RE: [council] Re: Uniform Rapid Suspension Discussion

["Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Kurt,

There was a discussion yesterday amongst some members of the community at an 
even hosted by MelbourneIT where I raised a question which I feel like I should 
restate on the Council list.  A number of us would like to see an RFI/RFP on 
the URS so that we can have empirical evidence that the process as designed 
cannot be conducted for the prices that have been indicated ($300-$500).  It is 
our understanding that your conclusions are based on some discussions with the 
National Arbitration Forum and with the World Intellectual Property 
Organization. However, some believe that there may indeed be providers out 
there that can meet the requirements at the desired feed.  But we will never 
know that unless and until a proper competitive process is held.

I draw analogies to the EBERO process where prior to the RFI, the community 
assumed that each applicant would have to secure a Letter of Credit for 
hundreds of thousands of dollars if not well in excess of $1M.  After the RFI 
process and ICANN saw the costs that would actually be charged by potential 
back-up providers (through the competitive process), it was realized that the 
fees would be substantially less.  I believe the same may be the case here.  If 
not, then what have we lost?

So, rather than trying to come up with new solutions on re-designing the 
process that took years to come up with in the first place, can we place some 
focus on getting the right providers at the right price?

Best regards,

Jeffrey J. Neuman
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs


From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 7:08 AM
To: Kurt Pritz
Cc: GNSO Council List
Subject: [council] Re: Uniform Rapid Suspension Discussion

Thanks Kurt. I am copying the Council for their information.

The Council will no doubt follow-up on this in the near future.

Best,

Stéphane Van Gelder
Directeur Général / General manager
INDOM NetNames France
----------------
Registry Relations and Strategy Director
NetNames
T: +33 (0)1 48 01 83 51
F: +33 (0)1 48 01 83 61

Le 18 sept. 2012 à 22:09, Kurt Pritz a écrit :


Hi Stephane:

I am writing to let you know that we are planning a set of discussions on 
Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) implementation in the near future and seek the 
input of GNSO leadership. As you know, a meeting in Prague we indicated that 
URS, as currently designed, did not appear to meet cost requirements. In 
Prague, contributors in the meeting described briefly several potential 
solutions. In the next set of meetings, we want to flesh out some of those 
models for possible implementation.We want to have one meeting in about two 
weeks (probably a webinar type of format with a possibility for some 
face-to-face interaction), and then we have a meeting in Toronto is scheduled. 
The first meeting will be announced shortly.

I am writing you because some of the proposed solutions, while feasible, do not 
match up with the specific conclusions of the STI team when it did its work. We 
recognize the role of the GNSO in those discussions. While the meetings we are 
having are open to all, we understand that the GNSO leadership might want to 
conduct the URS discussions in a certain way. Having the twin goals of 
developing a solution in time for use by new gTLDs and ensuring that all those 
interested can participate in the discussion, we can work in whichever way the 
GNSO wishes to proceed. (Of course, we also seek to meet the cost and 
timeliness goals for which the the URS was designed and also seek to ensure 
that registrants enjoy the protections written into the current model by the 
IRT and STI.)The output of the next meetings can inform GNSO discussion or we 
can carry on in a way acceptable to the GNSO.

I am also copying Olivier as ALAC members participated in the STI.

I hope you find this helpful. Contact me anytime with questions.

Regards,

Kurt