RE: [gnso-irtpd] Updated Report

["Dorrain, Kristine" <kdorrain@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Apologies for missing the call.  I had a crisis to deal with here.

Kristine

From: owner-gnso-irtpd@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-irtpd@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf 
Of Alan Greenberg
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2014 8:49 AM
To: James M. Bladel; Lars Hoffmann; gnso-irtpd@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-irtpd] Updated Report

I can live with it either way, The wording I proposed was what was mentioned on 
the call (by me) with no disagreement. 14 became semi redundant with the change 
to 13, and the intent was that in addition to the mandatory pointing to the 
R&R/B&R, Registrars/Resellers could also point directly. With "..an additional 
best practice..", additional to what?

Alan

At 08/09/2014 09:13 AM, James M. Bladel wrote:

I actually prefer the original language on this.  But maybe we can wordsmith 
something better during our call.

Thanks­

J.

From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx> 
>
Date: Sunday, September 7, 2014 at 23:45
To: Lars Hoffmann <lars.hoffmann@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:lars.hoffmann@xxxxxxxxx> >, 
"gnso-irtpd@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-irtpd@xxxxxxxxx> " 
<gnso-irtpd@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-irtpd@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: Re: [gnso-irtpd] Updated Report

One more small wording change.

14 starts off with: The WG recommends that, as an additional best practice, 
ICANN accredited Registrars...

That should have been: The WG recommends that, in addition, as a best practice, 
ICANN accredited Registrars
(See page 29 of the trascript - 
http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/transcript-irtp-d-18aug14-en.pdf ot at about 
minute 50 of the MP3).

Alan a

At 07/09/2014 10:12 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:

Sorry for the late comment.

Rec 13 now reads:
#13 The WG recommends that ICANN create and maintain a user-friendly, one-stop 
website containing all relevant information concerning disputed transfers and 
potential remedies to registrants. Such a website should be clearly accessible 
from the ICANN Registrants' Benefits and Responsibilities page ( 
https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/benefits-2013-09-16-en).
I would suggest that "should be clearly accessible from" be changed to "should 
be clearly accessible from or integrated into"

That gives those implementing the recommendation free reign to do this in the 
most logical and "user-friendly" manner.

I will be on at the start of the call, but will need to leave within a few 
minutes, so if there are any questions about this, I would hope that they can 
be addressed at the start of the meeting.

Thanks, Alan

At 29/08/2014 10:36 AM, Lars Hoffmann wrote:

Dear all,

Apologies for the late distribution of this update but thanks to the slight 
delay I was able to include comments from ICANN's GDD Team that might be useful 
to the Group’s discussion.

It would be great if you found some time to go through the Report – especially 
the recommendations and observations in Section 4 and also consider the newly 
supplied comments from the GDD Team.

Main edits from the last version are related to Charter Question F and the 
additional recommendations 18 and 19. These can be found on pages 26, 27, 28, 
29 and 30 – including the new Recommendation #19.

Please also note the comments from ICANN’s GDD Team on:

  *   page 14
  *   Page 16
  *   Page 18
  *   Page 22
  *   Page 24 (two comments)
  *   Page 26
  *   Page 28 (two comments)
  *   Page 30
  *   Page 42
Finally, please note that for ease of reading I have started the latest changes 
from a clean copy, meaning that only the edits from the last version are 
red-lined.

Many thanks and have a good weekend and those lucky enough to have Monday off – 
have a great Labour Day, too!

Best,
Lars