to share the following thought with you:<br>
We are in a crucial time for the CCWG requiring to act in a coordinated manner on the upcoming Devoted Calls with the aim of assisting the CCWG in finalizing Recommendation 11,including some adjustments in Recommendation 1 which enable CCWG to assemble
the Supplementary Report. This Report needs to be issued well in advance of the Marrakech meeting if the overall timeline for IANA stewardship transition is to be maintained. Given that the CCWG is working hard to agree a compromise in the current round
of virtual meetings,</span></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">I wish to reiterate what I mentioned at various occasions that we need to be pragmatic and tolerable, to be more open to any possible set of solution with a view to find a compromise and not merely
insist on the wishes, requirements and expectations of every single SO and AC but on the contrary make utmost efforts to satisfy ,to the extent practiceable and possible the entire community.</span></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">We are aware of the sensitive elements of Recommendation 1 as well as those of Recommendation 11</span></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">We have made considerable progress to almost bring the views of the interested parties together.</span></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">However, there are some more bits to be done. In ICT network connection, the Last kilometer or perhaps last hundred meters of the connection are sometimes more complex to compared with the entire
network to provide an overall inclusive connection.</span></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">We have succeeded to find workable solutions for many of these last kilometers in various area .It remains to finish that last kilometer which located in a rocky and mountainous area </span></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">We need to also make out utmost effort to move forward from our current position which is different from each other and not rule out compromise as a backward step. Our role is to make concession
towards each other position .We need to take every possible initiative to move forward to timely complete this proposal on enhanced accountability. </span></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Frankly speaking and from a professional view point, and as a participant of CCWG and Liaison of ICG to CCWG, I think we should really be more open, constructively, objectively and efficiently</span></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">To this effect , I wish to suggest a package deal which needs to be accepted or rejected as a whole without being disintegrated/ decomposed .</span></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">The Pack Deal is simple straightforward and practical</span></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<ol style="margin-top:0cm" start="1" type="1">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="color:black;margin-bottom:10.0pt;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo2">
<b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Modify Recommendation 1 to add the language as proposed by Beckie
</span></b><o:p></o:p></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="color:black;margin-bottom:10.0pt;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo2">
<b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Maintain the rest of Recommendation 1
<u>Unchanged</u> </span></b><o:p></o:p></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="color:black;margin-bottom:10.0pt;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo2">
<b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Accept the 60% threshold for GAC advice ,if to be rejected by the Board
</span></b><o:p></o:p></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="color:black;margin-bottom:10.0pt;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo2">
<b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Maintain the rest of Recommendation 11 Unchanged
</span></b><o:p></o:p></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="color:black;margin-bottom:10.0pt;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo2">
<b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">No other discussion ,what so ever, on these two Recommendation
</span></b><o:p></o:p></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="color:black;margin-bottom:10.0pt;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo2">
<b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Submit the <u>
Package Deal</u> to the forthcoming CCWG scheduled to be held on 09 February with a note from Beckie indicating that this is a delicate balance ,a sensitive compromise and recommend to the CCWG to take it as it is
</span></b><o:p></o:p></li></ol>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">I have no intention of being presumptuous about this, and you are of course entirely free to reject my suggestions. Please note that my proposal requires a change to Recommendation 1
<u>and</u> a conforming change to <u>Recommendation 2</u>. To be consistent with our standard procedures, I suggest we conduct 1rst final readings of the compromise during our Dedicated Rec 11 calls (scheduled for 4 Feb and 8 Feb) and the 2nd final reading
during our regular call on 9 Feb. Please note that I have also included Malcolm’s requested clarification regarding no changes with respect to presumptions or standard of review. I do not believe that this text is strictly necessary, but in the interests
of getting everyone on board I think it makes sense to include it. </span></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Package Deal</span></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">1. Modify Rec #1/Annex 1 and Rec #2/Annex 2</span></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> </span></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">· Add the following to the end of Paragraph 23 in Rec #1/Annex 1:
</span></b><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> </span></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><i><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">The GAC may not, however, participate as a decision maker in the Empowered Community’s consideration of the exercise a community power for the purpose of challenging or blocking the Board’s
implementation of GAC Advice. In such cases, the GAC remains free to participate in community deliberations in an advisory capacity, but its views will not count towards or against otherwise agreed thresholds needed to initiate a conference call, convene a
Community Forum, or exercise a specific Community Power. This carve out preserves the ICANN Board’s unique obligation to work with the GAC try to find a mutually acceptable solution to implementation of GAC Advice supported by consensus (as defined in Rec.
#11) while protecting the community’s power to challenge such Board decisions.</span></i></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><i><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> </span></i></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">· Modify the Table in Rec. #2/Annex 2 to reflect this carve out and add the following language to cover situations that would otherwise require the support of four SOs or ACs:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> </span></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><i><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">The CCWG-Accountability also recommends that in a situation where the GAC may not participate as a Decisional AC because the community power is proposed to be used to challenge the Board’s implementation
of GAC Advice and the threshold is set at four in support, the power will still be validly exercised if three are in support and no more than one objects.
</span></i></b><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> </span></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">2. Modify Recommendation 11 to reflect 60% threshold for rejection of GAC advice by Board, with note to drafters that supermajority requirement is not intended to create any presumption or modify
the standard applied by the Board in reviewing GAC Advice. </span></b><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> </span></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">3. During dedicated Recommendation 11 meetings (4 February and 8 February)
</span></b><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> </span></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">· Discuss and accept Recommendation 1 with change described above as first final reading;
</span></b><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">· Discuss and accept Recommendation 2 with change described above as first final reading; and</span></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">· Discuss and accept Recommendation 11 with changes described above as first final reading.
</span></b><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> </span></b><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">4. Submit the package deal to the CCWG for
<u>final consideration</u> (2</span></b><b><sup><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">nd</span></sup></b><b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> final reading) at its conference call scheduled
for 9 February, noting delicate balance requiring compromise on all sides to reach consensus and recommending adoption “as is” (assuming consensus on Dedicated Recommendation 11 calls).
</span></b><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:0cm">
<b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> Kavouss </span></b><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div></blockquote></body></html>