[gnso-pednr-dt] Draft resolution - Version 2
Attached is a revised version of the resolution. In addition to some word-smithing to make the sentences flow, I have made two changes which I would like your comments on. 1. On consideration, I felt that the term "best practices" that Chuck added did not really encompass the breadth of non-consensus policy recommendations that may result from this PDP. I have used the words "recommendations regarding best practices, ICANN compliance processes and possible RAA changes". This does not oblige the PDP group to address all of these, but it makes clear that all are allowed. The reason I feel this is important is that in recent times, Council has taken a strong position of PDP WGs not extending their scope on their own volition, so if we feel that all of these type of recommendations are within scope, we should make it clear at the onset, and not have some later Council mis-interpret our intent. 2. During our discussion today, it was suggested that this present PDP process could comment on and make recommendations to the IRTP-C group. I realized that although the mechanics or logistics of such a transfer are reasonably placed in the IRTP-C domain, it is really this PDP that should consider if the need for such a transfer is required from a registrant point-of-view. If this change is particularly troublesome to this group, we can revert to the wording in the previous version, but I do think that this adds some clarity. A reminder that if we want to make the agenda of this month's Council meeting, we need closure on this motion by Thursday. Regards, Alan Attachment:
DraftMotion-v02.doc
|