[Ccpdp-rm] NOTES | ccPDP3 on Review Mechanism WG | 9 September 2020 (04:00 UTC)

[Dr Eberhard W Lisse]

Irina,

That would be a question for the ccPDP-Retirement Wg.

	 My understanding is, however, once the trigger has been pulled (so
	 to speak) the actual mechanics (plan, timeline and so on) will be
	 the same.


The short answer to your second question from my view should be yes.

	 Naela (or Kim) stated on the last call, that once all ducks are
	 lined up in a row and the Board has approved, the actual mechanics
	 of modifying the root are very quick.

	 On the last call I introduced that we should be sure that nothing
	 should be done that can not easily be reverted.  I like the
	 un-ringing a bell analogy, Bernard compared it with un-cracking an
	 egg.

	 Preserving existing rights (of ccTLD Managers) is however extremely
	 difficult to codify (into any ICANN/IFO Policy).  

	 Not all ccTLDs are alike, and not all countries are alike, many are
	 functioning democracies, some aren't, many have a functional and
	 independent judiciary, some haven't, some governments like the smell
	 of AK-47s in the morning.  I recall a interactive session at ICANN25
	 in Wellington 2006 led by Chris Disspain about something like this
	 (he reads in copy).  There is no 007 at icann.ORG :-)-O

	 But, unless in cases of emergencies, drawing it out something like
	 another 30 days or so, does not affect the process and in particular
	 not the validity of the process.

	 It would however for example give an aggrieved incumbent ccTLD
	 Manager in a hostile revocation and transfer scenario some time to
	 review the process and request the relief that we are working on.

In any case this is for us in the group to decide.

el

On 09/09/2020 11:21, Irina Danelia wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> Please accept my apologies for not attending today’s call.  Last 2
> days were so busy with different meetings that I just got lost in my
> schedule –((
> 
> However I went through the notes and I will listen the recording
> 
>  
> 
> Meanwhile I’d like to ask for clarification on the work distribution
> between different PDP
> 
>  
> 
> Yesterday during the first call of ccPDP4 WG on IDN ccTLD Policy it
> was stated that PDP4 has decide on *TRIGGER EVENT* for IDN ccTLD
> retirement
> 
> It is my understanding that *THE PROCESS *of IDN ccTLD retirement is
> the same as for ASCII ccTLD and is defined within PDP3
> 
> The same for review mechnisms
> 
>  
> 
> Is that correct?
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Second question is regarding the table discussed on the last call
> https://community.icann.org/display/ccnsowkspc/9+September+2020+-+04%3A00+UTC?preview=/144376716/147849430/CCReviewProcedure-FrameworkV0.2.xlsx
> 
> Line 2 and 4: Contesting the approved but pending delegation/transfer
> 
> Is the suggestion to introduce 30-days delay between decision to
> approve delegation/transfer and the implementation of such a decision
> to provide time to apply for the review?
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Manu thanks in advance
> 
>  
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Irina
[...]

-- 
Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse   \         /       Obstetrician & Gynaecologist 
el at lisse.NA             / *      |  Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell)
PO Box 8421 Bachbrecht  \      /  If this email is signed with GPG/PGP
10007, Namibia           ;____/ Sect 20 of Act No. 4 of 2019 may apply