RE: [gnso-whois-wg] Draft outcomes report v 1.6

["Michael Warnecke" <mwarnecke@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Regarding Section 2.4 Consent to be an OPOC (lines 196-210):

The interplay between the "AGREED" statement and the propositions under
"SUPPORT" is somewhat ambiguous.  My recollection is that we changed
this section primarily to delete the agency language and not to
downgrade the "OPOC must get consent" from AGREED to SUPPORT.  Maybe I
am just getting the wrong impression from the way this is formatted,
though?  If so, it would be clearer if lines 203-04 could be moved up so
that they immediately follow the "registrant is responsible" language in
the AGREED section.

On the other hand, if it is the intent to demote the "OPOC must consent"
language from AGREED to SUPPORT, then I think we should revisit whether
that is an accurate reflection of the group's leanings. If we cannot
agree, as a baseline proposition, that an OPOC must consent to being an
OPOC, it calls into question the credibility of the OPOC system. (At the
very least, the credibility consideration should be noted in the first
bullet point.)

Mike Warnecke

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-whois-wg@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-whois-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 8:42 AM
To: gnso-whois-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-whois-wg] Draft outcomes report v 1.6


Please find attached the outcomes report version 1.6.

This I hope captures the last two weeks of discussion on list and on our
two calls.
Changes compared to v1.5 are:
- new and clarified text;
- revised levels of support;
- revised section 7 (with text transferred from section 2);
- new section 8 (further studies).
(I considered issuing a red-line tracked version but there have been too
many changes to make this a useful tool.)

I would like to call a halt to changes of substance on the issues: these
we have well covered.
I would like to invite any comments where you feel any opinion on the
substance is NOT yet recorded.
Please do NOT repeat earlier opinion: that will just make life more
challenging to weed out duplication.
Please do WITHDRAW earlier statements of disagreement if you now believe
the revised text is something that you can support.

Comments are open for one week until mid-day Thursday 9 August.

After that we will issue version 1.7 which will factor in any changes
(as above) along with factual and contextual additions from ICANN staff.

I will advise later how long version 1.7 will be up for comment before
completion of the group's work.
Many thanks.

Philip Sheppard
Chairman