[ispcp] RV: [council] Proposed 2013 RAA Posted for Comment

["Novoa, Osvaldo" <onovoa@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

All,
I think you should all be aware of this situation and consider if we should post any comment on the proponed RAA.  I think we should.
Best regards,
Osvaldo

________________________________
De: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] En nombre de Volker Greimann
Enviado el: Viernes, 08 de Marzo de 2013 12:10
CC: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx List
Asunto: Re: [council] Proposed 2013 RAA Posted for Comment

To complete the set of documents, I am fowarding the  statement of the RrSG Negotiation Team on the current state of the negotiations.
Please note that the proposal currently envisioned by ICANN will effectively move the policy development process from the GNSO to the board.
Most of the still contentious areas of the agreement are additions ICANN staff made this February after having let the negotiations languish in pause-mode for three months after the Toronto meeting and contain items that were never discussed with the registrar negotiation team since first proposed, due to other "matters of higher urgency".
This agreement is a portent of things to come and of a move away from the multi-stakeholder model to a top-down structure.
Registrar Stakeholder Group Negotiating Team (Registrar NT) statement regarding RAA negotiations

After nearly 18 months of negotiations with ICANN over a new Registrar

Accreditation Agreement (RAA), formal negotiations have concluded. The posting

of a "proposed" 2013 RAA by ICANN for public comment signals that ICANN staff

believes that negotiations have concluded and the remaining issues will not be

resolved.



The Registrars' NT disagrees. To be clear, this is NOT the outcome that

registrars wanted, and they remain ready and willing to continue negotiations.



Prior to the Toronto ICANN meeting (October 2012), all parties acknowledged

that they were very close to agreement on all remaining issues.  The process

appeared to be reaching a favorable conclusion and when ICANN CEO Fadi Chehadé

communicated his desire to have RAA negotiations wrapped up by the end of 2012,

registrars felt it was an ambitious timeframe, but one worth pursuing for the

benefit of all parties.



When negotiations finally resumed in February 2013 much to the surprise of

registrars, the few remaining issues were not the only items under discussion.

ICANN staff presented a list of 10 brand new items for inclusion in the

agreement, under the pretext of enhancing the "public interest." Furthermore,

these new items came along with an arbitrary deadline and decision to link the

2013 RAA to the new gTLD timeline.



Among these new demands was a Registrant Rights and Responsibilities document

(R3), a temporary privacy accreditation program and a requirement that

registrars accept and implement recommendations of the WHOIS Expert Working

Group, which had yet to be formed and whose work is just beginning.



Although registrars were surprised by these new demands, registrars worked in

good faith with ICANN to accommodate its intentions. For example, registrars

consulted with their members to fine-tune the R3 document to make it easier to

understand and readily translatable in other languages.



Some of the other new items for inclusion transcend the RAA and could affect

the entirety of the multi-stakeholder model.  For example, ICANN insisted on

including a proposed Revocation (or "blow up") Clause that would have given

them the ability to unilaterally terminate all registrar accreditations. After

major pushback, ICANN staff relented and in its place proposed giving the ICANN

Board the ability to unilaterally amend the RAA. This is identical to what

ICANN inserted into the proposed new gTLD registry agreement-a clause met with

strong opposition not only from the Registry Stakeholder Group but from the

broader ICANN community.



The effect of such a clause in the primary agreements between ICANN and its

commercial stakeholders would be devastating to the bottom-up,

multi-stakeholder model.  First, it will effectively mean the end of the GNSO's

PDP, as the Board will become the central arena for all controversial issues,

not the community. Second, it creates an imbalance of authority in the ICANN

model, with no limits on the scope or frequency of unilateral amendments, and

no protections for registrars and more important registrants.



In addition to the new items for inclusion there was a surprise announcement

that all new gTLD registries must only use registrars that have signed the 2013

RAA, a transparent effort by ICANN to arbitrarily link the new gTLD program to

the outcome of RAA negotiations. This requirement would create separate

"classes" or "levels" of registrars, which is unprecedented in the DNS

industry.  There can and must be only one meaning of "ICANN-Accredited."



All of the items that have been agreed to over the past 18 months would, by

themselves, produce an RAA that is vastly improved over the current 2009

version. If adopted, that RAA would significantly raise performance

requirements for every ICANN accredited registrar and bring dramatic

improvements to the domain name ecosystem. Nearly all of the Law Enforcement

requests that were endorsed by the GAC have been included, as well as the major

items that were requested by the GNSO are included in that RAA. That RAA would

bring registrant verification. That RAA would bring enhanced compliance tools.



Registrars must emphasize that the key differences between that RAA and the one

currently proposed by ICANN are not issues raised by Law Enforcement, GAC or

the GNSO but by ICANN staff.



It now moves to the greater ICANN community to review these competing draft

RAAs, and registrars look forward to those public discussions.  We welcome

engagement with all stakeholders on the new 2013 RAA, and what it means for

registrars, registrants, and the management of the DNS as a whole.

https://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/proposed-raa-07mar13-en.htm
Proposed 2013 RAA Posted for Comment
Comment / Reply Periods (*)
Comment Open Date:
7 March 2013
Comment Close Date:
28 March 2013 - 23:59 UTC
Reply Open Date:
29 March 2013
Reply Close Date:
19 April 2013 - 23:59 UTC
Important Information Links
Public Comment Announcement<https://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-07mar13-en.htm>
To Submit Your Comments (Forum)<mailto:comments-proposed-raa-07mar13@xxxxxxxxx>
View Comments Submitted<http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-proposed-raa-07mar13/>
Brief Overview
Originating Organization:
ICANN
Categories/Tags:

 *   Contracted Party Agreements
Purpose (Brief):

ICANN is seeking public comments on a Proposed 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA), particularly on areas where ICANN and the Registrar Negotiating Team have not been able to reach agreement in principle. This represents the first time in the nearly 18 months of negotiations that community comment is formally sought on this document.
Current Status:

ICANN and the Registrar Negotiating Team commenced negotiation on amendments to the RAA in October 2011. While the documents posted today show many areas of agreement, there are differences between the ICANN and Registrar positions are highlighted. In addition, further discussion is still ongoing regarding some of the specifications to the agreement.
Next Steps:

After review of the comment received, the proposed 2013 RAA will be reviewed to determine if further changes are warranted. In addition, ICANN and the Registrar NT are likely to continue discussions regarding the areas where the specifications remain open. The ultimate goal is to have a 2013 RAA completed and approved in the near future.
Staff Contact:
Samantha Eisner, Senior Counsel
Email Staff Contact<mailto:samantha.eisner@xxxxxxxxx?subject=More%20information%20on%20the%20Proposed%202013%20RAA%20Posted%20for%20Comment%20public%20comment%20period>
Detailed Information
Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose:

After nearly 18 months of negotiations, ICANN is posting a new version of the proposed 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA) for public comment.

The Registrar Negotiating Team (NT) has continued to engage in good faith negotiations to understand ICANN's perspective with respect to the outstanding issues, and to share the often divergent positions within the Registrar Stakeholder Group. Recently, additional revisions were proposed by ICANN's Negotiating Team stemming from the call by ICANN's CEO, Fadi Chehadé, to work to improve the image of the domain industry and to protect registrants through a further updated contractual framework. The Registrar NT considered each of these new issues, and worked towards finding solutions where appropriate. The RAA posted today reflects hard-fought concessions on many of key issues raised throughout the negotiations, and highlights issues remaining in order for the final 2013 RAA agreement to be reached.

Throughout the RAA and its Specifications, there are portions where two versions of draft text appear side by side. These highlight areas where ICANN and the Registrars have not been able to reach agreement in principle on an issue, therefore both positions are provided for comment. Unless otherwise noted, the remainder of the document reflects agreements in principle among ICANN and the Registrar NT.

A fuller discussion of the status of negotiations and areas of difference is available in ICANN's RAA Posting Memorandum<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/memo-07mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 66 KB].
Section II: Background:

The current round of negotiations over the RAA began in October 2011. ICANN and the Registrar Negotiation Team have presented updates to the community at each of ICANN's public meetings since that time. Information on the history of the negotiations, including previously released documentation, is available at the community wiki at https://community.icann.org/display/RAA/Negotiations+Between+ICANN+and+Registrars+to+Amend+the+Registrar+Accreditation+Agreement. This includes the group of documents posted in June 2012, which demonstrated the progress to date in the negotiations.
Section III: Document and Resource Links:

There are multiple documents for review as part of this posting. The new RAA is anticipated to be a base document with a series of specifications attached. This posting includes all documents that are currently anticipated to be part of the 2013 a. As noted above, a fuller discussion of the status of negotiations and areas of difference is available in ICANN's RAA Posting Memorandum<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/memo-07mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 66 KB].

The base RAA documents:

 *   Proposed 2013 RAA, Annotated to Show Differences Between ICANN and Registrar Positions<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-agreement-07mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 281 KB]
 *   Redline showing changes between Proposed 2013 RAA and the June 2012 RAA Posting<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-agreement-03jun12-redline-07mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 205 KB]
 *   Redline showing changes between Proposed 2013 RAA and the 2009 RAA<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-agreement-2009-redline-07mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 259 KB]
 *   A Summary of Changes from the June 2012 RAA Posting<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-agreement-summary-changes-07mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 268 KB] is also available.

The Specifications and Addendums:

For the Consensus and Temporary Policy Specification, the Data Retention Specification, and the Whois Accuracy Program Specification, each is available in annotated format to show where differences remain with the registrars, as well as redlines showing the differences in the documents from the 2012 posting.

 *   Proposed Consensus and Temporary Policy Specification, Annotated to Show Differences Between ICANN and Registrar Positions<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-consensus-temporary-policy-07mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 121 KB]
 *   Redline showing changes between to the Consensus and Temporary Policy Specification and the June 2012 Version<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-consensus-temporary-policy-redline-07mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 95 KB]
 *   Proposed Data Retention Specification, Annotated to Show Differences Between ICANN and Registrar Positions<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-data-retention-07mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 113 KB]
 *   Redline showing changes between to the Data Retention Specification and the June 2012 Version<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-data-retention-redline-07mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 118 KB]
 *   Proposed Whois Accuracy Program Specification, Annotated to Show Differences Between ICANN and Registrar Positions<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-whois-accuracy-07mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 116 KB]
 *   Redline showing changes between to the Whois Accuracy Program Specification and the June 2012 Version<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-whois-accuracy-redline-07mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 142 KB]

For the remaining specifications to the RAA, the versions below are provided as ICANN's latest proposal. The Registrar Negotiation Team is still considering each of these specifications:

 *   Proposed Registrant Rights and Responsibilities Specification<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-registrant-rights-responsibilities-07mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 48 KB]
 *   ICANN Proposed Specification on Proxy/Privacy Services<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-privacy-proxy-07mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 70 KB]
 *   ICANN Proposed Additional Registrar Operation Specification<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-additional-operation-07mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 78 KB]
 *   ICANN Proposed Registrar Information Specification<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-registrar-information-07mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 76 KB]
 *   ICANN Proposed Whois Specification<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-whois-07mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 160 KB]
 *   ICANN Proposed Compliance Certificate<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-compliance-certificate-07mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 64 KB]
 *   ICANN Proposed Transition Addendum <https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-transition-addendum-07mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 63 KB]
Section IV: Additional Information:
None
________________________________

(*) Comments submitted after the posted Close Date/Time are not guaranteed to be considered in any final summary, analysis, reporting, or decision-making that takes place once this period lapses.


Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat
gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
http://gnso.icann.org



________________________________
El presente correo y cualquier posible archivo adjunto está dirigido únicamente al destinatario del mensaje y contiene información que puede ser confidencial. Si Ud. no es el destinatario correcto por favor notifique al remitente respondiendo anexando este mensaje y elimine inmediatamente el e-mail y los posibles archivos adjuntos al mismo de su sistema. Está prohibida cualquier utilización, difusión o copia de este e-mail por cualquier persona o entidad que no sean las específicas destinatarias del mensaje. ANTEL no acepta ninguna responsabilidad con respecto a cualquier comunicación que haya sido emitida incumpliendo nuestra Política de Seguridad de la Información


This e-mail and any attachment is confidential and is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not intended recipient please inform the sender immediately, answering this e-mail and delete it as well as the attached files. Any use, circulation or copy of this e-mail by any person or entity that is not the specific addressee(s) is prohibited. ANTEL is not responsible for any communication emitted without respecting our Information Security Policy.