[atrt2] Draft Report - version 1 for review

Alan Greenberg alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Thu Oct 10 13:51:36 UTC 2013

At 10/10/2013 08:33 AM, Avri Doria wrote:

>On 10 Oct 2013, at 06:41, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond wrote:
> > However, when reviewing its own internal Rules of Procedures, another
> > process it carried out independently, it did not need a resolution from
> > the Board nor a public comment.
>Ok, so it is only the GNSO that is subject to the regime of needing 
>to have every little internal procedure change undergo full public comment.
>Thanks for correcting my understanding, I thought the ALAC ROP 
>changes had undergone community comment and review.
>Apologies for my error.

The recent ALAC Rules of Procedure changes probably did not have to 
under go public comment of any sort and in fact, could probably (from 
a "legal" point of view) been determined solely within the ALAC. That 
is not what we chose to do. There was significant community 
involvement and comment (although not a formal ICANN Public Comment).

That being said, there ARE aspects of the ALAC rules that do need 
Board approval. As an example, the rules for certifying and 
decertifying ALSs do require Board approval.


More information about the atrt2 mailing list