<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=iso-8859-1">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 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;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Avenir;
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;
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;
color:black;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0cm;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:0cm;
margin-left:36.0pt;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:black;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
color:black;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle23
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle24
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.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:148254187;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-1090600258 67698703 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0A7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0B7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0A7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0B7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0A7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
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]-->
</head>
<body bgcolor="white" lang="EN-GB" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">For the gTLDs, I’m afraid I still do not properly understand where fundamental authority lies, so please bear with me chuck: I’ll
get there one day…<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">On 1, the {putative] registry operator requests a delegation. I assume that it would be for ICANN to agree to grant and to show this
by signing a contract. If it refused to for reasons that failed the “bylaw test,” an IRP against ICANN would seem to be appropriate. But there might be other reasons – community objections, or GAC opposition or even failure to meet the criteria. So wouldn’t
“might be applicable” be correct here?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">On 2: I guess this would be the same for a ccTLD as for a gTLD. This would appear to fail PTI (or future IANA functions operator)
obligations to ICANN under its contract. I think I’m with Becky on this: a bylaw requirement on ICANN to enforce its contract with PTI would seem to be the simplest approach and an IRP could then challenge ICANN for failure. But is there a more direct approach
here: this would appear to be likely to fail one or more of the SLEs. It should be reported to the CSC, which (if there is refusal to correct) would escalate to RySG and/or ccNSO which would then decide on further action (a special IFR which could then lead
to a RfP). I have a certain antipathy to parallel paths and would certainly prefer the more “resolution-based” CSC to the more legalistic IRP.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">And, in the case of ccTLDs, judging whether there is justification to reject (or simply delay) might be difficult.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">For 3: this would seem to me to be a CSC issue – that’s what they are there for, complete with their own processes to resolve the
problem. I guess that an obligation to enforce the contract would make it easier for the CSC to guarantee access to ICANN should PTI remain obdurate (and that might be particularly relevant in a post PTI world, should ICANN have to rebid the contract).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">For me the fundamental reason why we might want to invoke an IRP would be that PTI is ignoring agreed policy (or seeking to impose
its own ideas, as ICANN did in the early days).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Imagine PTI decides it wants to impose a contract on all its “customers” (where few ccTLDs have contracts and where (if I understand
right) gTLDs have their authority from the contract they sign with ICANN. That TLDs denied service unless they accept a condition that is not in policy (and therefore should be in breach of its contract with ICANN) should have the right to appeal through
the IRP would seem to me to be reasonable use of an IRP. Hanging around waiting for the ccNSO & GNSO to initiate a special IFR and then trigger remedial action and/or separation for an attempt at extension of power by PTI would seem to me possible, but not
optimum.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Happy to hear thoughts.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Martin<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"> cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org
[mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Gomes, Chuck<br>
<b>Sent:</b> 25 January 2016 13:50<br>
<b>To:</b> Matthew Shears <mshears@cdt.org>; jrobinson@afilias.info; cwg-stewardship@icann.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [CWG-Stewardship] CCWG-ACCT Request for Guidance on PTI - IRP - Please respond by 23h59 UTC Monday 25 January 2016<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Let me give a few examples where I think that the IRP would be applicable:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2"><![if !supportLists]><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><span style="mso-list:Ignore">1.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><![endif]><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">A gTLD is not delegated as requested by a registry operator without appropriate justification.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2"><![if !supportLists]><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><span style="mso-list:Ignore">2.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><![endif]><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Modification to a zone file record for a gTLD is not made without proper justification.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2"><![if !supportLists]><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><span style="mso-list:Ignore">3.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><![endif]><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">SLEs are not met after applicable procedures are followed.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">I think that we have recommended processes that would hopefully solve problems like the above well before an IRP would be needed, but it those processes
do not work in a timely manner, then an IRP would provide an objective and well-defined option for an appeal. I think the affected registry operator, the RySG or the GNSO should all have standing to use the IRP in cases like the above if needed. The RySG
in its comments over the history of the CWG Stewardship has repeatedly emphasized the need for registry operators to be able to appeal IANA decisions that they believe are contrary to policy.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">I suspect that others could come up with other examples.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Chuck<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" 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 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:windowtext">
<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a> [<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org">mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Matthew Shears<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, January 25, 2016 8:14 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info">jrobinson@afilias.info</a>; <a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org">
cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [CWG-Stewardship] CCWG-ACCT Request for Guidance on PTI - IRP - Please respond by 23h59 UTC Monday 25 January 2016<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span lang="EN-US">Would it be useful to try and list the possible situations where recourse to an appeals mechanism would be used? This might give us a better sense of what type of mechanism would be suited
and whether or not the IRP would be appropriate/adequate?<br>
<br>
Matthew<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">On 22/01/2016 12:33, Jonathan Robinson wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">All,
</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">We have received a direct request (see below) from the CCWG Accountability Co-Chairs for further guidance with respect to the application of the
IRP to the actions (or inactions) of PTI.</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Moreover, we have had input from Sidley via the Client Committee as follows:</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">“Sidley spoke with Becky Burr from CCWG today regarding the CWG dependency for an IRP process. Based on the call, it appears that the open question
for CWG is whether the CWG dependency is adequately met with an ICANN bylaw provision that allows for an IRP if ICANN fails to enforce the contract with PTI (for example, due to a material performance breach by PTI that is not cured) – or whether in addition
to such an ICANN bylaw, a separate process is also required that would give direct customers a right to mediation or arbitration to address SLAs or other service issues. If the latter is required, then in order for CCWG to create such a process, it would
need input from CWG on what the standard of review should be for those types of proceedings and what the type of process would be – for example, would non-binding mediation be sufficient to address a direct customer issue or would binding arbitration be required?
By clarifying this point, CCWG will be better positioned to ensure that the CWG dependency is being met in the CCWG proposal.”</span></i><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">So the essential question is:</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-18.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">A.</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:7.0pt;color:#1F497D">
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Is an ICANN bylaw provision that allows for an IRP if ICANN fails to enforce the contract with PTI (for example, due to a material performance breach by PTI that
is not cured) sufficient?</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">OR</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-18.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">B.</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:7.0pt;color:#1F497D">
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">In addition to such an ICANN bylaw, is a separate process also required that would give direct customers a right to mediation or arbitration to address SLAs or
other service issues? </span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">If B above, what type of process is necessary?</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">As discussed in our CWG meeting yesterday, it will be particularly helpful if when responding to the above, you provide a rationale for your response.</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">In addition, if possible, please make reference to (and be consistent with) the prior work of this CWG Stewardship (such as our proposal in response
to the RFP from the ICG).</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Given that the request from the CCWG Co-Chairs indicates their need to close this item by 28 January, we need to discuss this soon. Accordingly,
we request that you provide input ASAP and, in any event, <u>by 23h59 UTC Monday 25 January 2016</u>.</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Thank-you,</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><br>
Jonathan & Lise</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Co-chairs, CWG Stewardship</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> Alice Jansen [<a href="mailto:alice.jansen@icann.org">mailto:alice.jansen@icann.org</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> 21 January 2016 17:05<br>
<b>To:</b> Lise Fuhr <a href="mailto:Fuhr@etno.eu"><Fuhr@etno.eu></a>; Jonathan Robinson
<a href="mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info"><jrobinson@afilias.info></a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> 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>; Grace Abuhamad
<a href="mailto:grace.abuhamad@icann.org"><grace.abuhamad@icann.org></a>; <a href="mailto:acct-staff@icann.org">
acct-staff@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> CCWG-ACCT Request for Guidance on PTI - IRP</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Avenir",serif">Sent on behalf of CCWG-Accountability Co-Chairs</span></u><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Avenir",serif"> </span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Avenir",serif">Dear Lise, Dear Jonathan,</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Avenir",serif">This is to inform you that further to our call #79, the CCWG-ACCT seeks the CWG-Stewardship’s guidance on the two proposed approaches that were suggested to address the
dependency that relates to PTI compliance through the Independent Review Process (IRP) i.e.: </span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:36.0pt;text-indent:-18.0pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Avenir",serif">1.</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:7.0pt">
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Avenir",serif">Provide direct access to IRP for PTI action or inaction;</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:36.0pt;text-indent:-18.0pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Avenir",serif">2.</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:7.0pt">
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Avenir",serif">Oblige ICANN in Bylaws to ensure PTI compliance, in which case failure to do is covered by IRP.</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Avenir",serif">We are currently in the final stages of discussion to issue our supplemental report and would need to close this item by 28 January. Any prompt feedback you could send
us would be much appreciated. </span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Avenir",serif">We look forward to your guidance.</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Avenir",serif">Thank you</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Avenir",serif">Best regards</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Avenir",serif">Mathieu, Thomas, León</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span lang="EN-US"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">CWG-Stewardship mailing list<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US"><a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US"><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">-- <o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">Matthew Shears | Director, Global Internet Policy & Human Rights Project<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">Center for Democracy & Technology | cdt.org<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">E: <a href="mailto:mshears@cdt.org">mshears@cdt.org</a> | T: +44.771.247.2987<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">CDT's Annual Dinner, Tech Prom, is April 6, 2016. Don't miss out - register at cdt.org/annual-dinner.<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<table class="MsoNormalTable" border="1" cellpadding="0" style="border:none;border-top:solid #AAABB6 1.0pt">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="105" style="width:78.75pt;border:none;padding:11.25pt .75pt .75pt .75pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:22.5pt"><a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient" target="_blank"><span style="text-decoration:none"><img border="0" id="_x0000_i1025" src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/logo-avast-v1.png"></span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
<td width="470" style="width:352.5pt;border:none;padding:15.0pt .75pt .75pt .75pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:22.5pt;line-height:13.5pt"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#41424E">This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast.
<br>
<a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient" target="_blank"><span style="color:#4453EA">www.avast.com</span></a>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:windowtext"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>