[gnso-ppsc-pdp] Tweeking of a policy post-implementation
One of the items on our list to discuss is how might the GNSO "adjust" a policy after it is implemented. The attached point is a case in point - an update on the Domain Tasting policy implementation. It identifies an area where a modification to the policy might be appropriate. Under the current processes, it would seem that the only way is to request an issues report and then initiate a new PDP. Within the context of GNSO priorities and overall workload, I would suggest that this will never happen. Given that we are increasingly incorporating a monitor and report clause into new policy, this is not an issue that we can ignore, nor is it obvious how to address it while maintaining the bottom-up consensus-driven model. I suggest that in advance of the PDP WT looking at this, anyone who is particularly interested might start a side discussion on alternatives for addressing this. Alan From: Craig Schwartz <craig.schwartz@xxxxxxxxx> To: GNSO Council <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 21:57:07 -0500 Subject: [council] AGP Limits Policy - Implementation Report Dear Councilors,Please find attached the second AGP Limits Policy Implementation Report. This report provides a status update on the implementation of the Policy since it was announced to the community on 17 December 2008.As always, please let me know if you have any questions about this information.Best, Craig Schwartz Chief gTLD Registry Liaison ICANN Attachment:
AGP Report to GNSO 20091214.pdf
|