Common use of Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx Clause in Contracts

Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx. Go ahead Xxxxxx . Xxxxxx Xxxxxxx: Sorry. Just at the moment, for those having issues, another thing you might try is just using a different browser; that sometimes works as well. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: All right. Thank you. Okay, well good luck folks on that. I'll try to point to you if there’s any other way to look at these. Actually, the next documents, I'm not sure if they’re up on the Adobe anyway. But they’re basically are from the - our email archive, and so if there’s questions, you can look at those. I thought there was a - did - we did have some discussion over the last couple of days about Task 2 and Task 3. Recognizing that we haven't completed Task 1, because we have a document with something like 40-odd top priorities and that still needs to be done. We - I think we need to resolve how we’re dealing with Task 2 and 3 if we can today, or at least make some progress on that. I sent around -- again, just to remind everybody -- what Task 2 and 3 are. Task 2 is from the list of topics. Flag any topics that may require further analysis as to impact on consensus policy. That’s the task we were given by the Council. And now I - we seem to have two or three different views on how we should proceed on that. Up till now, we've been trying to do Task 2 in tandem with Task 1. And you'll see on the matrix there are a few items where we've noted -- this seems to be handled by consensus policy; this seems to be something that’s being actively discussed by another working group, and it was the PEDNR working group. So I think we flagged a few issues. But now I see that Xxx and Xxxxxxx have suggested that in one approach. And I think the staff in the memo that they sent around may have suggested another approach. And then I put in a couple of comments on a third approach. So let - why don't we just ask, you know, let’s just review these and see what the different options are? So Xxxxxxx are you - can you tell us how you think we ought to handle Task 2? Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx: Well I've assist to supporting (Xxx)’s proposal a couple days ago - a day or so ago; that we let ICANN legal staff take a crack at this. Just because I - it could take things off us having to go through it. Give it to them. Give them a chance to do it. Apparently, they had done it in the past as well and their input would be helpful. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: Okay. So your idea is that we wait until they do that before we complete Task - in other words, we kind of subcontract Task 2 to the staff? Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx: I'm not saying we would have to stop work on what we’re doing. But we would seek their input at this point in the process. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: Okay. Xxxxxx, or someone else from the staff, would you like to kind of walk us through this aspect of the memo that you circulated yesterday? I mean, looking, really, at Point 3 of your memo, which I guess is on the Agenda Page. Maybe you could let us know. Tell us what the staff view is on who should be deciding whether an issue is more appropriately addressed through policy development process than in RAA. Xxxxxx Xxxxx: Sure. I can address that. The memo basically walks through the requirements under the RAA. And we were just clarifying that, you know, a couple aspects that I think there’s been maybe some misunderstanding on, on some of the participants. And what we were pointing out was that although the amendments can touch upon consensus policy issues, the question really is, is it appropriate, given the amount of work that we have and, you know, and the length of the topics? And so that the approach we took in the memo was to suggest that we look at the amendment and, you know, and where it’s clarification of language versus, you know, a new policy -- this is just a - purely a recommendation -- that that would be the - where you draw the line. You know? And understanding that the, you know, there is work already underway in some PDP groups and some, you know, something. Like, for example, you know, domain warehousing or something. You know? There’s no work absolutely, you know, being done right now on that, and that could be a subject of, you know, consensus policy development. And so we were just clarifying that; that the way we view the contract, you know, you can address consensus policy issues. But we think it’s more appropriate where you’re talking about developing new policy to go down the PDP path. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: And what I took away from your memo was also that you thought this is something the drafting team should try to...

Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx. Go ahead Xxxxxx Yeah okay. Xxxxxx All right, well we can also make a decision if we want our group to meet in Nairobi. You know at this point, it doesn't look like a lot of us will be there, but a few will. And maybe as we get a little bit closer, we can try to decide whether we want this group to meet in Nairobi. But unless there’s objection, we will proceed. I think we should proceed on our regular schedule. And again, I would encourage people if we can to get as much of this done on the list as possible because we do have a lot of ground to cover. And I'm also going to suggest on the next agenda item that we do a little bit of parallel processing by having some people get started on a proposal for what we think the next steps ought to be procedurally without regard to the particular topics. I see Xxxxx has her hand up and also Xxxxxxxx. I think Xxxxxxxx was first actually and then Xxxxx. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx: SorryOh, Xxxxx go ahead. Just at Xxxxx Xxxxxx: I just want to say as a way forward, first I'd note the momentcomment on Xxxxxx supported by Xxxxxxxx that comments about the discussion would be worthwhile in Nairobi surely. I'm not sure that not having something to put forward doesn't actually start the discussion, but I was just going to suggest as a way forward having a revised agenda so that in fact we do target exactly what meeting we’re aiming for those having issues, another thing you might try is just using a different browser; and where we have to go so that sometimes works as wellwe actually - the time doesn't keep slipping away. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: All rightI think that’s a good point. Thank youXxxxxxxx. Okay, well good luck folks on Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx: I think that’s an excellent suggestion. The other thing I was going to suggest if it’s possible - and I'll try 've been trying to point come up in my head with ways to you if there’s any other way to look at these. Actually, the next documents, do it and I'm not sure if they’re up on the Adobe anywayI have. But they’re basically are from the - our email archive, and so if there’s questions, you can look at those. I thought there was even a - did - we did have some discussion over the last couple chunk of days about Task 2 and Task 3. Recognizing this that we havecould at least be able to report back to the Council in terms of this is what we've done so far and this is where we’re at - this is where we’re going. Even if it - you know for example, I don't completed Task 1know whether it would be possible to say, because "Here are the topics that at least initially we have a document with something like 40-odd top priorities identified as first priority or the highest priority." Just so that there’s A, some information for Council because they will need some kind of update; and second, to really keep the process moving along at the Council level so that still needs to be done. We - I think we need to resolve how we’re dealing with Task 2 and 3 if we can today, or at least make some progress on that. I sent around -- again, just to remind everybody -- what Task 2 and 3 are. Task 2 it doesn't really drop off of everybody’s radar screen until right after the report is from the list of topics. Flag any topics that may require further analysis as to impact on consensus policy. That’s the task we were given by the Council. And now I - we seem to have two or three different views on how we should proceed on that. Up till now, we've been trying to do Task 2 in tandem with Task 1. And you'll see on the matrix there are a few items where we've noted -- this seems to be handled by consensus policy; this seems to be something that’s being actively discussed by another working group, and it was the PEDNR working group. So I think we flagged a few issues. But now I see that Xxx and Xxxxxxx have suggested that in one approach. And I think the staff in the memo that they sent around may have suggested another approach. And then I put in a couple of comments on a third approach. So let - why don't we just ask, you know, let’s just review these and see what the different options are? So Xxxxxxx are you - can you tell us how you think we ought to handle Task 2? Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx: Well I've assist to supporting (Xxx)’s proposal a couple days ago - a day or so ago; that we let ICANN legal staff take a crack at this. Just because I - it could take things off us having to go through it. Give it presented to them. Give them a chance to do it. Apparently, they had done it in the past as well and their input would be helpful. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: Okay. So your idea is , so you’re suggesting that of course even though we wait until they do that before we complete Task - may not be in other wordsa position to submit a final report, we kind of subcontract Task 2 to the staff? Xxxxxxx certainly should be submitting a status report. Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx: I'm not saying we would have to stop work on what we’re doing. But we would seek their input at this point in the process. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: Okay. Xxxxxx, or someone else from the staff, would you like to kind of walk us through this aspect of the memo that you circulated yesterday? I mean, looking, really, at Point 3 of your memo, which I guess is on the Agenda Page. Maybe you could let us know. Tell us what the staff view is on who should be deciding whether an issue is more appropriately addressed through policy development process than in RAA. Xxxxxx Xxxxx: Sure. I can address that. The memo basically walks through the requirements under the RAA. And we were just clarifying that, you know, a couple aspects that I think there’s been maybe some misunderstanding on, on some of the participants. And what we were pointing out was that although the amendments can touch upon consensus policy issues, the question really is, is it appropriate, given the amount of work that we have and, you know, and the length of the topics? And so that the approach we took in the memo was to suggest that we look at the amendment and, you know, and where it’s clarification of language versus, you know, a new policy -- this is just a - purely a recommendation -- that that would be the - where you draw the line. You know? And understanding that the, you know, there is work already underway in some PDP groups and some, you know, something. Like, for example, you know, domain warehousing or something. You know? There’s no work absolutely, you know, being done right now on that, and that could be a subject of, you know, consensus policy development. And so we were just clarifying that; that the way we view the contract, you know, you can address consensus policy issues. But we think it’s more appropriate where you’re talking about developing new policy to go down the PDP path. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: And what I took away from your memo was also that you thought this is something the drafting team should try to...Yes.

Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx. Go ahead Xxxxxx Okay. Xxxxxx Xxxxxxx: Sorry. Just All right but getting back to Task 3 does anybody have other ideas at the momentthis point about options for next steps or would it be more, for those having issuesexcuse me, another thing you might try is just using would people be more comfortable reacting to a different browser; that sometimes works as well. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: All right. Thank you. Okay, well good luck folks on that. I'll try to point to you if there’s any other way to look at these. Actually, the next documents, I'm not sure if they’re up on the Adobe anyway. But they’re basically are from the - our email archive, and so if there’s questions, you can look at those. I thought there was a - did - we did have some discussion over the last couple of days about Task 2 and Task 3. Recognizing that we haven't completed Task 1, because we have a document with something like 40-odd top priorities and that still needs to be done. We - I think we need to resolve how we’re dealing with Task 2 and 3 if we can today, or at least make some progress on that. I sent around -- again, just to remind everybody -- what Task 2 and 3 are. Task 2 is from the list of topics. Flag any topics that may require further analysis as to impact on consensus policy. That’s the task we were given by the Council. And now I - we seem to have two or three different views on how we should proceed on that. Up till now, we've been trying to do Task 2 in tandem with Task 1. And you'll see on the matrix there are a few items where we've noted -- this seems to be handled by consensus policy; this seems to be something that’s being actively discussed by another working group, and it was the PEDNR working group. So I think we flagged a few issues. But now I see that Xxx and Xxxxxxx have suggested that in one approach. And I think the staff in the memo that they sent around may have suggested another approach. And then I put in a couple of comments on a third approach. So let - why don't we just askwritten, you know, let’s just review these and see what the different options arewritten document? So Xxxxxxx are you - can you tell us how you think we ought to handle Task 2Xxxxx? Xxxxxxx XxxxxxxXxxxx Xxxx: Well I've assist to supporting (Xxx)’s proposal a couple days ago - a day or so ago; that we let ICANN legal staff take a crack at this. Just because Yes Xxxxx, I - it could take things off us having to go through it. Give it to them. Give them a chance to do it. Apparently, they had done it in the past as well and their input would be helpful. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: Okay. So your idea is that we wait until they do that before we complete Task - in other words, we kind of subcontract Task 2 to the staff? Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx: I'm not saying we would have to stop work on what we’re doing. But we would seek their input at this point in the process. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: Okay. Xxxxxx, or someone else from the staff, would you like to kind of walk us through this aspect of the memo that you circulated yesterday? I mean, looking, really, at Point 3 of your memo, which I guess is on the Agenda Page. Maybe you could let us know. Tell us what the staff view is on who should be deciding whether an issue is more appropriately addressed through policy development process than in RAA. Xxxxxx Xxxxx: Sure. I can address that. The memo basically walks through the requirements under the RAA. And we were just clarifying thatdefinitely favor, you know, reacting to a couple aspects that written document at this point. I think thereif we could - if the group can complete the consolidation work ahead that should begin to short cycle the drafting work that Staff’s been maybe some misunderstanding ongoing to be asked to conduct, on some of the participantsparticularly since that drafting work is not something that can be unilaterally handled by contractual compliance. And what so we’ll need to work with legal as well as with the Registrar liaison team and perhaps others when we were pointing out was that although finally reach the amendments can touch upon consensus policy issuespoint where we’re putting some straw man provisions together, you know, for purposes of submitting those to a negotiating team. So I like the question really is, is it appropriate, given the amount of work that we have ideas put forth and, you know, and support the, you know, the length path forward as it’s been described. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: Okay, any other comments on Task 3? Xxxxxxxx has stated that she agrees with Xxxxx. Okay well I will try my hand at that and then Xxxxx will take the first cut at reclustering and we will make sure that something is circulated on that, not within the next few days but hopefully perhaps some time next week. Now this brings us really to the scheduling of our next call. I think if you look back at the timetable we said, you know, this meeting is taking place a week early from our bi-weekly schedule because of Nairobi. So we could try to again come together in two weeks but I don’t know whether people who are traveling to Nairobi, some of them might actually be spending a little more time in Kenya and therefore may not be back so soon. So I wonder if it makes sense to try to in our next Doodle poll try to look at some dates late in the week of the topics? And so that 15th, perhaps on the approach we took in 18th or 19th and we’re spilling over into early the memo was to suggest that we look at the amendment andfollowing week. Do people know, you know, and where particularly those who are traveling to Nairobi do you know if - it’s clarification the week of language versus, the 15th going to be totally out for you know, a new policy -- this or is just a - purely a recommendation -- it at least possible that we could find some dates and times that would be the - where you draw the line. You knowwill work? And understanding that the, you know, there is work already underway in some PDP groups and some, you know, something. Like, for example, you know, domain warehousing or something. You knowAny reactions to that? There’s no work absolutely, you know, being done right now on that, and that could be a subject of, you know, consensus policy development. And so we were just clarifying that; that the way we view the contract, you know, you can address consensus policy issues. But we think it’s more appropriate where you’re talking about developing new policy to go down the PDP path. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: And what I took away from your memo was also that you thought this is something the drafting team should try to...Xxxxxxx.

Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx. Go ahead Xxxxxx And yeah, I don't think there’s any disagreement with that. Xxxxxx XxxxxxxLet’s see. I have Xxxxxxx and Xxxxx. Xxxxxxx did you want to be recognized? Xxxxxxx Xxxxxx: SorryYeah, just very briefly. Just at From what I recollect, staff should be able to confirm. Working groups have to provide some kind of basic status update to the momentCouncil every couple of months anyway, for those having issues, another thing you might try is just using a different browser; that sometimes works as wellso it’s kind of moot in some respects unless I'm missing something. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: All rightI've been providing a very brief status report to the Council for every meeting. Thank youXxxx sends me an email and I send her you know a two-sentence report back, but we certainly can and probably should plan to have something more detailed for the Nairobi meeting. Xxxxxxx Xxxxxx: Okay, well good luck folks on that. I'll try to point to you if there’s any other way to look at these. Actually, the next documents, I'm not sure if they’re up on the Adobe anyway. But they’re basically are from the - our email archive, and so if there’s questions, you can look at those. I thought there was a - did - we did have some discussion over the last couple of days about Task 2 and Task 3. Recognizing that we haven't completed Task 1, because we have a document with something like 40-odd top priorities and that still needs to be done. We - Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: Xxxxx I think we need you were next. Xxxxx Xxxxxx: This is to resolve how we’re dealing with Task 2 and 3 if we can today, or at least make some progress on that. I sent around -- again, just to remind everybody -- support what Task 2 and 3 are. Task 2 is from the list of topics. Flag any topics that may require further analysis as to impact on consensus policy. That’s the task we were given by the Council. And now I - we seem to have two or three different views on how we should proceed on that. Up till now, we've been trying to do Task 2 in tandem with Task 1. And you'll see on the matrix there are a few items where we've noted -- this seems to be handled by consensus policy; this seems to be something that’s being actively discussed by another working group, and it was the PEDNR working group. So I think we flagged a few issues. But now I see that Xxx and Xxxxxxx have suggested that in one approachXxxxxxxx said. And I think it would be nice if we could just have a little look at a more detailed report based on where we've got to before the staff in the memo that they sent around may have suggested another approachnext Nairobi. And then I put in it can be just a couple of comments on a third approach. So let - why don't we just askstatus report, you know, let’s just review these and see what the different options are? So Xxxxxxx are you - can you tell us how you think we ought to handle Task 2? Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx: Well I've assist to supporting (Xxx)’s proposal a couple days ago - a day or so ago; but that we let ICANN legal staff take a crack at this. Just because I - it could take things off us having to go through it. Give it to them. Give them a chance to do it. Apparently, they had done it in the past as well and their input would be very helpful. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: Okay. So your idea is that All right, then we wait until they do that will plan to prepare a detailed status report before we the Nairobi meeting, and then the suggestion about setting a target date for trying to complete Task - in other words, we kind of subcontract Task 2 our work and have something submitted to the staffCouncil. I think there are two - I mean two options. One would be - don't hold me to the exact date, but one would be about March 15, which would enable us to have something before the Council to start its process at the April 1 meeting. And the second choice would be April 8, which would allow the Council - have something before the Council so it could start its work at the April 22 meeting. Do people have thoughts between those options or other suggestions? Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx: Xxxxx X'm not sure if you have your hand up or if I just failed to put it - I'm not saying we would have managing the screen very well. I didn't know if you wanted to stop work on what we’re doingbe recognized. But we would seek their input at this point in the processXxxxx Xxxxxx: I put it down actually. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: Okay, sorry about that. XxxxxxAll right. Okay, well what I would suggest that we do is that we see if we can aim at getting our work done by March 15. I can - well I guess depending on how many people are traveling to Nairobi, that may slow things up a bit. If we aim at April 8, I could certainly send out a proposed timetable with you know what we would have to do at each of the meetings between now and then. And maybe that’s the best way to proceed with the goal of having the report submitted by April 8 so that the Council could have it for its April 22 meeting. And of course as we said, there would be - would prepare a detailed status report for the Nairobi meeting. Are people comfortable with that approach? Okay in that case with hearing no objections, I will proceed on that basis. Okay, is there anything else on our timetable that people want to bring up? If not, let’s turn to the next agenda item, which is sub task or someone else from Task Number 3 of our Sub Team, which is recommending the staffnext steps. And I wonder if a couple of people would be interested in preparing something that we could look at either our next meeting or the following meeting as a starting point to give our recommendations of how - assuming we've got our list and we've got our - you know all of the items have been identified at high or low priority, would you what should happen next. Do people have thoughts on that that they'd like to kind of walk us through share at this aspect of the memo that you circulated yesterdaypoint? I mean, looking, really, at Point 3 of your memo, which I guess is Or are there people who would be willing to volunteer to try to come up with a proposal on the Agenda Page. Maybe you could let us know. Tell us what the staff view is on who should be deciding whether an issue is more appropriately addressed through policy development process than in RAA. that? Xxxxxx Xxxxx: SureXxxxx, this is Xxxxxx. I can address thatjust wanted to go back to the schedule. The memo basically walks through the requirements under the RAA. And we were I just clarifying that, you know, a couple aspects that I think there’s been maybe some misunderstanding on, on some of the participants. And what we were pointing out was that although the amendments can touch upon consensus policy issues, the question really is, is it appropriate, given the amount of work that we have and, you know, and the length of the topics? And so realized that the approach we took in GNSO on the memo 22nd of April is going to be changed because there was to suggest that we look at the amendment and, you know, and where it’s clarification of language versus, you know, a new policy -- this is just a - purely a recommendation -- that that would be the - where you draw the line. You know? And understanding that the, you know, there is work already underway in some PDP groups and some, you know, something. Like, for example, you know, domain warehousing or something. You know? There’s no work absolutely, you know, being done right now on that, and that could be a subject of, you know, consensus policy developmentconflict. And so we were just clarifying that; may have to revise your schedule when we know exactly what the date is going to be for that the way we view the contract, you know, you can address consensus policy issues. But we think it’s more appropriate where you’re talking about developing new policy to go down the PDP pathGNSO meeting. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: And what I took away from your memo was also that you thought this is something the drafting team should try to...Okay, do we know if it will be moved up or presumably moved back? We don't know.

Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx. Go ahead Xxxxxx Okay. Xxxxxx Xxxxxxx: Sorry. Just at the moment, for those having issues, another thing you might try is just using a different browser; that sometimes works as well. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: All right. Thank you. Okay, well good luck folks on that. I'll try to point to you if there’s any other way to look at these. Actually, the next documents, I'm not sure if they’re up on the Adobe anyway. But they’re basically are from the - our email archive, and so if there’s questions, you can look at those. I thought there was a - did - we did have some discussion over the last couple of days about Task 2 and Task 3. Recognizing that we haven't completed Task 1, because we have a document with something like 40-odd top priorities and that still needs to be done. We - Well I think we need to resolve how we’re dealing with Task 2 and 3 if we can today, that that suggests that there still may be room for some greater specificity or at least make perhaps urgency on some progress on that. I sent around -- again, just to remind everybody -- what Task 2 and 3 are. Task 2 is from the list of topics. Flag any topics that may require further analysis as to impact on consensus policy. That’s the task we were given by the Council. And now I - we seem to have two or three different views on how we should proceed on that. Up till now, we've been trying to do Task 2 in tandem with Task 1. And you'll see on the matrix there are a few items where we've noted -- this seems to be handled by consensus policy; this seems to be something that’s being actively discussed by another working group, and it was the PEDNR working groupthese. So I think guess I would suggest that we flagged keep this on the table but perhaps as a few issueslower priority item because there already is some ability to do this. But now I see that Xxx and Xxxxxxx have suggested that in one approachwant to move on because I don’t want to spend the whole call on Section 5. And I should say now which I didn’t say at the beginning, I really appreciate Xxxx’s stepping up to this because it was on a quite short notice that after he came back from the holiday he pulled together a review of these items. So we do appreciate that. Can we move onto Item 5.3 which is a specific right to audit after a change of control to determine if the new registrar is compliant? So Xxxxx what’s your reaction to that? Xxxxx Xxxx: Well Xxxxx I think the staff that’s an item that we quite frankly ought to be auditing. I can tell you we haven’t audited that item in the memo that they sent around may past. But again I do think under Section 3.14 we have suggested another approachthe authority to do essentially what the IPC is suggesting ought to be done here. And so if that is the case then I put in a couple of comments on a third approach. So let - why don't we just askwould suggest to the group that an amendment, you know, let’s just review these wouldn’t be required to specifically call this out as a certain type of audit. Because then quite frankly we’d almost have to create a laundry list of the various audits and see what incorporate that laundry list into an RAA if we begin to, you know, start identifying audits by item, you know, in the different options are? RAA, you know, going forward. So Xxxxxxx are you - can you tell again I believe we’ve got the authority we need under 3.14, and the way to test that is to work with Section 3.14 this coming fiscal year and give us how you think we ought to handle Task 2? Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx: Well I've assist to supporting (Xxx)’s proposal a couple days ago - a day or so ago; that we let ICANN legal staff take a crack at this. Just because I - it could take things off us having to go through it. Give it to them. Give them a chance to do it. Apparently, they had done it in the past as well and their input would be helpful. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: Okay. So your idea is use that new tool that we wait until they have to, you know, to do that before we complete Task - in these types of audits and other words, we kind types of subcontract Task 2 to the staff? Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx: I'm not saying we would have to stop work on what we’re doing. But we would seek their input at this point in the process. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: Okay. Xxxxxx, or someone else from the staff, would you like to kind of walk us through this aspect of the memo that you circulated yesterday? I mean, looking, really, at Point 3 of your memo, which I guess is on the Agenda Page. Maybe you could let us know. Tell us what the staff view is on who should be deciding whether an issue is more appropriately addressed through policy development process than in RAA. Xxxxxx Xxxxx: Sure. I can address that. The memo basically walks through the requirements under the RAA. And we were just clarifying audits that, you know, that we’re planning to undertake. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: Now I know there’s a couple aspects provision in the draft new registry agreement for the new TLDs that would require the new owner if you will to certify their compliance and then you can follow-up on that. Is there any provision like that in the RAA now? Xxxxx Xxxx: Not with that specificity, no. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: So the concern here of course is that, you know, is this whole accreditation by acquisition problem which is, you know, the whole register fly issue. And you’re saying there’s nothing specific about it in the agreement and no - not even a requirement that the new owner certify their compliance which can, you know, can then be audited. So I agree with you that 3.14, you know, might cover this but I guess the question is there value to having - and this is not an issue randomly chosen from a universe of potential auditable events. This change of control means you’re moving from someone who ICANN has done due diligence on to someone that ICANN hasn’t done due diligence on. Xxxxx Xxxx: Correct. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: So if due diligence is worth anything then maybe this ought to be singled out as a time when there’s a specific ability to audit and perhaps, you know, that’s really what gave rise to that proposal. Xxxxx Xxxx: That’s a fair point Xxxxx. And that’s why I put this sort of, you know, in the middle of our spectrum. But I do think there’s been maybe some misunderstanding on, on some an opportunity to work with the Registrar Liaison Team proactively so that as part of the participantsregistrar accreditation process when a change of control occurs, perhaps the Registrar Liaison Team would take the initiative to refresh the registrar accreditation application information as part of a sort of a fast track due diligence. And what then if there was a - if there were any suspect items or information in that fast track due diligence process, then I think the Registrar Liaison Team could turn it over to contractual compliance and we were pointing out was could further audit that although the amendments can touch upon consensus policy issues, the question really is, is it appropriate, given the amount of work that we have andinformation, you know, and the length of the topics? And so that the approach we took in the memo was to suggest that we look at the amendment and, you know, and where it’s clarification of language versus, you know, a new policy -- this is just a - purely a recommendation -- that that would be the - where you draw the line. You know? And understanding that the, you know, there is work already underway in some PDP groups and some, you know, something. Like, for example, you know, domain warehousing or something. You know? There’s no work absolutely, you know, being done right now on that, and that could be a subject of, you know, consensus policy development. And so we were just clarifying that; that the way we view the contract, you know, you can address consensus policy issues. But we think it’s provide more appropriate where you’re talking about developing new policy to go down the PDP pathclarity. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: And what (There’s probably) a question of where the responsibility for that would fall. I took away think that’s a good point. Xxxxx Xxxx: Yeah. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: Xxxxxxx you had your hand up still or is that from your memo was also that you thought this is something the drafting team should try to...an older... Xxxxxxx Xxxxxx: New one. ((Crosstalk)) Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: Okay... ((Crosstalk))

Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx. Go we - we have lost our echo, thanks to Xxxx’s self sacrifice. So why don't we get started. I think, our job here is to plunge back in to the - to our document starting at Item 11. I noticed that Xxxxxx has circulated a new - an updated version that reflects what we discussed last time. I've not even had a chance to look at that yet. And I guess what I would suggest is that people take a look at that and if you see any discrepancies or problems, please note those on the list and we'll get those squared away. But I - I - I think that’s probably the best way to proceed on that. On Number 11, I think the first one up here, 11.1 is simply to - for the RAA to reflect that the way that the GNSO council recommends consensus policy has changed with the GNSO restructuring. And I think it’s pretty much of a technical change. Unless anybody has any other comments on that, why don't we move ahead Xxxxxx to 11.2. Xxxxxx Xxxxxxx: SorryXxxxx has identified for us a number of reports or papers from the security and stability advisory committee that might be relevant here. Just at And I think it boiled down to just a couple of them -- 28 and 40, if I'm not mistaken -- that would be primed for discussion now. And I know we have Xxxx Xxxxxxxxxx on the moment, for those having issues, another thing you might try is just using a different browser; that sometimes works line as well. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: All right. Thank you. OkayLet me just say before we start the discussion on our topic 11.2, well good luck folks on that. I'll try just to point recall that all we’re doing here is trying to you set priorities and see if there’s any other way to look at these. Actually, the next documents, I'm not sure if they’re up on the Adobe anyway. But they’re basically are from the - our email archive, and so if there’s questions, you can look at those. I thought there was a - did - we did have some discussion over the last couple of days about Task 2 and Task 3. Recognizing anything that we haven't completed Task 1, because we have a document with something like 40-odd top priorities and that still needs to be done. We - I think we need to resolve how we’re dealing with Task 2 and 3 if we can today, or at least make some progress on that. I sent around -- again, just to remind everybody -- what Task 2 and 3 are. Task 2 is from the list of topics. Flag any topics that may require further analysis flag as to far as impact on consensus policy. That’s Not necessarily whether we'd agree with putting all of these topics into the task we were given by - or you know, all these provisions into the Council. And now I - we seem to have two or three different views on how we should proceed on that. Up till nowRAA, we've been trying to do Task 2 in tandem with Task 1. And you'll see on the matrix there are a few items where we've noted -- this seems to be handled by consensus policy; this seems to be something that’s being actively discussed by another working group, and it was the PEDNR working group. So I think we flagged a few issues. But now I see that Xxx and Xxxxxxx have suggested that in one approach. And I think the staff later stage in the memo that they sent around may have suggested another approach. And then I put in a couple of comments on a third approachprocess. So let me open the floor for discussion on 11.2. In particular on those two - why don't we what is in those two SSAC Advisories, 28 and 40. So please just asklet me know if you want to be recognized on this. I know some of you are on Adobe Connect, you knowbut not everybody. So the floor’s open on 11.2. Xxxx, letXxxxx wants to be heard. Anybody else? Let’s just review these and see what the different options arestart with Xxxxx. Go ahead. Xxxxx, go ahead. I wonder if you’re muted? So Xxxxxxx Xxxxx are you - can you tell us how you think we ought to handle Task 2with us? Xxxxxxx XxxxxxxCoordinator: Well Her line is now open Xxx. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: Thank you. Xxxxx Xxxxxx: I've assist to supporting been muted. I was - I must be the source of echo. Okay... Man: Not... (Xxx(Crosstalk)’s proposal a couple days ago ) Xxxxx Xxxxxx: ...the reason I put these up was - and all of them really, was because SAC, they - a day or so ago; lot of the advisories make sense. I was looking at the conversation between Xxxxxxx and Xxxx online and I do take Xxxx’s point that these advisories are not only for about registrants, they’re also about the safety and security of the registrar and the registrant as well. And that taking on board some of these recommendations will in fact increase the safety and security of rent as well. And we let ICANN legal staff take a crack at thisshould be thinking about the interests of all the parties. Just because I - it could take (Unintelligible) just the registrars here. These are some of the things off us having that will actually help. So I'd be interested to go through it. Give it to them. Give them a chance to do it. Apparently, they had done it in the past as well hear both Xxxx and their input would be helpfulXxxxxxx on these. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: Okay. So your idea is that we wait until they do that before we complete Task - in other wordsThank you very much Xxxxx. Xxxx or Xxxxxxx, we kind did either of subcontract Task 2 you want to the staff? Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx: I'm not saying we would have to stop work on what we’re doing. But we would seek their input contribute anything at this point in the processpoint. Xxxx Xxxxxxxxxx: You know, I think I've made most of my comments online... Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: Okay. XxxxxxThis is Xxxx speaking, or someone else from the staff, would you like to kind of walk us through this aspect of the memo that you circulated yesterday? I mean, looking, really, at Point 3 of your memo, which I guess is on the Agenda Page. Maybe you could let us know. Tell us what the staff view is on who should be deciding whether an issue is more appropriately addressed through policy development process than in RAA. Xxxxxx Xxxxx: Sure. I can address that. The memo basically walks through the requirements under the RAA. And we were just clarifying that, you know, a couple aspects that I think there’s been maybe some misunderstanding on, on some of the participants. And what we were pointing out was that although the amendments can touch upon consensus policy issues, the question really is, is it appropriate, given the amount of work that we have and, you know, and the length of the topics? And so that the approach we took in the memo was to suggest that we look at the amendment and, you know, and where it’s clarification of language versus, you know, a new policy -- this is just a - purely a recommendation -- that that would be the - where you draw the line. You know? And understanding that the, you know, there is work already underway in some PDP groups and some, you know, something. Like, for example, you know, domain warehousing or something. You know? There’s no work absolutely, you know, being done right now on that, and that could be a subject of, you know, consensus policy development. And so we were just clarifying that; that the way we view the contract, you know, you can address consensus policy issues. But we think it’s more appropriate where you’re talking about developing new policy to go down the PDP path. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx: And what I took away from your memo was also that you thought this is something the drafting team should try to...right?