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

[Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Steve.
I would like to see this worded in a way which leaves the door open to there
not being any further amendments required. I understood that to be one of
the premises of this work after the motion the GNSO Council passed and the
Board's response: that it's worth looking at this to see if there are
further amendments, but that this is by no means a given.

Thanks,

Stéphane


Le 24/07/09 00:32, « Metalitz, Steven » <met@xxxxxxx> a écrit :

> 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.
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
>