RE: [gnso-raa-dt] Proposed agenda for: RAA call details / Monday 03 August 1900 UTC
- To: <gnso-raa-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gnso-raa-dt] Proposed agenda for: RAA call details / Monday 03 August 1900 UTC
- From: "Rosette, Kristina" <krosette@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 12:56:24 -0400
Looks like one resolution to me . . .
Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA) motion
Motion made by Tim Ruiz
Seconded by Kristina Rosette
Whereas, the Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA) has not been amended since
May 2001, and ICANN has undertaken a lengthy consultative process related to
amending the RAA, including several public comment periods and consultations;
Whereas, the proposed changes to the RAA include important compliance and
enforcement tools for ICANN; The Council wishes to approve the set of proposed
amendments as quickly as possible so that the ICANN Board may review them, and
if approved then implement them as quickly as possible; and
The Council would like to proceed on the drafting of a charter identifying
registrant rights that registrars would be obliged to link to, as contemplated
in the set of amendments;
The Council would like a specific process and timeline to move forward with
additional potential amendments to the RAA; and
The Registrar Constituency is supportive of these efforts and is willing to
participate on a good faith basis on anticipated next steps.
The GNSO Council supports the RAA amendments as documented in
and recommends to the Board that they be adopted at its meeting of March 6,
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.
Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote.
27 Votes in favour
Chuck Gomes, Jordi Iparraguirre, Edmon Chung (Registry constituency) Tim Ruiz,
Stéphane van Gelder, Adrian Kinderis (Registrars) 2 votes each; Greg Ruth, Tony
Harris, Tony Holmes (ISP); Mike Rodenbaugh, Philip Sheppard, Zahid Jamil
(CBUC); Olga Cavalli, Avri Doria, Terry Davis -remote participation (NCA); Mary
Wong, Carlos Souza, Bill Drake (NCUC) Kristina Rosette, Cyril Chua - remote
(IPC) one vote each.
Absentee ballot: Ute Decker (IPC) one vote in favour.
From: owner-gnso-raa-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-raa-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Tim Ruiz
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 12:28 PM
To: Avri Doria
Subject: RE: [gnso-raa-dt] Proposed agenda for: RAA call details / Monday 03
August 1900 UTC
Not sure that we even need a Chair for either of these efforts. And they will
not work well unless separated. They are NOT related, it was not discussed as
if they were, and the RrC never agreed that they were a combined effort. That's
why there were two resolutions.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [gnso-raa-dt] Proposed agenda for: RAA call details / Monday 03
August 1900 UTC
From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, August 03, 2009 11:06 am
On 3 Aug 2009, at 11:39, Mike Rodenbaugh wrote:
> I will volunteer as chair or co-chair, if there are no other
> volunteers from the BC, IPC or ISPCPC leadership. I believe it is
> important that people from non-contracting parties take leadership
> roles in this group.
Thanks for this.
My personal suggestion would be for someone who was neither on ALAC
nor the GNSO Council to chair - as part of the effort to spread the
work beyond official councils, i.e as part of the new council as
policy manager effort
I also think we should appoint someone to act as a GNSO council
liaison(s) to the group. You are already doing several of these, but
we can discuss that in the next council meeting.
As for non-contracting parties versus contracting parties, one idea
may be to have 2 co-chairs, with one from each house.