Re: [Privacy] [gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg] Recommendations for a Thick WHOIS new recommendation

[Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I don't see how they can isolate the Generic Domains Division from the Generic 
Names Supporting Organization policy processes. By design, Generic Name 
policies affect Generic Names. In fact, the new gTLD program IS a GNSO (Generic 
Name) policy. Sometimes I think we're in the twilight zone.

Tim


On Sep 7, 2013, at 3:34 PM, "Avri Doria" <avri@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> 
> On 7 Sep 2013, at 11:46, Avri Doria wrote:
> 
>> Yes an issue report by the GNSO might do as well, but it might not have the 
>> same influence over ICANN beyond the GNSO as a Board request for an issues 
>> report.
> 
> 
> Let me explain this a bit better.  
> 
> As I understand it, the GDD has been isolated from the GNSO Policy process so 
> that there is less community tussle for the managers of the gTLD processes.  
> But having the Board say this GNSO issues report and PDP is important and 
> relevant to GDD, Legal and all the non Policy parts of ICANN, might give it a 
> chance to include all side of the issue.
> 
> And yes, as I said, i might be achieved otherwise, but personally, I am not 
> sure how the GDD is accessed by the community other than through Board 
> intercession. 
> 
> avri
> 
>