[GTLD-WG] [CPWG] Fwd: FW: Draft Comment on RA Renewals

Marita Moll mmoll at ca.inter.net
Sat Apr 27 06:34:20 UTC 2019


I am reading powerful arguments on both sides of this issue and then 
reading Greg's proposed comment again. In the particular case of .org, 
and should we decide to go in the direction that Greg has mapped, would 
it be possible to beef up the last line. It seems like a throw away but 
it could be a good bridge between the opposing points of view. The 
comment asks that ICANN "monitor" future price increases and any market 
responses to those increases. What should ICANN do if it decides the 
increases are unwarranted?

@Christopher -- eh bien, le poisson est encore vivant !!

Marita

On 4/26/2019 5:41 PM, Greg Shatan wrote:
> Justine,
>
> Thank you for your kind words and helpful comments.
>
> Unfortunately, the “party” got rained out.  The CPWG decided not to 
> approve this statement, whether it covers all the renewals or is 
> limited to .ORG.  So nothing is being sent to the ALAC for their 
> consideration. I think it’s a good statement, and it would be made 
> better with your suggestions.  I am considering revising this draft, 
> cutting the subject back to .ORG and submitting it individually.  
> Also, circulating it for others to submit — either individually or 
> with multiple signatures.
>
> In particular, I am concerned there are a number of comments being 
> made that tend to denigrate PIR and ISOC. This is something I would 
> like to counter.  [Full disclosure: I am the President of ISOC-NY (an 
> At-Large Structure) and participate here in that capacity.  However, I 
> have not yet asked the ISOC-NY Board to consider endorsing this 
> statement, so I am discussing it here in my individual capacity.]. I 
> honestly think much of what has been said about PIR and ISOC has been 
> untrue or exaggerated and fails to to give credit to ISOC for its 
> mission and unique place in the internet ecosystem.
>
> I believe that PIR was hoping for a comment along the lines of our 
> first draft (which I believe they saw on our site) or our second 
> draft.  I’m not comfortable leaving PIR and ISOC to be “thrown under 
> the bus” by ill-informed and prejudicial comments.  If ALAC will not 
> comment (or more precisely, if the CPWG wont send ALAC a draft comment 
> for their consideration), then it behooves those who support this 
> statement to submit it or use it as a basis for their own comments.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Greg
>
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 6:02 AM Justine Chew <justine.chew at gmail.com 
> <mailto:justine.chew at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Thanks to Greg Shatan for the 24 April draft statement.
>
>     My comments / suggestion are as follows:-
>
>     1. I wonder if it might be better to prepare (and submit) 2
>     statements instead of a consolidated one ie. one to address .BIZ,
>     .ORG and .INFO and another for .ASIA.. This is because .ASIA had a
>     "different playing field of no price caps" to begin with and in
>     this way, any concerns about price cap removals for .BIZ, .ORG and
>     .INFO can be addressed squarely in comparison with .NET and with
>     reference to the ALAC's 2017 comment. Given that we don't seem to
>     be offering comments to the inclusion of some RPMs.
>
>     2. In any case, the draft starts with "Background" but doesn't
>     indicate where that backgrounder ends and where the present
>     comment begins.
>
>     3. Related to the point about standardizing RAs as being a good
>     approach, it be useful to draw attention to the use of Addendums
>     as the controlled means for handling necessary variations.
>
>     4. Would it not be incumbent on At-Large to also support (or least
>     comment on) regularizing the inclusion of PICs in these RA
>     renewals (if any)?
>
>     5. As for UA, it's not clear (to me at least) what we want all ROs
>     to do about it at this point. Given community interest on UA has
>     increased further in recent meetings, actual responsibilities
>     might be better framed in due course. So, it may be prudent to
>     tackle the inclusion of UA into the base Registry Agreement by
>     amending Specification 6, or possibly by way of a consensus policy
>     addition in Specification 1, at a later date.
>
>     Justine
>     (my apologies for being late to the "party")
>
>     -----
>
>
>     On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 at 04:15, Evin Erdogdu <evin.erdogdu at icann.org
>     <mailto:evin.erdogdu at icann.org>> wrote:
>
>         Thank you Greg; this draft ALAC Statement on the 4 Registry
>         Agreement Public Comments is posted to each workspace, for
>         comment:
>
>         At-Large Workspace: Proposed Renewal of .biz Registry
>         Agreement
>         <https://community.icann.org/display/alacpolicydev/At-Large+Workspace%3A+Proposed+Renewal+of+.biz+Registry+Agreement>
>
>         At-Large Workspace: Proposed Renewal of .asia Registry
>         Agreement
>         <https://community.icann.org/display/alacpolicydev/At-Large+Workspace%3A+Proposed+Renewal+of+.asia+Registry+Agreement>
>
>         At-Large Workspace: Proposed Renewal of .org Registry
>         Agreement
>         <https://community.icann.org/display/alacpolicydev/At-Large+Workspace%3A+Proposed+Renewal+of+.org+Registry+Agreement>
>
>         At-Large Workspace: Proposed Renewal of .info Registry
>         Agreement
>         <https://community.icann.org/display/alacpolicydev/At-Large+Workspace%3A+Proposed+Renewal+of+.info+Registry+Agreement>
>
>         Kind Regards,
>
>         Evin
>
>         *From: *GTLD-WG <gtld-wg-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>         <mailto:gtld-wg-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org>> on behalf of
>         Greg Shatan <greg at isoc-ny.org <mailto:greg at isoc-ny.org>>
>         *Date: *Wednesday, April 24, 2019 at 2:44 PM
>         *To: *CPWG <cpwg at icann.org <mailto:cpwg at icann.org>>, Evin
>         Erdogdu <evin.erdogdu at icann.org
>         <mailto:evin.erdogdu at icann.org>>, Jonathan Zuck
>         <JZuck at innovatorsnetwork.org <mailto:JZuck at innovatorsnetwork.org>>
>         *Subject: *[GTLD-WG] [CPWG] Fwd: FW: Draft Comment on RA Renewals
>
>         *Please see attached.*
>
>         -- 
>
>         Greg Shatan
>
>         greg at isoc-ny.org <mailto:greg at isoc-ny.org>
>
>         President, ISOC-NY
>
>         /"The Internet is for everyone"/
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         CPWG mailing list
>         CPWG at icann.org <mailto:CPWG at icann.org>
>         https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     CPWG mailing list
>     CPWG at icann.org <mailto:CPWG at icann.org>
>     https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
>     _______________________________________________
>     GTLD-WG mailing list
>     GTLD-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>     <mailto:GTLD-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>     https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg
>
>     Working Group direct URL:
>     https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs
>
> -- 
> Greg Shatan
> greg at isoc-ny.org <mailto:greg at isoc-ny.org>
> President, ISOC-NY
> /"The Internet is for everyone"/
>
> _______________________________________________
> CPWG mailing list
> CPWG at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/gtld-wg/attachments/20190427/8f6f003a/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg


More information about the GTLD-WG mailing list