[CPWG] [registration-issues-wg] [GTLD-WG] Fwd: FW: Draft Comment on RA Renewals
Marita Moll
mmoll at ca.inter.net
Mon Apr 29 17:27:02 UTC 2019
Hi Holly. It is not too late. We have an extension till May 2. I think a
lot of people are agreeing with your concerns.
Marita
On 4/29/2019 8:29 AM, Holly Raiche wrote:
> Greg
>
> I fear it is almost too late, but I will repeat what I said on the
> CPWG: .ORG is special and if we don’t comment on the others, or if
> comments on .ASIA are made separately, we should, at least, comment on
> .ORG which is for international non-profits - in the end user
> interest. And to make a point that was made in the conversation,
> monitoring will not help; once a contract is signed, arrangements are
> made based upon that contract, so undoing those arrangements because a
> review says they aren’t operating as they should would be nigh on
> impossible.
>
> Holly
>
>> On Apr 29, 2019, at 3:58 PM, Greg Shatan <greg at isoc-ny.org
>> <mailto:greg at isoc-ny.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Siva,
>>
>> I don’t disagree with you. ISOC’s mission is much broader than ICANN,
>> much less At-Large. I am as trying to say that At-Large should view
>> ISOC with a certain kinship, based on shared values and support for
>> priorities that ultimately benefit the end-users — the Internet is
>> for everyone!
>>
>> But the broad spectrum of activities and priorities that ISOC has
>> goes far beyond At-Large’s “band.”
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 1:33 AM sivasubramanian muthusamy
>> <6.internet at gmail.com <mailto:6.internet at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 29, 2019, 10:44 AM Greg Shatan <greg at isoc-ny.org
>> <mailto:greg at isoc-ny.org>> 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.
>>
>>
>> No. Please don't equate ISOC with one Constituency of ICANN.
>> Rather, ISOC's mission is larger than the DNS. While ICANN
>> perceives limitations in it's mission, ISOC's policies and
>> programs span way beyond, and what ISOC does results in what is
>> good for the DNS.
>>
>> 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"/
>> _______________________________________________
>> CPWG mailing list
>> CPWG at icann.org <mailto:CPWG at icann.org>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> registration-issues-wg mailing list
>> registration-issues-wg at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> <mailto:registration-issues-wg at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
>>
>> --
>> 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
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cpwg/attachments/20190429/c2403f2f/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the CPWG
mailing list