[client com] Fwd: [CWG-Stewardship] FW: Revised Community Agreement Draft: 08-05-2016

Mon Aug 8 22:35:24 UTC 2016

Chuck Gomes response to comments.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Gomes, Chuck <cgomes at verisign.com>
Date: Sun, Aug 7, 2016 at 11:32 PM
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] FW: Revised Community Agreement Draft:
08-05-2016
To: Andrew Sullivan <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com>
Cc: "cwg-stewardship at icann.org" <cwg-stewardship at icann.org>

I for one trust the experts who have put this together. Unless others with
comparable expertise can point out any significant problems, I am willing
to trust those who are representing us.  If there are any serious problems,
we will have the public comment period to catch them.

Chuck

Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 7, 2016, at 11:10 PM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com>
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Full disclosure: I'm a trustee and part of the group that is
> negotiating this agreement on behalf of the IETF Trust.
>
> I want first of all to agree in general with Greg's responses.  But I
> also implore people to think very hard about fussing with the text
> from the lawyers when the CWG negotiating team brings it to you.  We
> really only have a few days to do this.  These agreements need to go
> out to public comment before ICANN prepares its report for NTIA.  That
> happens Friday, so comment needs to start on Thursday.  If we miss
> this window, then the IPR piece (which is a prerequisite for the
> transition) will not be complete in NTIA's evaluation, and they may
> decide to renew the IANA contract.  In effect, we have to be done
> everything but document preparation on Wednesday.
>
> It would be a terrible shame if the transition fell apart on a small
> matter like the IPR.  I believe the better thing to ask in every case
> is not whether something is exactly the way you would do it, but
> whether it is something you can live with.  If the answer is, "Yes," I
> would encourage you to say so.
>
> Thanks and best regards,
>
> A
>
>
>> On Sun, Aug 07, 2016 at 06:07:17PM -0400, Greg Shatan wrote:
>> All,
>>
>> Please see my responses (in "balloon" comments) to Kavouss's comments.
>>
>> Greg
>>
>> On Sun, Aug 7, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Kavouss Arasteh <
kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear All,
>>> No matter who made the changes, I am commenting on the text not on the
>>> author's identity.
>>> I have had to convert the PDF in word and have done my verifications and
>>> attached my comments
>>> There are serious problems in some of the terms.
>>> I have indicated all in terms of deletion with reasons and/or with
>>> comments in round bracket.
>>> Regartds
>>> Kavouss
>>>
>>> 2016-08-07 20:15 GMT+02:00 Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> The changes were not made by me. The changes were made by the CWG's
>>>> counsel and the IETF Trust's counsel working collaboratively, which
came
>>>> after discussion of the IANA IPR collaborative group (including reps
of all
>>>> the communities and the Trust).
>>>>
>>>> I don't have the redline in Word. I sent to the list everything that
was
>>>> initially sent by the IETF Trust's counsel to CWG's counsel to the
Client
>>>> Committee list.
>>>>
>>>> Greg
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sunday, August 7, 2016, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear ALL
>>>>>
>>>>> I HAVE no comments on the initial text before being changed
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Kavouss
>>>>>
>>>>> 2016-08-07 18:04 GMT+02:00 Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com
>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Seun
>>>>>> NO
>>>>>> PLS DO NOT MAKE MY JOB HARD..
>>>>>> WHY NOT A RED MARK WORD VERSION
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>> Kavouss
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2016-08-07 17:42 GMT+02:00 Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello Kavous,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> An option could be that you look at the PDF and make your comment on
>>>>>>> the word version(though you can make comment on the pdf as well)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Another option is if you (or someone) has the previous clean version
>>>>>>> then one can produce a redline off the two clean versions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sent from my LG G4
>>>>>>> Kindly excuse brevity and typos
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 7 Aug 2016 4:37 p.m., "Kavouss Arasteh" <
kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dear Andrew,
>>>>>>>> Tks again for your kind reply.
>>>>>>>> Please send me a red mark  Word Version and I Will reply today.
>>>>>>>> I HAVE SOME CONCERS ON SOME OF THE  CHANGED MADE  BY GREC
>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>> Kavouss
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2016-08-07 17:28 GMT+02:00 Andrew Sullivan <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
>:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I don't know whetheer you will get that before tomorrow, and that
is
>>>>>>>>> really rather late.  Can you at least say what your concerns are?
>>>>>>>>> There really isn't a lot of time: this needs to go to public
comment
>>>>>>>>> on Thursday.  An additional day to wait for the comments would be
>>>>>>>>> bad.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 07, 2016 at 05:14:50PM +0200, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Seun,
>>>>>>>>>> I know that a word version was included but the Word Version is a
>>>>>>>>> clean
>>>>>>>>>> Text and it is difficult to identify the changes .I wish to see
>>>>>>>>> what was
>>>>>>>>>> the changes introduced by Greg
>>>>>>>>>> I still need the red mark text in WORD VERSION.
>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>>> Kavouss
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2016-08-07 14:09 GMT+02:00 Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> A word version was included in Greg's mail
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my LG G4
>>>>>>>>>>> Kindly excuse brevity and typos
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 7 Aug 2016 10:36 a.m., "Kavouss Arasteh" <
>>>>>>>>> kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Grec,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you very much for the amendments. I do not agree with
>>>>>>>>> some of them
>>>>>>>>>>>> In order to enable me to provide my counter comments to you,
>>>>>>>>> pls provide
>>>>>>>>>>>> a word version of your amendment as soon as convinient
>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>>>>> Kavouss
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016-08-07 0:22 GMT+02:00 Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> CWG,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am forwarding a revised draft of the proposed Community
>>>>>>>>> Agreement
>>>>>>>>>>>>> relating to the IANA IPR.  In addition to any other comments
>>>>>>>>> you may have,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I draw your attention to the two specific items in the email
>>>>>>>>> below: (1)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> identifying an entity to sign for the names community, and (2)
>>>>>>>>> providing a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> brief description of the IANA Services used by the names
>>>>>>>>> community (
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *see* Exhibit A for descriptions provided by the other
>>>>>>>>> communities).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This will be the subject of further refinement by the IPR
>>>>>>>>> collaborative
>>>>>>>>>>>>> group early in the week, with the goal of initiating a public
>>>>>>>>> comment
>>>>>>>>>>>>> period as soon as possible after the CWG-IANA meeting on
>>>>>>>>> Thursday.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Greg
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Hofheimer, Joshua T. <jhofheimer at sidley.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Date: Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 4:55 PM
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [client com] FW: Revised Community Agreement Draft:
>>>>>>>>> 08-05-2016
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: Client <cwg-client at icann.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear Client Committee,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Attached please find a revised draft of the proposed Community
>>>>>>>>> Agreement
>>>>>>>>>>>>> for your review and comment.  This is an iterative version
>>>>>>>>> prepared jointly
>>>>>>>>>>>>> by counsel (Sidley) to the CWG and counsel to the IETF Trust
>>>>>>>>> to reflect the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 7-point discussion items.  To be clear, it is still a work in
>>>>>>>>> progress, but
>>>>>>>>>>>>> we believe ready for the CWG to have an opportunity for
review.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Two important issues to highlight:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) the Names Community needs to determine who will be the
>>>>>>>>> signatory
>>>>>>>>>>>>> party, acting on behalf of the Names Community, to the
>>>>>>>>> Community
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Agreement.  For your information, the attached draft has the
>>>>>>>>> organizations
>>>>>>>>>>>>> put forward to represent the Numbers and Protocols
>>>>>>>>> Communities; and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) we need a brief description of the IANA services to be
>>>>>>>>> provided on
>>>>>>>>>>>>> behalf of the Names Community.  The following high-level
>>>>>>>>> description was
>>>>>>>>>>>>> included in a draft of the Naming Functions Agreement.  If
>>>>>>>>> this is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> acceptable for including here is well, please advise (or we
>>>>>>>>> ask the Client
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Committee to provide a sufficient description):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The “*IANA Naming Function*” is comprised of:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (a)             Management of the DNS Root Zone (“*Root Zone
>>>>>>>>> Management*
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ”);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (b)             Management of the .INT top-level domain;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (c)              Maintenance of a repository of
>>>>>>>>> internationalized
>>>>>>>>>>>>> domain name tables and label generation rule sets; and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (d)             Provision of other services related to the
>>>>>>>>> management
>>>>>>>>>>>>> of .INT top-level domains, at ICANN’s reasonable request and
>>>>>>>>> at ICANN’s
>>>>>>>>>>>>> expense.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please provide any comment or feedback as soon as practical,
>>>>>>>>> as we are
>>>>>>>>>>>>> trying to finalize the draft for approval by the various
>>>>>>>>> stakeholders and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> release for public comment by Thursday.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you in advance.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Josh
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Joshua Hofheimer*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sidley Austin LLP*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *jhofheimer at sidley.com <jhofheimer at sidley.com>*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *(213) 896-6061 <%28213%29%20896-6061> (LA direct)*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *(650) 565-7561 <%28650%29%20565-7561> (Palo Alto direct)*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *(323) 708-2405 <%28323%29%20708-2405> (cell)*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *From:* iana-ipr-bounces at nro.net [mailto:
>>>>>>>>> iana-ipr-bounces at nro.net] *On
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Behalf Of *Jorge Contreras
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Friday, August 05, 2016 10:01 AM
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *To:* iana-ipr at nro.net
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Subject:* [Iana-ipr] Revised Community Agreement Draft:
>>>>>>>>> 08-05-2016
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> All – attached is a draft of the Community Agreement that Josh
>>>>>>>>> and I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> have collaborated on over the past two days.  We believe that
>>>>>>>>> it reflects
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the current requirements of the parties, and submit it for
>>>>>>>>> your review and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> discussion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> A clean version, as well as a marked version against the draft
>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 07-30-16 (in PDF format) are attached.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please note a few items that still need to be completed,
>>>>>>>>> including the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> description of the IANA Names Service, the identities of the
>>>>>>>>> CCG
>>>>>>>>>>>>> representatives, etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jorge
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jorge L. Contreras
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Contreras Legal Strategy LLC
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1711 Massachusetts Ave. NW, No. 710
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Washington, DC 20036
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> contreraslegal at att.net
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The contents of this message may be attorney-client privileged
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> confidential.  If you are not the intended recipient, please
>>>>>>>>> delete this
>>>>>>>>>>>>> message immediately.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ************************************************************
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ****************************************
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information
>>>>>>>>> that is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> privileged or confidential.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the
>>>>>>>>> e-mail and any
>>>>>>>>>>>>> attachments and notify us
>>>>>>>>>>>>> immediately.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ************************************************************
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ****************************************
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cwg-client mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cwg-client at icann.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-client
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
>>>>>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Andrew Sullivan
>>>>>>>>> ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
>
>
>
>
> --
> Andrew Sullivan
> ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
> _______________________________________________
> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-client/attachments/20160808/e4cf41f4/attachment-0001.html>