RE: [gnso-irtp-b-jun09] IRTP Part B Working Meeting on Tuesday 27 September at 14.00 UTC
Network Solutions supports the draft proposals, so long as the 5-day turn-around does not automatically overrule a lock that was put in place due to some valid legal or administrative process. I will not be available for the 27 September call, but trust in the judgment of the other registrar reps. Regards, P Paul A. Diaz Policy & Ethics Manager P 703-668-4961 www.networksolutions.com <Http://www.networksolutions.com> ________________________________ From: owner-gnso-irtp-b-jun09@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-irtp-b-jun09@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Marika Konings Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 5:08 AM To: Gnso-irtp-b-jun09@xxxxxxxxx Subject: [gnso-irtp-b-jun09] IRTP Part B Working Meeting on Tuesday 27 September at 14.00 UTC Dear All, Michele has requested that the IRTP Part B Working Group reconvenes to discuss the attached proposals on Tuesday 27 September at 14.00 UTC (please let me know if this time/day does not work for you). For those of you that have not done so yet, please feel free to share your views, comments and /or questions with the mailing list. If there are any questions you have for staff who have been involved in preparing these proposals, please share these prior to the call so I can take these back and hopefully provide you with an answer during the call itself. With best regards, Marika From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2011 07:44:55 -0700 To: "Gnso-irtp-b-jun09@xxxxxxxxx" <Gnso-irtp-b-jun09@xxxxxxxxx> Subject: [gnso-irtp-b-jun09] For your review - Draft Proposals IRTP Reason for Denial #7 and WHOIS Status messages 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.