[.Paris] Additional comments on DAGv3 by the City of Paris

[Clément, Jean-Philippe <Jean-Philippe.Clement@xxxxxxxx>]

Further to the letter of Deputy Mayor of Paris Jean-Louis MISSIKA to ICANN 
Chairman Peter Dengate-Thrush and ICANN CEO Rod Beckstrom, the City of Paris 
would like to make the following additional comment.

1) Priority categories of new gTLD applications. 
We understand ICANN's need to define clear criteria for the allocation of 
priorities. A number of community-based gTLD projects, including that of 
.paris, reflect the commitment of the relevant government authorities. We 
submit that this is a reliable criterion for access to a priority application 
window. As a matter of fact, the frequently mentioned concern of "gaming" does 
not apply if priority is based on government support or non-objection.

2) Overreaching contract requirements. 
In a number of aspects, the current Draft Application Guidebook places 
inconsiderate or pointless burdens on the organization in charge of the TLD. We 
urge ICANN to ensure that  technical or financial requirements match the type 
of TLD and the type of applicant. 
Here are some examples:

2.1) Continued Operation Instrument. 
Specification 8 attached to the Revised Proposed Draft New Registry Agreement 
requires a 5-year "standby letter of credit or irrevocable escrow deposit". 
This is, for all practical purposes, a bank guarantee for which a substantial 
commission must be paid. This would of course have no practical value in the 
case of Paris. It would also be questionable use of taxpayers' money for the 
City to demonstrate its solvency in this fashion. We also draw ICANN's 
attention to the fact that financial systems vary from one country to another 
and that it would be inappropriate for ICANN to impose US-centric financial 
requirements.
 
2.2) Registration Data Publication Service. 
Section 1.1.2 of Specification 4 attached to the Revised Proposed Draft New 
Registry Agreement mandates the Registry operator to provide the full detail of 
a registrant's information. This provision is would violate French law with 
respect to the Protection of Individuals With Regard to the Processing of 
Personal Data.

2.3) Registry-registrar service level requirements. 
The Revised Proposed Draft New Registry Agreement contains a number of service 
level requirements relating the registry-registrar data transmission, or the 
update frequency of the TLD zone file. Some of them only make sense for certain 
kinds of TLDs. For a community TLD, ICANN-defined performance requirements 
should be limited to the TLD name service and public Whois service.

Yours truly,

Jean-Philippe CLEMENT
Advisor to the Secretary General of the City of Paris
Internet, Communication and Information Technology