<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16525" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=984220609-29082007>Chuck, see replies below.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=984220609-29082007>Philip</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=984220609-29082007></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=224571521-27082007><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=224571521-27082007><U><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Last paragraph on page 9</FONT></U></SPAN></DIV>
<UL dir=ltr>
<LI>
<DIV align=left><SPAN class=224571521-27082007><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT
face=Arial><FONT size=2>I am not totally clear on what "Agreed" means.
</FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN><SPAN class=224571521-27082007><FONT
color=#0000ff><FONT face=Arial><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=984220609-29082007></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<LI>
<DIV align=left><SPAN class=224571521-27082007><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT
face=Arial><FONT size=2><SPAN class=984220609-29082007> <FONT
color=#000000>This was a group of 70 most of whom spoke for themselves or
their organisation. No attempt was made to assess support by GNSO constituency
or other interest grouping. No votes were conducted. Agreed recommendations
were supported unanimously or by a substantial majority present at the
relevant meeting when that item was discussed, and then received
insufficient objections to downgrade
them.</FONT></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV></LI></UL>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=224571521-27082007><U><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Page 19, 1st paragraph</FONT></U></SPAN></DIV>
<UL dir=ltr>
<LI>
<DIV align=left><SPAN class=224571521-27082007><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT
face=Arial><FONT size=2>The reference to RAA clause 3.7.7.3 appears to me to
cover the case when a registrant licenses use of a domain name
registration to a proxy service provider but, if I understand correctly,
there are also lots of cases where a proxy service provider is the actual
registrant and the proxy service provider licences use of the domain name
registration to what could be referred to as the underlying user of the
name. Did the WG discuss the second scenario? The 'Agreed'
statement says, "In order to avoid a third layer between the underlying
Registrant and the OPOC, where a proxy service exists, the proxy and the first
designated OPOC must be one and the same." Can I assume that 'underlying
Registrant' could also mean the 'underlying licensee' in cases where the proxy
service provider is actually the offical registrant?<SPAN
class=984220609-29082007><FONT
color=#000000> </FONT></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<LI>
<DIV align=left><SPAN class=224571521-27082007><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT
face=Arial><FONT size=2><SPAN class=984220609-29082007><FONT color=#000000>The
objective here is to avoid layers of obfuscation. All help from our service
providers is
welcome.</FONT> </SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV></LI></UL>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=224571521-27082007><U><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Page 24, Implementation Options</FONT></U></SPAN></DIV>
<UL dir=ltr>
<LI>
<DIV align=left><SPAN class=224571521-27082007><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT
face=Arial><FONT size=2>The last option is: "other e.g. good
faith". When I combine this with the lead in before the bullets,
it would say, "Reason for Request is a reasonable suspicion of good
faith." Should this say 'lack of good faith' instead of 'good
faith'?<SPAN class=984220609-29082007><FONT
color=#000000> </FONT></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<LI>
<DIV align=left><SPAN class=224571521-27082007><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT
face=Arial><FONT size=2><SPAN class=984220609-29082007><FONT
color=#000000>Poor editing - apologies. No. The "good faith" was a later
addition. It is misplaced with the lead
in.</FONT> </SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV></LI></UL>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=224571521-27082007><U><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Page 27, Implementation Options</FONT></U></SPAN></DIV>
<UL dir=ltr>
<LI>
<DIV align=left><SPAN class=224571521-27082007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>12 hour and 72 hour time frames seem awfully short in cases where a
registrant may be traveling, etc. Did the WG discuss such time
frames? Did the WG conclude that such time frames were
reasonable?</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<LI>
<DIV align=left><SPAN class=224571521-27082007><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT
face=Arial><FONT size=2>The last bullet says, "Existing provisions in certain
Registry agreements may provide an implementation solution." This is
also stated elsewhere. What provisions are referenced here?<SPAN
class=984220609-29082007><FONT
color=#000000> </FONT></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<LI>
<DIV align=left><SPAN class=224571521-27082007><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT
face=Arial><FONT size=2><SPAN class=984220609-29082007><FONT
color=#000000>Implementation options are just that - options. I simply wanted
to record the suggestions mentioned by group members but to make it clear they
were NOT policy.</FONT></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV></LI></UL>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=224571521-27082007><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2><U>Page 53 ff</U></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<UL dir=ltr>
<LI>
<DIV align=left><SPAN class=224571521-27082007><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT
face=Arial><FONT size=2>What do the numercial numbers in the column headings
mean? 25.4, 2.9, etc.<SPAN class=984220609-29082007><FONT
color=#000000> </FONT></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<LI>
<DIV align=left><SPAN class=224571521-27082007><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT
face=Arial><FONT size=2><SPAN class=984220609-29082007><FONT
color=#000000>25.4 is the 25th day of April 2007.
</FONT> </SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV></LI></UL></BODY></HTML>