<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Anne,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The proposal identified as Straw Proposal 1 is not mine. Actually, if it was just for my personal beliefs, it would be very different and simpler than that... SP1 was the result of 4 interactions of list discussions and call discussions, and no longer can be attributed to a single person. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">None of the proposals are suggesting Question 23 language; that is way ahead in the SubPro process. What we are developing are the guidelines for writing/updating the questions; some text of SP2 is based on Q23 Language based on your request, but that's not because we are rewriting Question 23 at this point, that's because this was offered as an starting point.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">On the tracks issue, I noticed in the comments that SP1 is silent on whether it would have tracks or not, but suggests a mechanism that likely creates tracks, while SP2 explicitly create tracks. So I don't see that much of a difference between them in this regard. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">1. 2012 applicants were required to list both new registry services and customary registry services. SP1 indeed removes the requirement to list customary registry services, while SP2 does not. </div><div class="">2a. SP1 indeed makes the evaluation of registry services mentioned in the application to explicit go thru RSEP, different from 2012 where the process was modelled to be like RSEP, but was not formally RSEP. </div><div class="">2b. SP1 indeed suggests an option that was not available in 2012, to a service to be proposed to be evaluated at contracting time. The two other possibilites (application and after contracting) would be available both at SP1 and SP2, since application is mentioned in both SP1 and SP2 and after contracting is assured by the Registry Services Policy. </div><div class="">3. Not at all, since no language to Q23 is being proposed. </div><div class="">4. Not at all, since no language to Q23 is being proposed. But the "being offered in a manner unique to the TLD" isn't something that came up in neither SP1 or SP2 languages so far. How would SP1 and SP2 be like incorporating this angle ?</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Rubens</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Sep 5, 2017, at 7:17 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne <<a href="mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com" class="">AAikman@lrrc.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div class="WordSection1" style="page: WordSection1; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;"><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Rubens,<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Are you saying that your Straw Proposal includes a proposal to delete the existing Question 23 language asking applicants to propose specifically any new registry services (and listing customary services) whereas mine proposes to maintain it and establish two tracks for processing – that is, one for Fastrack “no new services” applications and another for regular “proposed new services” applications? For clarity, the existing language is pasted below in purple with my proposal in red. It is not clear to me whether your proposal includes Question 23 text as is (with additions) or whether you want to delete the current text in the application (shown in purple below from existing application). <o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">It appears you propose (and advocate in this debate) four substantive changes:<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; text-indent: -0.25in;" class=""><span class="">1.<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: 'Times New Roman';" class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span></span>Applicant is NOT required to list proposed new registry services in the application as was the case in 2012.<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; text-indent: -0.25in;" class=""><span class="">2.<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: 'Times New Roman';" class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span></span>Applicant can choose when to propose new services (in the application, at contracting, or after contracting) and when they will be evaluated, using only the RSEP procedure.<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; text-indent: -0.25in;" class=""><span class="">3.<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: 'Times New Roman';" class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span></span>You propose to delete the list of “customary services” in Question 23. (BTW for participants, this includes port-43 WHOIS, Web-based Whois, RESTful Whois)<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; text-indent: -0.25in;" class=""><span class="">4.<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: 'Times New Roman';" class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span></span>You propose to delete the text which states that the Applicant must describe whether any of the customary registry services listed are going to be offered in a manner unique to the TLD.<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Is that correct?<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Thank you,<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Anne<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="color: rgb(112, 48, 160);" class="">" 23. Provide name and full description of all the Registry Services to be provided. Descriptions should include both technical and business components of each proposed service, and address any potential security or stability concerns.<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="color: rgb(112, 48, 160);" class="">The following registry services are customary services offered by a registry operator:<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="color: rgb(112, 48, 160);" class="">A. Receipt of data from registrars concerning registration of domain names and name servers.<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="color: rgb(112, 48, 160);" class="">B. Dissemination of TLD zone files.<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="color: rgb(112, 48, 160);" class="">C. Dissemination of contact or other information concerning domain name registrations (e.g., port-43 WHOIS, Web- based Whois, RESTful Whois service).<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="color: rgb(112, 48, 160);" class="">D. Internationalized Domain Names, where offered.<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="color: rgb(112, 48, 160);" class="">E. DNS Security Extensions (DNSSEC). The applicant must describe whether any of<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="color: rgb(112, 48, 160);" class="">these registry services are intended to be offered in a manner unique to the TLD.<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="color: rgb(112, 48, 160);" class="">Additional proposed registry services that are unique to the registry must also be described. <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="color: rgb(192, 0, 0);" class="">"Applicant acknowledges that ICANN may establish two application evaluation tracks which will operate separately, one for applications which propose new registry services and one for applications which contain only the following pre-approved registry services: LIST PRE-APPROVED SERVICES HERE"</span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Anne E. Aikman-Scalese<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Of Counsel<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">520.629.4428 office<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">520.879.4725 fax<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><a href="mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;" class="">AAikman@lrrc.com</a><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">_______________________________<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">One South Church Avenue, Suite 700<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><a href="http://lrrc.com/" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;" class="">lrrc.com</a><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">-----Original Message-----<br class="">From: Rubens Kuhl [<a href="mailto:rubensk@nic.br" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;" class="">mailto:rubensk@nic.br</a>]<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2017 2:43 PM<br class="">To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne<br class="">Cc: Jeff Neuman;<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4@icann.org" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;" class="">gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4@icann.org</a><br class="">Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4] Registry Services straw-person</div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">So we are still missing one from Kurt and Sarah... but so far, we have:<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Straw-proposal 1: (from Sep 1)<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">"Applicants will be allowed but not required to specify additional registry services. List of previously approved registry services (IDN Languages, GPML, BTPPA) to be included by reference in AGB and contract.<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">If applicant informs additional registry services, they will be evaluated thru RSEP. Applicant will choose whether the evaluation is to occur at evaluation time, contracting time or after contract signing."<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Straw-proposal 2:<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">"Applicants should provide name and full description of all the Registry Services to be provided. Descriptions should include both technical and business components of each proposed service, and address any potential security or stability concerns.<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">"Applicant acknowledges that ICANN may establish two application evaluation tracks which will operate separately, one for applications which propose new registry services and one for applications which contain only the following pre-approved registry services: LIST PRE-APPROVED SERVICES HERE"<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">(disclaimer: I compiled the language from Q23 and the mailing list discussion, and is prone to errors since it was not submitted in entirety by proposal author)<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Similarities:<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">- Both foresee pre-approved services and mention a list<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">- Both are silent on whether using only pre-approved services would have a different fee<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Differences between the two so far:<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">- (1) incorporates a list of pre-approved services by reference, although mentioning some, while (2) explicitly names a list<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">- (1) allows a service to be evaluated at contracting time while (2) does not; (* note: although 1 foresees a option after contract signing, that's already a fact due to Registry Services policy *)<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">- (1) is silent of the processing of applications, although in practice create 2 tracks since RSEP is an already established procedure outside of the subsequent procedures evaluation program. (2) explicitly creates two tracks.<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">- (1) only requires applicant to inform about registry services that are not in the pre-approved list while (2) requires all services to be informed and described at application time<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Feedback taken from the latest discussions on the list:<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">- The list of services on (1) and (2) could be expanded to the "minimal pre-approved services" that would be allowed even if there is no such list for already established registry operators.<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">- Some already mentioned the list in AGB as a possible starting point:<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">"A. Receipt of data from registrars concerning registration of domain names and name servers. B. Dissemination of TLD zone files. C. Dissemination of contact or other information concerning domain name registrations (e.g., port -43 WHOIS, Web - based Whois, RESTful Whois service). D. Internationalized Domain Names, where offered. E. DNS Security Extensions (DNSSEC)."<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""></co-chair><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">- The mention of registry services evaluation after contract signing in (1) is probably misplaced, since it's part of a policy not covered in our charter. It's also redundant.<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">- The requirement of specifying pre-approved services in the application in (2) is likely ineffective if there is such a list for registry operators, since a registry could activate them just after contract signing since they are pre-approved. It has an effect though if no such list for registry operators exists at that time.<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">A question arises: do we assume such a list will exist or think on both scenarios ?<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><co-chair><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Any further thoughts, feedback or new straw proposals ?<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Rubens<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> Em 5 de set de 2017, à(s) 18:09:000, Aikman-Scalese, Anne <<a href="mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;" class=""><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration: none;" class="">AAikman@lrrc.com</span></a>> escreveu:<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> Rubens,<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> My Straw Proposal is actually stated in A. below, and yet you have said you did not receive it. It would be good to have the two side by side.<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> Anne<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> Anne E. Aikman-Scalese<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> Of Counsel<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> 520.629.4428 office<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> 520.879.4725 fax<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;" class=""><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration: none;" class="">AAikman@lrrc.com</span></a><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> _____________________________<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> <image003.png><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> One South Church Avenue, Suite 700<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://lrrc.com/" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;" class="">lrrc.com</a><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> From: Rubens Kuhl [<a href="mailto:rubensk@nic.br" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;" class=""><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration: none;" class="">mailto:rubensk@nic.br</span></a>]<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2017 2:05 PM<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> Cc: Jeff Neuman;<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4@icann.org" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;" class=""><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration: none;" class="">gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4@icann.org</span></a><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4] Registry Services straw-person<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> Em 5 de set de 2017, à(s) 17:52:000, Aikman-Scalese, Anne <<a href="mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;" class=""><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration: none;" class="">AAikman@lrrc.com</span></a>> escreveu:<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> Rubens,<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> I have communicated separately with you off-list and to Leadership regarding your response. The following comments are circulated to the entire list:<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> A. Please circulate the second Straw Proposal in addition to your own for comparison purposes. The second proposal is that the language of Question 23 remain the same as in the 2012 round which states that all new services to be offered MUST BE DESCRIBED (see below) with the following addition: “Applicant acknowledges that ICANN may establish two application evaluation tracks which will operate separately, one for applications which propose new registry services and one for applications which contain only the following pre-approved registry services: LIST PRE-APPROVED SERVICES HERE (TO BE DISCUSSED ON THE NEXT CALL).<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> As I mentioned, I haven't received the second straw proposal. I believe Sarah, Kurt, and perhaps you could join them, were going to send one... as soon as one does, let's start circulating them both. Or three or more if it needs be...<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> Note also the agenda for the next call was defined long before this discussion, and doesn't include registry services... if there is AOB time for it, it's sure a topic to add.<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> B. You state that it is “out-of-scope” for Work Track 4 for us to discuss the policy issue of incurring additional fees for evaluation of additional new registry services. However, it is in fact your Straw Proposal that suggests such additional fees are appropriate. If this is policy work that is “out-of-scope” for Work Track 4, then the language of your Straw Proposal is itself “out-of-scope”.<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> The latest straw person actually removed any fees reference, exactly due to that. BTW, this was added due to a comment during the call that was one made not by me or Cheryl... but anyway, it's removed both due to opposition and to be out of scope.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> C. You state that I cannot raise issues regarding effect on RPM policy because that is for the RPM PDP, not for Work Track 4. If you are advocating a policy change that affects RPM policy, it has to be raised and flagged, not buried as “out of scope” for Work Track 4.) How will the RPM PDP even KNOW that such an issue is being created by a proposed change in Question 23 if not discussed and brought to their attention?<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> On the connection with RPM PDP WG, while there is not something currently foreseen at the work-track level, there is at the WG level, and every WT definition comes first to the WG, doesn't go into final report before that. From our charter:<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> "Second-Level Rights Protection Mechanisms: Proposing recommendations directly related to RPMs is beyond the remit of this PDP. There is an anticipated PDP on the "current state of all rights protection mechanisms (RPMs) implemented for both existing and new gTLDs, including but not limited to the UDRP and the URS...". Duplication or conflicting work between the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP and the PDP on RPMs must be avoided. If topics relatedto RPMs are uncovered and discussed in the deliberations of this PDP, those topics should be relayed to the PDP on RPMs for resolution. To assure effective coordination between the two groups, a community liaison, who is a member of both Groups, is to be appointed jointly by both Groups and confirmed by the GNSO Council."<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> The first topic you mentioned seemed to me an aspect of the sunrise/claims process, which is being actively worked by the RPM PDP WG. The other one is about registry services in general so is not directly related to RPMs; either way, every one of the SubPro recommendations will need, at the end, an analysis of whether it uncovered a new topic that should be forwarded to the RPM PDP or not.<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> (remaining text already replied to)<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> Rubens<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">> This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><hr style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><font face="Arial" color="Gray" size="1" style="font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><br class="">This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class=""></font><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class=""></span></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>