[registrars] FW: Information regarding Data Escrow

[Nevett, Jonathon]

Registrars:  

The following is an e-mail message from Kurt Pritz regarding ICANN's
data escrow program.  It appears that ICANN staff has selected Iron
Mountain as the ICANN preferred provider pending final comments and a
contract.  Because a division of Iron Mountain actually is an accredited
registrar, it has supplied -- at ICANN's request -- the attached
document that shows how it proposes to address any conflicts of interest
concerns.  I should note that we all have a choice of whether to use the
ICANN provider (at ICANN's expense) or select an escrow provider of our
choosing (at our expense) that is approved by ICANN.     

Please provide any comments to the list or directly to Kurt or Mike
Zupke.

Thanks.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: Kurt Pritz [mailto:pritz at icann.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 6:58 PM
To: Nevett, Jonathon
Cc: Mike Zupke; Tim Cole
Subject: Information regarding Data Escrow

Jon:

In response to discussions with the Registrar Constituency regarding  
data escrow services, please provide the attached document to the  
constituency members for their review and information.

After analysis of seven responses to an RFP for the provision of data  
escrow services, Iron Mountain has emerged as the most suitable  
candidate. There were other competent proposals but, balancing the  
criteria provided in the RFP, ICANN has begun negotiations with Iron  
Mountain. Other candidates have been informed that the process is not
yet closed but these negotiations have started.

ICANN understood concerns voiced in the RC meeting regarding  
selection of an accredited registrar for this task. Given those  
concerns (and in accordance with best practices anyway) we set out to  
understand all potential conflicts of interest that might exist for  
Iron Mountain. ICANN sent, and Iron Mountain returned for  
distribution to the constituency, the attached questionnaire. We  
think the responses are open and frank. We also believe that these  
responses, the fact that Iron Mountain presently escrows some  
registrar data, and the fact that Iron Mountain's business model is  
predicated on the trust that confidential data will not be compromised  
demonstrate its suitability as a potential service provider. We  
understand that some registrars may opt for a different provider for  
various reasons but hope that those who make that choice understand  
that this appears now to be the best selection for ICANN at this time.

I hope this is helpful. If there are questions or comments from  
constituency members, please have them forwarded directly to Mike  
Zupke or me.

As an aside, you will also notice a second section to the  
questionnaire regarding contingency, disaster and failure planning.  
We added this because it was thought that the original RFP did not  
solicit sufficient information in this regard.

Kurt Pritz

ICANN
4676 Admiralty Way, #330
Marina del Rey. CA  90292

+1.310.301.5809 (office)
+1.310.400.4184 (mobile)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: RDE Provider Risks and Conflicts.pdf
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 104695 bytes
Desc: RDE Provider Risks and Conflicts.pdf
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/registrars/attachments/20070809/676e6437/RDEProviderRisksandConflicts.pdf>