RE: [gnso-raa-dt] First Draft DT charter (RAA)

[Margie Milam <Margie.Milam@xxxxxxxxx>]

Please disregard my reply-  sent in error.
Regards,
Margie Milam

-----Original Message-----
From: Margie Milam 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 3:44 PM
To: 'Metalitz, Steven'; Stéphane Van Gelder; gnso-raa-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-raa-dt] First Draft DT charter (RAA)



-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-raa-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-raa-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Metalitz, Steven
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 3:32 PM
To: Stéphane Van Gelder; gnso-raa-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-raa-dt] First Draft DT charter (RAA)


Stephane, 

I agree with you that this DT is not intended to draft amendments to the RAA. I 
was trying to keep fairly close to the wording of the resolution, which directs 
us to "identify those [further amendments to RAA] on which further action may 
be desirable."  Perhaps we should say "Identify topics on which further action 
in the form of amendments to the RAA may be desirable."  

Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: Stéphane Van Gelder [mailto:stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 9:17 AM
To: Metalitz, Steven; gnso-raa-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-raa-dt] First Draft DT charter (RAA)

Thanks Steve,

Forgive me if I am reading the proposed charter wrong, but it seems to me
that the opening point should not read "(1)  Identify topics on which
further amendments to the RAA would be desirable.", where the idea that
there are further amendments is a given, but instead something like "(1)
Identify topics which MAY REQUIRE further amendments to the RAA TO BE WORKED
ON."

Such a clarification would serve to clearly state that the DT is not there
to craft the actual amendments and that its work is looking at whether the
need for such amendments exists.

Thanks,

Stéphane


Le 21/07/09 23:43, « Metalitz, Steven » <met@xxxxxxx> a écrit :

> A <<DRAFT RAA DT charter 072109 circulated (2310153).DOC>> fter I
> volunteered to take the first crack at a charter for the Drafting Team
> on RAA amendments, I learned that no previous examples of DT charters
> could be located!  So the attached is adapted from some Working Group
> proposed charters that staff shared with me.
> 
> My apologies for delay in circulating this first draft for
> review/editing.  Note that it deals with the other subject of the
> Council resolution (see below) -- Registrant Rights Charter -- only to
> the extent of establishing a liaison relationship with the GNSO-ALAC
> group working on that.   That might or might not be deemed sufficient at
> this point.  
> 
> Steve Metalitz
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-raa-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-raa-dt@xxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Metalitz, Steven
> Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 9:17 AM
> To: Avri Doria; gnso-raa-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gnso-raa-dt] Re: Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA)
> Drafting Team (DT) call on TUESDAY, June 09 at 1300 UTC.
> 
> 
> For ready reference here are the operative resolutions from GNSO
> Council:  
> 
> Within 30 days of Board approval of the set of amendments,
> representatives from the GNSO community and the ALAC shall be identified
> to participate in drafting a registrant rights charter, as contemplated
> by the amendments and the current GNSO Council discussions, with support
> from ICANN staff. A draft charter shall be completed no later than July
> 31 2009; and
> 
> Within 30 days of Board approval of the set of amendments, the GNSO
> Council will form a Drafting Team to discuss further amendments to the
> RAA and to identify those on which further action may be desirable. The
> Drafting Team should endeavor to provide its advice to the Council and
> ICANN staff no later than July 31, 2009.
>  
> 
> 
>