The CCWG has jurisdiction over the IRP and needs to expand the IRP with the general proposition that the IRP covers PTI action/inaction. This is a completely separate basis for initiating an IRP, so it is not merely an "implementation" issue.<div><br></div><div>Once the proposition is taken care of, the CWG can work with counsel and the CCWG to nail down its specific implementation.</div><div><br></div><div>Greg <span></span><br><br>On Wednesday, January 20, 2016, Matthew Shears <<a href="mailto:mshears@cdt.org">mshears@cdt.org</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
+ 1 Avri and Greg and agree this needs to be addressed before we
close the discussion on the IRP.<br>
<br>
<div>On 20/01/2016 05:35, Greg Shatan wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Avri,</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">I agree with your
analysis and share your concern. The PTI IRP is fundamentally
not a Bylaws issue (or more accurately -- fundamentally not a
"violation of the Bylaws" issue).</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Having "borrowed" the
IRP in an attempt to fill the requirements of the CWG, we
can't then pretend that the requirements of the CWG are
coterminous with the general design of the IRP. The CWG's
requirements will require a specific statement of the basis on
which a claim may be brought -- and it is a different basis
than for other IRP claims. This doesn't have to be long, but
it does have to be right.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Conversely, if we are
truly wedded to the idea that the IRP is a "bylaws court" and
nothing more, then it can't be used to satisfy the CWG's
requirement and we will need to do something else.
Personally, I don't endorse this position (though it does
raise some concern about the ability of the panel to deal with
PTI failures, if it is designed to be a bylaws court. That
said, I have sufficient faith in the skill of experienced
arbitrators to be able to resolve a variety of disputes.)</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Since this a
requirement for the transition, we need to resolve this
crisply, explicitly and appropriately.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Greg</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:25 AM, Avri
Doria <span dir="ltr"><<a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','avri@acm.org');" target="_blank">avri@acm.org</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi,<br>
<br>
I am uncomfortable with closing the discussion of the new
principles for<br>
the IRP. Since we decided not to create a new entity to
serve the<br>
requirements of the CWG but rather to make it a function of
the IRP, we<br>
need to make sure that the basis for the IRP is fit for
purpose before<br>
starting on its implementation.<br>
<br>
The CWG calls for:<br>
<br>
> 1. *Appeal mechanism*. An appeal mechanism,
for example in<br>
> the form of an Independent Review Panel, for issues
relating to the<br>
> IANA functions. For example, direct customers with
non-remediated<br>
> issues or matters referred by ccNSO or GNSO after
escalation by the<br>
> CSC will have access to an Independent Review Panel.
The appeal<br>
> mechanism will not cover issues relating to ccTLD
delegation and<br>
> re-delegation, which mechanism is to be developed by
the ccTLD<br>
> community post-transition.<br>
><br>
<br>
I do not see how to define this function in terms of By Laws
alone as By<br>
Laws have little to say about negotiated SLAs and the
customers' or CSC<br>
complaints. Perhaps it can be done by changes to some of
the By Laws,<br>
but I do not see us as having scoped out what those changes
need to be.<br>
<br>
So until such time as we have dealt the the policy issues of
filling the<br>
CWG's requirements, I would like to register a personal
caution, and<br>
thus an objection, to closing the discussion of the basis
and standing<br>
for IRP appeals. I do not believe this is merely an
implementation<br>
issue. At least not yet.<br>
<br>
avri<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
---<br>
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus
software.<br>
<a href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.avast.com/antivirus</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org');" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<br>
<pre>_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
<a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org');" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre cols="72">--
Matthew Shears
Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology
<a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','mshears@cdt.org');" target="_blank">mshears@cdt.org</a>
+ 44 771 247 2987 </pre>
<table style="border-top:1px solid #aaabb6;margin-top:30px">
<tbody><tr>
<td style="width:105px;padding-top:15px">
<a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient" target="_blank"><img src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/logo-avast-v1.png" style="width:90px;min-height:33px"></a>
</td>
<td style="width:470px;padding-top:20px;color:#41424e;font-size:13px;font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;line-height:18px">This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast. <br><a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient" style="color:#4453ea" target="_blank">www.avast.com</a>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
</blockquote></div>