8. Identify and describe in detail the timetable in which you will allow full access to ICANN accredited registrars.

9. Identify and describe in detail the your average and worst case transaction times for post to appearance on Whois.

10. Identify and describe in detail the service level to which you are willing to contractually commit for post to appearance on Whois.

11. Identify and describe in detail your projected level of Whois query traffic.

12. Identify and describe in detail the projected query traffic level to the Whois function to which you are willing to contractually commit.

13. Assuming you receive a new TLD, identify and describe in detail the timetable for the availability of the following services:

14. Identify the service availability timetable to which you are willing to contractually commit for the following:

15. Assuming your primary site experiences a catastrophic failure, identify and describe in detail the timetable required to restore partial SRS service.

16. Identify whether you will provide a test-bed for registrars to validate their protocol software.

KDDISOL Responses:

1. Our exit strategy for NSI is as follows:

Step-1: Through Phase 1 and Phase 2, accumulate actual operational experiences and monitor/analyze actual performances of NSI-based registry system to be used for our proposed TLDs.

Step-2: Identify the requirements/concepts for a new registry system taking into account at least:

• the predicted growth of domain names using the TLDs,
• the available technologies/equipment, and
• relevant comments gathered from registrars/registrants.

Step-3: Develop a functional model of a new registry system based on the requirements identified in Step-2, above, with the particular focus on smooth and safe transition from Phase 2. In order to avoid any service failures, the transition procedure will be well coordinated with NSI.

Step-4: Evaluate the developed model in every aspect of the system functionality, and modify the model taking into account the result of the evaluation until a sound model is developed.

Step-5: Develop the new registry system based on the model produced in Step-4. Thoroughly test/evaluate this new system until the results expected in terms of both performance and functionality are achieved by instituting whatever modification/adjustments may be necessary.

Step-6: Perform the final field trial of the new registry system including the actual involvement of registrars, and make final modification/adjustments for the release of the system.

Step-7: Ready for the transition from NSI-based registry system to KDDISOL's registry system.

2. The basic strategy underlying our planned relationship with NSI is that our control will increase over time until we're in a position to exit from NSI-based registry system. Especially for the initial phase, where the precise prediction of actual demand for our proposed TLD's is very difficult, we concluded that outsourcing to NSI would be the most practicable in terms of economy, system flexibility and stability. However, within two to three years, we will be fully capable of essentially independent operation. Consequently, the basic role of NSI will then be reduced to that of the DNS software provider.

We are responding to this part on the assumption that you are requesting an explanation not for the term "Secondary Role" but for "Support Role" as described in D13.2.1 of our proposal.

In phase 2 of our business plan, we will be responsible for the primary operation of the registry and NSI will provide sufficient support upon request of us.

Details of NSI's "support roles" are as follows:

• Operational Test & Evaluation

We will provide operational test & evaluation for registrars by ourselves, and severe problems that cannot be resolved by ourselves will be escalated to NSI for assistance.

• System Administration, Data Base Administration

We will provide day-to-day administration of the registry systems and database, and severe problems that affect operations will be escalated to NSI for assistance

• Back-up and Recovery, Network Operation Center

We will establish an Onsite Command Center (OCC) for the purpose of registry system and network operations. Difficulties that cannot be resolved by ourselves will be escalated directly to the NSI Registry Global Command Center (GCC). The GCC will also monitor our onsite registry system and contact the OCC when certain alerts are received. The OCC will be informed of actions, timeframes, and current status of GCC efforts to resolve those alerts or to have the matter escalated to the GCC. When problems are noted, the GCC staff will open a trouble call and perform preliminary analysis to diagnose the root cause of the problem. They will contact our OCC to inform us of the issue and of the measures being taken to address the problem. At that time, our assistance will be requested if required. If the first-level support team cannot resolve the problem, GCC will immediately escalate it to the on-call System Administrator (SA) in Registry Technical Operations. The SA will immediately address the problem and contact the on-call Database Administrator, if necessary. In the unlikely event that the problem cannot be resolved at this level, the problem will be escalated to NSI Registry Engineering. A workaround may be provided until the issue is resolved.

• Customer Affairs

NSI will provide us sufficient advice and know-how that comes from their various experience while serving as the existing gTLD registry.

• Customer Services

When KDDISOL CS receives a call from one of its Registrars, it will collect all necessary information and resolve the issue. If it is unable to resolve the issue, KDDISOL CS will forward the call to NSI Registry CS. NSI Registry CS will log the call in the CS tracking system and assign a tracking number. The NIS Registry CSR will work closely with KDDISOL CS to resolve and close the ticket. If necessary, NSI Registry CSR will forward the ticket to the appropriate Registry department for investigation and resolution. Once resolution is obtained, the NSI Registry CSR will forward this information to the KDDISOL CSR who then contacts Registrar for closure. The NSI Registry CS will always be the single point of contact for the KDDISOL CS for updates and additional information until closure of the ticket.

3. As an initial matter, we would like to clearly state that this new effort to serve the Internet community as a gTLD registry represents one of the most important activities within the new KDDI. KDDISOL, a wholly owned subsidiary company of KDDI, will be able to efficiently utilize the well established channels for marketing as well as other network resources of KDDI. Therefore, we anticipate that the marketing costs, especially the cost to associate new registrars, may not be significant and will be covered by the "others" costs set forth in sections D.13.2.11 and D.13.3. Should it be necessary in the future to increase the budget allocation for our marketing efforts in order to promote the penetration of Internet, we will not hesitate to allocate such amounts in order to achieve our goal and to thereby make a significant contribution to the world Internet community.

4. We recognize that the competitive situation under multiple general purpose TLDs will affect the total number of registrations for our proposed TLDs. However, we opted not to recognize this parameter in our calculations for the following reasons:

Under our most confident business plan, in five years the total number of registrations will reach approximately 23 million, which seems to be near the number of the existing gTLDs (".com", ".net", and ".org"). The estimation has been made as follows based on the fact that the potential market of Asia is huge. If the Internet penetration rate of those Asian countries, where the present rate is approximately 1%, increases to 15%, Internet users increase by about 500 million. This may amount to more than the current level of Internet users all over the world. Of course, this calculation is very rough. But it represents the potentiality of the Asian market. We are confident of our strategic business position in the Asian markets and in our ability to expand the distribution channels of TLDs. Accordingly, it is for these reasons that we think it may be possible to have the same level of registrations as the existing gTLDs, even if we consider the possible implications arising from competition among new general purpose TLDs.

5. In the communique of the GAC dated 24 August 1999, the following recommendations to the ICANN Board were given:

• The GAC reaffirmed its May resolution that the Internet naming system is a public resource and that the management of a TLD Registry must be in the public interest.
• Accordingly, the GAC considers that no private intellectual or other property rights inhere to the TLD itself nor accrue to the delegated manager of the TLD as the result of such delegation."

Also, in Item 3.(b) of the UDRP, it is stated that the complainant shall conclude their complaints with the following statement:

• Complainant agrees that its claims and remedies concerning the registration of the domain name, the dispute, or the dispute's resolution shall be solely against the domain-name holder and waives all such claims and remedies against (a) the dispute-resolution provider, (b) the registrar, (c) the registry administrator, and (d) ICANN.

Our position to the issues is identical to the above statements.

We are aware of assertions made by certain parties suggesting the existence of some proprietary claim to "biz". In this regard, we have read and fully agree with ICANN's response to such assertions.

6. We are willing to indemnify ICANN for any liability that ICANN might incur as a result of challenges regarding KDDISOL's right to operate the Registry for its proposed gTLD's along with the worldwide consensus mentioned in 1 above.

Should there be any necessities to allocate resources for the indemnification, we expect to utilize general corporate resources.

7. In the case where both ".biz" and ".home" are granted as our TLD strings, we predict that over half of the domain names could be for ".biz". In the case where only ".home" is granted as our TLD string, the actual growth rate of our domain names would be somewhat reduced as compared with the case where both ".biz" and ".home" are granted. Three factors, operating together, produce this result - (i) the huge growth potential of the Internet community, (ii) the generic nature of the ".home" string, and (iii) the concentration of our marketing power into ".home". Although we anticipate that when taken together, ".home" will be the less dominant TLD, if it is our only TLD all of our considerable resources will be focused on it in such a way as to result in total registrations equal to 85 -90% of that set forth in our application. We believe that the most important ingredient in the determination of total registrations is the fact that we would be the first Asian-based registry with a marketing program specifically focused on largely untapped sectors of the potential internet community. Consequently, although there will be some financial impact associated with our registry operations in the event we are awarded only one of the two proposed gTLD's, it is not expected to be great and, in either case, it will not represent a financial or operational deterrent to KDDISOL's commitment to serve the internet community.