RE: [gnso-rap-dt] FW: [council] AGP Limits Policy - Implementation Report

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

I would like to hear a little more background on the alleged fraud.  I
take a different position in that some fraud I believe would be an
example of an extraordinary event especially in light of the true
purpose of the AGP.  The AGP was put into place to protect against fraud
and mistake.

 

Bottom line is that I do not believe we have enough facts surrounding
the incidents of alleged fraud to determine whether that was the
appropriate outcome.

 

Jeffrey J. Neuman 
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy



________________________________

The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for
the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential
and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you
have received this e-mail message in error and any review,
dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please
notify us immediately and delete the original message.

 

 

From: owner-gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Greg Aaron
Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 10:06 AM
To: 'Marika Konings'; gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-rap-dt] FW: [council] AGP Limits Policy -
Implementation Report

 

Of the nine exemption requests, eight involved registrant fraud -
phishing, etc.  Only one of those requests were granted, and it also
involved a problem with cross-credentials, and the registry said the
registrar needed to better next time.  The registry operators declined
the requests since fraud is not an extraordinary event, and is therefore
not covered under the policy.  

 

I think those were appropriate outcomes.  And to me, it appears that the
policy encourages registrars to be watchful.

 

All best,

--Greg

 

 

________________________________

From: Marika Konings [mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 3:23 AM
To: gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-rap-dt] FW: [council] AGP Limits Policy - Implementation
Report

 

Dear All,

For your information, please find the latest AGP Limits Policy
Implementation Report attached. Note that in the Exhibit 2 'History of
exemption requests', there are two requests (from the same registrar)
for exemption on the basis of 'Registrant abuses that resulted in
numerous registrations being added, deleted and re-added multiple times
within the AGP to avoid paying for the registration'. It might also be
worth noting that exemption was granted noting that the registrar 'need
to
improve their systems to catch the scenario identified in part 2 of the
request as future exemptions will not be granted'.

Please let me know if you have any further questions.

With best regards,

Marika

------ Forwarded Message
From: Craig Schwartz <craig.schwartz@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 18:57:07 -0800
To: GNSO Council <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [council] AGP Limits Policy - Implementation Report

Dear Councilors,
 
Please find attached the second AGP Limits Policy Implementation Report.
This report provides a status update on the implementation of the Policy
since it was announced to the community on 17 December 2008.
 
As always, please let me know if you have any questions about this
information.
 
Best,
 
Craig Schwartz
Chief gTLD Registry Liaison
ICANN 



------ End of Forwarded Message