[CCWG-ACCT] On IRP subgroup summary being presented at Johannesburg

Sivasubramanian M isolatedn at gmail.com
Sun Jun 25 07:26:46 UTC 2017


Unless there are unspoken and unseen merits, I have some concerns on some
aspects of the summary:

1.  The idea of constraining ICANN to its bylaws figures very prominently
in the summary, defined as one of the pillars, not really a supportive
pillar, but sort of a not so well thought of negative command, " Don't
allow ICANN to exceed its mission"

2.  The standing panel is to be trained by ICANN on DNS technical matters. *For
argument, wearing a skeptical hat across the table,* who in ICANN would
train the standing panel? Staff? Board? Community? Which part of the
Community? Would it stop with training the panel on DNS? Or, extend to
impart notions on what would constitute an acceptable ruling and what would

How independent would the IRP be , if the training is provided by ICANN and
support is provided by ICANN?

Sivasubramanian M <https://www.facebook.com/sivasubramanian.muthusamy>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20170625/15be42c9/attachment.html>

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list