RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] RE: Consolidated Response to Jeff & Anthony

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

Michele,

The point is that not all TLDs will need registries, registrars, WHOIS, 
Transfer policies....in the way that we think about today.  

Thanks - there is a section that states:  In the event that ICANN publishes a 
rights and responsibilities doc, the registrar should post it and point 
registrants to it.  I did miss that.  

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.



-----Original Message-----
From: Michele Neylon :: Blacknight [mailto:michele@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2010 12:57 PM
To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: Neuman, Jeff; Jon Nevett
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] RE: Consolidated Response to Jeff & Anthony


On 27 Mar 2010, at 16:43, Neuman, Jeff wrote:
> 
> It is precisely my position, that (1) new TLDs in the future may not need 
> some of the "consumer protections" that registrars like to allege are in the 
> RAA because they would not be applicable; and (2) there are no protections in 
> the RAA that could not be put directly into a registry agreement for those 
> registries in the future that do not need or want to use ICANN -accredited 
> registrars.
> 
> Let me give you an example, which I will state is NOT one that I know is 
> applying for a TLD in this round, but is a potential TLD based on actual 
> services offered today in the marketplace.  I have also extremely dummied 
> this down for myself and for others.  There are a number of companies that 
> offer what is known as private ENUM services which use DNS to perform lookups 
> and to route traffic amongst telecommunication service providers and their 
> aggregators.  It is private in that to "register" or "access" private domain 
> names requires connection to the "registry" through private VPN-type 
> connections and cannot be viewed or accessed by the regular public.  Billions 
> of transactions per day are conducted through these private ENUM systems.  
> Most of the Private ENUM operators have never participated in the ICANN 
> process nor do they have any intention to.
> 
> However, there may be reasons that these private ENUM systems may want to be 
> opened up so that public lookups, or connections through the public Internet 
> are possible.  It would still essentially be a closed system, but in order to 
> prevent a clash between something registered in the public root and the 
> private root, it is possible that an operator of a private ENUM system may 
> want a TLD in the public root.  What is important for this example is not 
> that this exists today, which it does, but rather these names do not have 
> websites, e-mail accounts, blogs, etc.  There is no content available to be 
> viewed by the public, nor is it something a consumer ever sees.  Everything 
> happens in the background invisible to the consumer.  In that circumstance, 
> there would be no need for registrars, WHOIS, no need for registrar 
> transfers, no resellers, no ICANN deletion policy, no UDRP, no need for an 
> ICANN logo, etc.   In fact, one might argue that there is very little 
> registry functionalit!
> y needed as well :)

There are also public ENUM in operation in several countries and you can do 
lookups via public DNS.

I fail to see your point.



> 
> I took your advice and re-read the RAA.  Cutting out of the legalese, the 
> parts about paying ICANN its fees and the boilerplate, below is the sum total 
> or protections for consumers (Reworded in short hand by me)

<snip>

You seem  to have  overlooked the "rights and responsibilities" that was 
introduced in the 2009 RAA


Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection
ICANN Accredited Registrar
http://www.blacknight.com/
http://blog.blacknight.com/
http://mneylon.tel
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
US: 213-233-1612 
UK: 0844 484 9361
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland  Company No.: 370845