RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Question to WG on RAA

[Jeff Eckhaus <eckhaus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Michael - as you stated, these are provisions in the draft Registry agreement, 
not the RAA (Registrar Accreditation Agreement) which had been the topic of my 
email.

As for the WG  there has not been a major response to my initial question of 
what are the concerns with either signing the RAA or having a Registry 
agreement that incorporates the RAA? In earlier emails people were against it 
and was an option multiple times in the survey that was distributed, so there 
must be a reason people are against signing it.

I was hoping we could start the dialogue on the list on this issue or others as 
we wait  for the proposals to roll in.


Jeff



From: Michael D. Palage [mailto:michael@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2010 10:35 AM
To: Jeff Eckhaus; Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Question to WG on RAA

Jeff,

I have a hard time reconciling your and Jon's interpretation of ICANN 
contractual regime.  How about we ask ICANN's general counsel to interpret the 
following contractual provisions in the draft registry agreement.

2.9 Use of Registrars. Registry Operator must use only ICANN accredited 
registrars in registering domain names.

2.6 Reserved Names  ...... If Registry Operator is the registrant for any 
domain names in the
Registry TLD (other than the Second-Level Reservations for Registry Operations 
from Specification 5),
such registrations must be through an ICANN accredited registrar.......

Best regards,

Michael




From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Jeff Eckhaus
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2010 12:45 PM
To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] Question to WG on RAA

I would like to ask a question to the people in this Working Group on the issue 
of having a Registry sign the RAA. What is the section of the RAA that people 
are so virulently opposed to? I believe this is an issue that may be getting 
muddled so would like to bring it out in the open.

The RAA does not mandate that the use of Registrars in every business model. 
That provision is in the Registry agreement. The provision in the RAA is below 
that explains this issue:

2.4 Use of ICANN Accredited Registrars. In order to promote competition in the 
registration of domain names, and in recognition of the value that 
ICANN-accredited registrars bring to the Internet community, ICANN has 
ordinarily required gTLD registries under contract with ICANN to use 
ICANN-accredited registrars, and ICANN will during the course of this agreement 
abide by any ICANN adopted specifications or policies requiring the use of 
ICANN-accredited registrars by gTLD registries.



*         The RAA  mandates that the Registrar must abide by Domain dispute 
resolutions. Is this the item in the RAA that some are opposed to?

*         The requirement to escrow data?

*         The RAA has a schedule of fees to be paid by the Registrar. Is it the 
fees?

*         Registrar Training requirements?

*         Having to delete a domain within 45 days of registrar or registrant 
terminating a registration agreement ?

*         The requirement to maintain insurance with a limit of at least 
$500,000 ?


I am hoping we can discuss this issue on the list and maybe figure out what are 
the concerns with either signing the RAA or having a Registry agreement that 
incorporates the RAA?

For those who have never read the RAA, here is a link to the latest version 
http://www.icann.org/en/registrars/ra-agreement-21may09-en.htm



Thanks

Jeff