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

Marita Moll mmoll at ca.inter.net
Mon Apr 29 06:17:58 UTC 2019


In the interests brokering some kind of comprise, I take up Greg's offer 
to make a suggestion on beefing up the last sentence of his proposal re: 
ICANN monitoring the impact of price increases.

I would suggest retaining the price caps but raising them slightly and 
then have a periodic review that could either raise or lower the caps.

e.g. price cap raised to 12% (15?) and reviewed after 5 )10?) years. 
That would make everybody equally unhappy. Good political compromise.

My second choice would be Greg's suggestion that ICANN reserve the right 
to roll back price increases deemed to be abusive -- but rolling back 
price increases would be really controversial if it ever came to pass.

In addition, I would limit the statement to .org and add the comment 
already put forward by Maureen re: .asia. I have not seen any strong 
arguments for retaining price caps on .biz .info. I think throwing all 
these thing together in one pot has been disingenuous. I realize the 
goal was standardization but the timing seems to be wrong.

Marita

On 4/29/2019 7:14 AM, Greg Shatan wrote:
> I would be happy, Marita, to beef up the last line of the comment and 
> make that aspect more substantial generally!   Please send your 
> editorial suggestions.  As for what ICANN should do, one possibility 
> is that ICANN reserves the right to roll back price increases, in 
> whole or in part, if the price hikes are abusive or discriminatory.
>
> All, I still hope that there is room for a comment here.  It would be 
> particularly unfortunate if we fail to comment on the .ORG renewal.  
> Roberto’s email encapsulates many of the reasons why.  I look at ISOC 
> as almost a sister organization of At-Large.  As Roberto points out, 
> ISOC works to accomplish many goals that it shares with At-Large.  
> ISOC also supports the IETF and even provides its corporate “home.”   
> PIR runs on similar principles.  PIR is not a run of the mill 
> commercial registry.  In many ways, it was put into business by ISOC.  
> Yet the essence of the concerted campaign against .ORG is that PIR 
> can’t be trusted to abstain from massive price increases, that ISOC 
> could and possibly would push it to do so, and that ISOC is a 
> parasitical organization sucking money out of other non-profits. I 
> feel like we would be throwing ISOC under the bus if we fail to 
> comment on the .ORG renewal in particular.  [Disclosure: I am the 
> President & Chair of an At Large Structure that is also an ISOC 
> Chapter, ISOC-NY.]
>
> Originally, my draft dealt only with .org. We could just go back to 
> that focus.  We can leave a general discussion of price caps to one 
> side if we don’t expand this to .biz and .info (and .asia doesn’t have 
> price caps now).
>
> Based on the discussions we had, I aimed to limit the comment to the 
> concrete issues raised by the agreement rather than go beyond the 
> agreement to some of the broader registry issues.  But that’s a 
> question of approach and I’m fine with a broader statement. 
> Alternatively, we could decide not to comment on .biz and .info at 
> all, limit the current statement to .org, and put in a brief UA 
> statement for .asia.   But first we would have to get any drafts, 
> revisions, etc. out on the table so we can see what we’re dealing with.
>
> Even asking for an extension is a double-edged sword, since that keeps 
> the doors open for more of the cut-and-paste comments that have been 
> filed in opposition to these renewals.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Greg
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 2:34 AM Marita Moll <mmoll at ca.inter.net 
> <mailto:mmoll at ca.inter.net>> wrote:
>
>     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  <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"/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/gtld-wg/attachments/20190429/a8eed07d/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