Re: [gnso-irtp-b-jun09] For your review - Draft Proposals IRTP Reason for Denial #7 and WHOIS Status messages

["Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>]

sorry about the sluggish reply,

i think both of the proposals are fine.  i'm also fine with the "any and all" 
interpretation.

thanks!

mikey


On Sep 5, 2011, at 9:44 AM, Marika Konings wrote:

> Dear All,
> 
> Following the adoption by the GNSO Council of the following resolved clauses 
> (see below and http://gnso/resolutions/#201106), you will find attached two 
> draft proposals prepared by ICANN Staff. Before putting these out for public 
> comment, we would like to get the feedback of the IRTP Part B Working Group. 
> Please feel free to share your comments, suggestions and/or questions with 
> the mailing list. If needed or preferred, we can also schedule a conference 
> call to discuss in further detail.
> 
> I look forward to receiving your feedback.
> 
> With best regards,
> 
> Marika
> 
> From Motion 1 on the Adoption of the IRTP Part B Final Report and 
> Recommendations (see http://gnso/resolutions/#201106):
> 
> RESOLVED (D), prior to the consideration of approval of the recommendation 
> which states: "denial reason #7 should be replaced by adding a new provision 
> in a different section of the IRTP on when and how domains may be locked or 
> unlocked", the GNSO Council requests ICANN Staff to provide a proposal for 
> such a new provision, taking into account the IRTP Part B WG deliberations in 
> relation to this issue (see IRTP Part B Final Report - (Recommendation #9 - 
> part 2). Upon review of the proposal, the GNSO Council will consider whether 
> to approve the recommendation.
> RESOLVED (E), prior to the consideration of approval of the recommendation 
> regarding the standardizing and clarifying WHOIS status messages regarding 
> Registrar Lock status, the GNSO Council requests ICANN staff to provide a 
> proposal designed to ensure a technically feasible approach can be developed 
> to meet this recommendation. Staff should take into account the IRTP Part B 
> WG deliberations in relation to this issue (see IRTP Part B Final Report). 
> (IRTP Part B Recommendation #8). The goal of these changes is to clarify why 
> the Lock has been applied and how it can be changed. Upon review of the 
> proposed plan, the GNSO Council will consider whether to approve the 
> recommendation. 
> <IRTP Reason for Denial #7 - Draft Proposal - 5 September 2011.pdf><IRTP 
> Recommendation #8 - Draft Proposal - 5 September 2011.pdf>

- - - - - - - - -
phone   651-647-6109 (try this first, but routing is currently flakey 'cause of 
the hurricane so feel free to hit the cell if this number just rings)

cell            651-212-0857