RE: [council] 20 Nov Council call - staff response to Afilias RSEP question

[Liz Gasster <liz.gasster@xxxxxxxxx>]

All,

Sorry we were obtuse in the earlier response.  Please disregard the first 
explanation.  The Afilias proposal went through the Registry Services 
Evaluation Process (also known as the Funnel) because they were proposing a 
proposed policy imposing new obligations on .INFO registrars relating to 
"abusive domain use". Under the consensus policy adopted by the ICANN Board, 
all requests for new registry services or amendments must go through this 
registry services evaluation. Accordingly, as a proposed policy for .INFO 
registrars relating to abusive domain use, it was reviewed as a registry 
service. Proposed registry services need to be reviewed against the definition 
in the Registry Agreements for security, stability and competition issues. This 
is done with all proposed registry services. This falls under A(i) of the 
definition of registry service, “(i) operations of the registry critical to the 
following tasks: the receipt of data from registrars concerning registrations 
of domain names and name servers”. Some proposals require a change to the terms 
of the Registry Agreement in order to be implemented. The Afilias Abusive Use 
Policy did not require a change to the terms of the Registry Agreement (or RRA) 
in order to be implemented.

Thanks, Liz

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Ruiz [mailto:tim@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 11:49 AM
To: Liz Gasster
Cc: Rosette,Kristina; GNSO Council
Subject: RE: [council] 20 Nov Council call - staff response to Afilias RSEP 
question

I'm a little dense at times, but it seems to me this is really not an
answer unless the implication is that since Staff determined no change
to the RRA was necessary (and hence no change to the Registry
Agreement), use of the RSEP was not necessary. Is that the case?

Tim

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [council] 20 Nov Council call - staff response to Afilias RSEP
question
From: Liz Gasster <liz.gasster@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, December 09, 2008 12:47 pm
To: "Rosette, Kristina" <krosette@xxxxxxx>, GNSO Council
<council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Kristina and all,

At the last GNSO Council meeting, during the discussion on the issues
report on registration abuse provisions, Kristina Rosette asked whether
Afilias was required to use the Registry Services Evaluation Process
(RSEP) to implement their anti-abuse policy or whether Afilias could
have implemented it unilaterally. Following is staff’s response to
that question:

Afilias contacted ICANN about their proposed anti-abuse policy and
following a review of the RSEP and their Registry Agreement, ICANN staff
determined that the proposed anti-abuse policy did not require a
modification to the Registry-Registrar Agreement (RRA) which is part of
the Registry Agreement. It should be noted, however, that the RSEP is
required for all registry services as defined in the Registry Agreement.
 It is also worth noting that Afilias implemented their Abusive Use
Policy pursuant to section 3.5.2 of their Registry-Registrar Agreement
<http://www.icann.org/en/tlds/agreements/info/appendix-08-08dec06.htm>,
which allows Afilias to require registrars to comply with: "operational
standards, policies, procedures, and practices for the Registry TLD
established from time to time by Afilias in a non-arbitrary manner and
applicable to all registrars, including affiliates of Afilias, and
consistent with ICANN's standards, policies, procedures, and practices
and Afilias’ Registry Agreement with ICANN."

Please let us know if you have further questions.

Thanks, Liz