[CCWG-ACCT] AOC type Reviews and Fundamental bylaws.

Malcolm Hutty malcolm at linx.net
Thu Apr 30 13:32:53 UTC 2015

On 30/04/2015 13:27, Avri Doria wrote:
> Hi,
> The issue came up of AOC type review bylaws being or not being
> fundamental bylaws in the context of the CWG IANA Review Function. 
> The possibility of tagging individual bylaws as fundamental or not was
> mentioned. 
> If such a capability exists, I would recommend that the bylaw defining
> the Accountability and Transparency Review  be tagged as a fundamental
> bylaw.

The commitment to have AoC reviews is embodied in the Core Values, which
I believe we do intend to tag as fundamental.

I'm not sure that it is a good idea to tag as fundamental the more
detailed bylaws on how the AoCs are to work and what they are to
consider. We may well wish to amend or supplement these later, in the
light of experience (maybe even soon, in the light of our deliberations
on WS2).

Tagging too much as fundamental, and then needing to change it rapidly
and frequently, would devalue the protection for those things for which
there is no foreseeable reason to change them, and every reason to wish
them to be deeply entrenched.

            Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523
   Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog
 London Internet Exchange | http://publicaffairs.linx.net/

                 London Internet Exchange Ltd
           21-27 St Thomas Street, London SE1 9RY

         Company Registered in England No. 3137929
       Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list