[council] Vertical Integration

Tim Ruiz tim at godaddy.com
Wed Feb 17 17:22:21 UTC 2010


When does Staff expect to publish the "new registry-registrar separation
model" for discussion?


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [council] Vertical Integration
From: Margie Milam <Margie.Milam at icann.org>
Date: Wed, February 17, 2010 11:08 am
To: "icann at rodenbaugh.com" <icann at rodenbaugh.com>
Cc: "'GNSO Council List'" <council at gnso.icann.org>


We have analyzed the length of time associated with recent PDPs, and the
average time from initiation to council vote is 406 days (see attached
summary).   When you factor in the fact that this issue is complex and
contentious,   this PDP may take longer than the average, and most
likely longer than the 16 weeks referenced in the GNSO resolution.   
The divergence of opinions experienced to date in  developing the
charter for this PDP seems to support this conclusion.      Also, we
need to account for the time necessary to obtain Board approval and to
develop the implementation details associated with the new policy, which
further delays the commencement of the new policy.
Obviously, we will support the GNSO’s efforts to conclude this PDP in
an expedited manner, but want to make sure that we are realistic about
what is possible.

Best Regards,
Margie Milam
Senior Policy Counselor

From: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:icann at rodenbaugh.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 9:09 AM
To: Margie Milam; 'Stéphane Van Gelder'; 'Adrian Kinderis'
Cc: 'GNSO Council List'
Subject: RE: [council] Vertical Integration

The Council motion also addressed the timing issue, prioritizing the
work by putting this PDP on a very quick path to completion.  
Hearing from Staff that it will take ‘years to conclude’, at the
outset, is disheartening and has no basis in fact.  Council’s track
record on PDPs in the past few years indicates that they go much faster
than that, as Staff ought to be well aware.
Mike Rodenbaugh
tel/fax:  +1 (415) 738-8087

From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org]
On Behalf Of Margie Milam
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 7:53 AM
To: Stéphane Van Gelder; Adrian Kinderis
Cc: GNSO Council List
Subject: RE: [council] Vertical Integration

Stéphane and Adrian,
Yes,  the Issues Report  on Vertical Integration discussed this issue 
(see page 24 of
   Because the outcome of a PDP is uncertain (it is possible that no
recommendation will be produced or that the PDP will take years to
conclude),  the implementation activities will continue to be pursued in
parallel with the GNSO’s PDP activities.     
Best Regards,
Margie Milam
Margie Milam
Senior Policy Counselor
From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org]
On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 3:34 AM
To: Adrian Kinderis
Cc: GNSO Council List
Subject: Re: [council] Vertical Integration

Isn't this what Staff told us in the issues report, that the work Staff
are doing on this for the DAG would continue whether (I hesitate to use
the term "despite") the Council initiated a PDP or not?

Le 17 févr. 2010 à 05:33, Adrian Kinderis a écrit :



Further to my previous email please see the following from the ICANN


Vertical Integration (aka Registry/Registrar Separation)

Based on debates on the subject held at the ICANN meetings in Seoul,
discussion during the consultation with certain community
representatives held on 7 January 2010 in Washington D.C., and ongoing
study, ICANN will propose for community comment a new registry-registrar
separation model for inclusion in the next draft of the gTLD agreement.
Additionally, the Board and community members will be discussing the
issue in Nairobi.


ICANN are proposing what?




What about the PDP?


I’m still confused!



Adrian Kinderis

More information about the council mailing list