[atrt2] PDP Effectiveness Study

Lise Fuhr lise.fuhr at difo.dk
Fri Jun 21 09:26:57 UTC 2013

Hi all,

I think that Avri´s version changes the focus too much away from the purpose
of Jørgen's text, a purpose that it  is my understanding that there were
support to at the conference call.

If we only look at GAC's status as defined in ICANN's bylaws the scope is
much narrower and we will not review if there are any needs to change the
bylaws or other processes but only if ICANN is complying to the existing
bylaws in this matter.

So I find we should keep Jørgen's wording.


-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: atrt2-bounces at icann.org [mailto:atrt2-bounces at icann.org] På vegne af
Avri Doria
Sendt: 20. juni 2013 20:21
Emne: Re: [atrt2] PDP Effectiveness Study


I would be more comfortable with a more ICANN centric question, like:

- Whether the views of the GAC have been handled appropriately given their
status as defined in the ICANN bylaws.


On 20 Jun 2013, at 12:41, Jørgen C Abild Andersen wrote:

> Dear colleagues
> Proposal for a new bullit between 86 and 87 (a 86A):
> - whether in particular the views and advice provided by GAC has been duly
taken into account given the specific tasks of national governments with
respect to public policy.
> Best wishes
> Jørgen 
> _______________________________________________
> atrt2 mailing list
> atrt2 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2

atrt2 mailing list
atrt2 at icann.org

More information about the atrt2 mailing list