<html 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=Windows-1252">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@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;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style>
</head>
<body lang="EN-US">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I disagree with the lack of openness regarding the proposed changes and the intent to tie a closer relationship with Verisign with an uncapped and uncontrolled fee structure over the next 10 years. The .COM registration fees are currently
out of control and only getting worse. There’s no evidence that the proposed amendment will promote a stronger DNS solution or promote a healthy marketplace. I’m disheartened by this proposal and others that ICANN are considering (like with .ORG domains) as
it seems like there are nefarious decisions being made without public discussion for a global service. This proposal implies that ICANN is resolving its responsibility and giving it to a private company. Vote NO on the amendment.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thank you,</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Ryan<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>