<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<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:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@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";}
span.apple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
.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;}
--></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]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Erick,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I am pretty sure I understand everything you said except for your last paragraph: “</span>In the case of gTLDs finally is based in a contract with ICANN, and
IANA is a function. For the majority of ccTLDs the relation is with IANA (the old IANA), and with ICANN as “housing” of IANA. That difference need to be a priority in all the process.<span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">”
The first sentence is fine. The second sentence I am less clear about. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">If all you are saying is that the difference of contractual relationship vs. no contractual relationship needs to be a priority, I agree. Throughout the CWG
process, I have been under the impression that that difference has been emphasized over and over again and everyone seems to support that. I think we all also understand the differences related to the involvement of governments for ccTLDs and that that varies
by ccTLD.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">What I don’t understand is where you think you and I are disagreeing.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Chuck</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> Erick Iriarte [mailto:eiriarte@iriartelaw.com]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, June 01, 2015 9:36 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Gomes, Chuck<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Martin Boyle; jonathan.robinson@afilias.info; cwg-stewardship@icann.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [CWG-Stewardship] GNSO-ccNSO engagement in the Multi-stakeholder model<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hi<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Balance is one of the words, the other is diversity, and with diversity i mean what exactly means for each ccTLD (with their local realities around the world) the relation with IANA now, and will be affected with a change in special in
relation with their local community. (Remenber RC 1591<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">(…)<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">“2) These designated authorities are trustees for the delegated domain, and have a duty to serve the community.<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">The designated manager is the trustee of the top-level domain for both the nation, in the case of a country code, and the global Internet community.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">(…)<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">6) For any transfer of the designated manager trusteeship from one organization to another, the higher-level domain manager (the IANA in the case of top-level domains) must receive communications from both the old organization and the new
organization that assure the IANA that the transfer in mutually agreed, and that the new organization understands its responsibilities.”<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">gTLDs and ccTLDs are not only different, ccTLDs are different between each, and that means the “solution for IANA transition” need to recognized that difference and how will be affected.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">In the case of gTLDs finally is based in a contract with ICANN, and IANA is a function. For the majority of ccTLDs the relation is with IANA (the old IANA), and with ICANN as “housing” of IANA. That difference need to be a priority in all
the process.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Yours,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Erick<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">pd. I’am agree with Martin (this time :) ).<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">El 1/6/2015, a las 8:15, Gomes, Chuck <<a href="mailto:cgomes@verisign.com">cgomes@verisign.com</a>> escribió:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Martin,</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I have no argument at all with your conclusion that “</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">we – gs and cs –
have at least equal interest in the provision of a well-run IANA functions operator.</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">” I think one cause of any imbalances that may be perceived has to do with the fact
that gTLD registries are just a subset of the GNSO while the ccNSO only involves ccTLD registries, albeit not all of them. That said, I personally support efforts to achieve as much balance as possible between c’s and g’s.</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Chuck</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> </span></span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""><a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org"><span style="color:purple">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</span></a><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>[<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org"><span style="color:purple">mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</span></a>]<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><b>On
Behalf Of<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></b>Martin Boyle<br>
<b>Sent:</b><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Monday, June 01, 2015 3:58 AM<br>
<b>To:</b><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:jonathan.robinson@afilias.info"><span style="color:purple">jonathan.robinson@afilias.info</span></a>;<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org"><span style="color:purple">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</span></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>[CWG-Stewardship] GNSO-ccNSO engagement in the Multi-stakeholder model</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Jonathan,</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">In one of Friday’s calls I noted the imbalance between GNSO and ccNSO (and wider ccTLD) engagement in the various entities the model is putting in place. You
responded that the GNSO is not an homogenous organisation. I let the discussion drop, not because I was happy with the response, but because I was getting no traction in the discussion and did not want to delay it any further.</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">However, I would like to at least put on the record why I think the current imbalance is wrong and gives too much say to a GNSO-skewed view of the IANA.</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">I’m sure that the traditional balance in favour of the gTLD-centric view of the universe works fine in an ICANN setting, given that most of this is about policy-making
and relatively little of this implicates ccTLDs. This is the main reason for the disproportionate funding of ICANN’s costs between the GNSO and ccNSO: simply put, ccTLDs use considerably less of ICANN’s resources.</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">However, for the IANA, without exact figures to hand, I would expect the balance in use between ccTLDs and gTLDs of the IANA services to be much more equal and
most ccTLDs recognise the need for fair funding of the IANA functions operation. Certainly I’d say we – gs and cs – have at least equal interest in the provision of a well-run IANA functions operator.</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">But a serious alarm went up for me a few weeks ago when I had an extended exchange on list with Chuck and Milton about ICANN instructions to IANA. (For many
of you, this must have seemed like an esoteric discussion. I’d say it was symptomatic of a fundamental issue that we are failing to address.)</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">The gTLD view of life (in this case) was all about ICANN giving instructions to the IANA functions operator. That is certainly not the case for ccTLDs, but
I got a lot of abuse for pointing this out. It only was resolved when the ICANN (ccNSO-focussed) secretariat was asked to clarify. In a post transition world, I’m not sure how easy it we will be able to draw on this experience and knowledge to back up a
point.</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">That is my fundamental concern about the imbalance between the ccNSO and GNSO. Especially a concern as the constituent parts of the GNSO are heavily policy
focussed. It will be so easy for the GNSO representatives in various discussions to focus on gTLD issues (ignoring that ccTLD delegations and redelegations are actually usually well outside an ICANNic framework) and misshape the discussion accordingly. </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">I’m not sure that the current proposed imbalance will be sustainable in the long term unless it is very clear that different needs are respected. (In the same
way, in the ccTLD world, we need to be very cautious about not applying inappropriate blanket rules.)</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Simply ignoring the significant number of ccTLD comments about the imbalance might be an easy solution, but it is not a good compromise.</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">I hope that this helps colleagues understand my very real concerns about our direction of travel.</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Martin</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"">_______________________________________________<br>
CWG-Stewardship mailing list<br>
</span><a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";color:purple">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</span></a><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif""><br>
</span><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";color:purple">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>