RE: [gnso-raa-b] Update on next steps and apologies

["Hammock, Statton" <shammock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I'd like to support Tim's proposal to ask John Jeffrey or others on
ICANN's Legal Staff to identify the items from our list that require a
consensus policy process.  I believe someone acknowledged in the early
days of the WG, that the members wouldn't be able to agree on which
items were inside or outside of the "picket fence" so I think it's a
good idea to ask Staff to do this.  Also, I understand that during the
last round of amendments, Kurt P. gave ICANN's opinion on which
proposals required consensus policy so I think there is precedent for
this. 

 

Statton

 

 Statton Hammock 

 Sr. Director, Law, Policy & Business Affairs 

P 703-668-5515  M 703-624-5031 www.networksolutions.com

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-raa-b@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-raa-b@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Tim Ruiz
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 12:16 PM
To: gnso-raa-b@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-raa-b] Update on next steps and apologies

 

 

I apologize, but it looks like I may not be able to make the call

tomorrow, although I still intend to try. So I'd like to offer some

thoughts on what we discussed last call, and another idea.

 

There were a few ideas put forward regarding the next steps I proposed

on the last call. As I noted, the RrSG feels strongly that only the two

parties to the agreement should be involved in the actual negotiations.

However, as discussed if there is a reiterative process that would keep

the community more informed and involed we would be open to that. If

there is anything specific we can define in that regard it would be

helpful in keeping things moving forward on this.

 

I would also like to make a proposal on another open issue, identifying

those items that would require the consensus policy process. Instead of

us trying to hash that out, we should ask John Jeffrey to do that for

the group. I know some work may have been done on that, but it should be

reviewed by John for his opinion.

 

 

Best,

 

Tim