[CWG-Stewardship] FW: [client com] ICANN-PTI Naming Functions Agreement & Services Agreement Headers

Fri Aug 5 08:01:09 UTC 2016

All,

As promised. Email thread copied to Client Committee mailing list and
referred to on yesterday's CWG call.

Jonathan

From: Chris Disspain [mailto:chris at disspain.id.au] 
Sent: 30 July 2016 00:42
To: Becky Burr <Becky.Burr at neustar.biz>
Cc: Katrina Sataki <katrina at nic.lv>; Nigel Roberts <nigel at channelisles.net>;
Greeley, Amy E. <AGreeley at sidley.com>; Byron Holland
<byron.holland at cira.ca>; Keith Davidson <keith at internetnz.net.nz>; Client
Committee <cwg-client at icann.org>; demi at registro.br
Subject: Re: [client com] ICANN-PTI Naming Functions Agreement & Services
Agreement Headers
Importance: High

Becky,

I think this covers the important points and works as a way of approaching
the situation. I will also now look more closely at the document as a whole
to make sure we have dealt with any anomalies etc.. 

Cheers,

Chris

On 30 Jul 2016, at 02:56 , Burr, Becky <Becky.Burr at neustar.biz
<mailto:Becky.Burr at neustar.biz> > wrote:

Folks, I have taken a quick stab at addressing the problems that have been
discussed.  I will review a bit more carefully now, but please take a look
and send me your thoughts on the approach

J. Beckwith Burr 
Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006
Office: +1.202.533.2932  Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 /
<http://www.neustar.biz/> neustar.biz

From: Jordan Carter <jordan at internetnz.net.nz
<mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz> >
Date: Friday, July 29, 2016 at 4:18 AM
To: Maarten Simon <maarten.simon at sidn.nl <mailto:maarten.simon at sidn.nl> >
Cc: Chris Disspain <chris at disspain.id.au <mailto:chris at disspain.id.au> >,
Becky Burr <becky.burr at neustar.biz <mailto:becky.burr at neustar.biz> >,
Katrina Sataki <katrina at nic.lv <mailto:katrina at nic.lv> >, Client Committee
<cwg-client at icann.org <mailto:cwg-client at icann.org> >, "demi at registro.br
<mailto:demi at registro.br> " <demi at registro.br <mailto:demi at registro.br> >,
"Greeley, Amy E." <AGreeley at sidley.com <mailto:AGreeley at sidley.com> >, Byron
Holland <byron.holland at cira.ca <mailto:byron.holland at cira.ca> >, Keith
Davidson <keith at internetnz.net.nz <mailto:keith at internetnz.net.nz> >
Subject: Re: [client com] ICANN-PTI Naming Functions Agreement & Services
Agreement Headers

I share the concerns of other ccTLD reps. Happy to help from .NZ any way
that may be useful - am copying Keith Davidson who was also an FOI person. 

Jordan 

On Friday, 29 July 2016, Maarten Simon <maarten.simon at sidn.nl
<mailto:maarten.simon at sidn.nl> > wrote:

Hi Chris,

I understood yesterday that the idea is to have the naming contract out for
public comment on August 7. Ideally that version should contain the correct
text. If not, we should use the public comment period to bring it up but
that is of course less preferable.

Best,

Maarten

From: Chris Disspain [mailto:chris at disspain.id.au
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','chris at disspain.id.au');> ] 
Sent: vrijdag 29 juli 2016 9:10
To: Maarten Simon; Becky Burr
Cc: Client Committee; Katrina Sataki; Byron Holland; Greeley, Amy E.;
demi at registro.br <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','demi at registro.br');> 
Subject: Re: [client com] ICANN-PTI Naming Functions Agreement & Services
Agreement Headers
Importance: High

Hi Maarten,

Becky and I were both closely involved, as was Bernie Turcotte, Bart
Boswinkel and a number of ccTLD folks. 

Can you give me some idea of the timing constraints we have on this?

Maybe Becky and I can start the ball rolling and get something out to the
ccNSO. Becky, are you available over the next couple of days?

Cheers,

Chris

On 29 Jul 2016, at 17:02 , Maarten Simon <maarten.simon at sidn.nl
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','maarten.simon at sidn.nl');> > wrote:

Thanks Chris,

I was just about to sort this one out as I also noticed and discussed with
Paul Kane that the references to the GAC Principles where if necessary at
least not specific enough. Would be nice if we could have someone who was
closely involved in the drafting of the final text of the FOI go through the
(last version) of the document and come up with suggestions to bring both
documents in line. I could give it a try too but I wasn't involved in the
drafting of the FOI at all.

Best,

Maarten  

From: <cwg-client-bounces at icann.org
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','cwg-client-bounces at icann.org');> > on behalf
of Chris Disspain <chris at disspain.id.au
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','chris at disspain.id.au');> >
Date: Friday 29 July 2016 at 08:45
To: "cwg-client at icann.org
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','cwg-client at icann.org');> "
<cwg-client at icann.org <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','cwg-client at icann.org');>
>
Cc: Becky Burr <becky.burr at neustar.biz
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','becky.burr at neustar.biz');> >, Katrina Sataki
<katrina at nic.lv <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','katrina at nic.lv');> >, Byron
Holland <byron.holland at cira.ca
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','byron.holland at cira.ca');> >, "Greeley, Amy E."
<AGreeley at sidley.com <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','AGreeley at sidley.com');>
>, "demi at registro.br <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','demi at registro.br');> "
<demi at registro.br <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','demi at registro.br');> >
Subject: Re: [client com] ICANN-PTI Naming Functions Agreement & Services
Agreement Headers

All, 

A number of the clauses in this current draft are likely to be of
significant concern to ccTLDs. I have highlighted some paragraphs in the
attached which will need to be re-drafted IMO. 

The references to RFC 1591 and GAC Principles seem to have been inserted by
Sidley so may appear simply because of a lack of background information on
the history of these matters. 

If there is to be any reference at all to the GAC Principles (and I am
unclear that there needs to be one) it needs to be specifically to the 2005
Principles and not merely an undated reference.

It is IMPORTANT to note that the GAC Principles 2005, by their own terms,
apply ONLY if the relevant government and ccTLD manager AGREE that they
apply.

"1.3. These principles are intended as a guide to the relationships between
Governments, their ccTLD and ICANN. They are not intended to be binding and
need both Governments and Registries voluntarily to agree to apply them
within their legal framework. If either the Government or the Registry
decide not to adopt the principles, this cannot be held against the
Registry, and the Registry still has a valid existence."

This is a critical nuance, so any reference to the GAC Principles (2005)
must say that only where the relevant government and ccTLD manager agree
they apply.

Further, the documents definition of 'Interested and Affected Parties' won't
work in respect to ccTLD matters. The Framework of Interpretation uses very
specific words about who needs to be consulted regarding ccTLD matters.

I have refrained from offering any redrafted wording as I don't think it
would be appropriate for me to do so. However I strongly recommend that the
leadership of the ccTLD community is immediately consulted so that
acceptable words can be found (I have copied the ccNSO Chair and Vice Chairs
into this email). Further, I believe that Sam Eisner will also be able to
provide some guidance as to the pitfalls that the wording needs to avoid.

I am happy to assist in any way.

Cheers,

Chris

On 28 Jul 2016, at 14:10 , Hofheimer, Joshua T. <jhofheimer at sidley.com
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','jhofheimer at sidley.com');> > wrote:

Client Committee - Attached is a further revised draft of the Naming
Functions Agreement.  For convenience, we have included a clean version and
two redlines - an incremental draft marked against the Sidley draft
circulated per the email below, and a cumulative redline against the
original ICANN-legal draft proposal. 

Regarding Annex C, on our review many of the concepts do appear to have been
incorporated either into the Naming Functions Agreement or into the
governance documents.  We have added only a few suggested, additional
clauses related to Annex C in the attached draft, along with mapping to the
particular provision in the Annex. 

Thank you and speak to you tomorrow.

Best regards,

Josh

Joshua Hofheimer

Sidley Austin LLP

 <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','jhofheimer at sidley.com');>
jhofheimer at sidley.com

(213) 896-6061 (LA direct)

(650) 565-7561 (Palo Alto direct)

(323) 708-2405 (cell)

-- 
Jordan Carter
Chief Executive, InternetNZ 

+64-21-442-649 | jordan at internetnz.net.nz <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz> 

Sent on the run, apologies for brevity

<Naming Function Agreement - BB comments on Sidley draft to reflect
FOI.docx>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160805/d1feee2a/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: Untitled attachment 00031.txt
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160805/d1feee2a/Untitledattachment00031-0001.txt>