<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[gnso-ppsc-pdp] GNSO - and policy related to GTLDs
- To: "Gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [gnso-ppsc-pdp] GNSO - and policy related to GTLDs
- From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 10:52:24 -0500
Hi,
I am wondering whether there is an issue for the PDP work team in the following.
In the Staff report on Issues Report on Vertical Integration Between Registries
and Registrars
> Page 17 of 38
> Author: Margie Milam
>From http://gnso.icann.org/issues/vertical-integration/report-04dec09-en.pdf
> The NCUC suggests that all policies adopted by ICANN affecting gTLDs must be
> approved by the GNSO. However, while the ICANN Bylaws grant the GNSO the
> right to recommend policies affecting gTLDs, such right is not exclusive, and
> policies may be recommended under the Bylaws by any of the advisory
> committees (34), including the GAC, ALAC, and SSAC. An example of a recent
> policy affecting gTLDs that was not recommended by the GNSO, is the policy to
> prohibit redirection and synthesized DNS responses by TLDs adopted by the
> ICANN Board on 26 June 200935, resulting entirely from an SSAC
> recommendation. Since the GNSO’s approval is not required, resolving the
> vertical integration issue through the implementation processes that are
> currently underway instead of through a PDP would be consistent with the
> ICANN Bylaws.
Footnote 34
> 34 For example, Bylaws Article XI Section 2.2(a) Section 6 relating to the
> SSAC states that the SSAC’s responsibilities shall include: “to make policy
> recommendations to the ICANN community and Board.” Bylaws Article XI Section
> 2.1(i) relating the GAC states that the GAC “may put issues to the Board
> directly, either by way of comment or prior advice, or by way of specifically
> recommending action or new policy development or revision to existing
> policies.”
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|