[CWG-Stewardship] Final response from DT-M regarding public comments
Martin Boyle
Martin.Boyle at nominet.org.uk
Fri Jun 5 10:00:58 UTC 2015
I struggle to imagine why the ICANN Board (any more than the PTI Board) would want to initiate an SIFR, in particular without the support of the community. Worse, I would feel that there would be a “cunning plan” somewhere behind such a decision and that leaves me seriously questioning why we would want this process to be triggered in such a way. No support for an SIFR, no overriding ICANN (or PTI) Board to ignore interests of the community.
If someone can see possible reasons, I’d like to hear them. Then any trigger route could be defined (and limited) more carefully.
Martin
From: cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Matthew Shears
Sent: 05 June 2015 06:17
To: Milton L Mueller; cwg-stewardship at icann.org
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Final response from DT-M regarding public comments
But what would the thresholds be? And, currently an SIFR comes as a result of other mechanisms being exhausted as well as the IANA probems resolution process.
The Special IFR would be triggered by a supermajority vote of each of the ccNSO and GNSO Councils according to their normal procedures for determining supermajority.
Would we require a supermajority of only the Board, or in addition to the ccNSO and GNSO. And as a result of the mechanisms being exhausted? I would assume so.
Matthew
On 6/5/2015 4:05 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
I can't
--MM
-----Original Message-----
From: cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-
bounces at icann.org<mailto:bounces at icann.org>] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2015 5:02 PM
To: avri at acm.org<mailto:avri at acm.org>; cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Final response from DT-M regarding public
comments
Good catch Avri and good question. Can anyone think of a reason why the
ICANN Board should not be able to request an SIFR?
Chuck
-----Original Message-----
From: cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-
bounces at icann.org<mailto:bounces at icann.org>] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2015 4:39 PM
To: cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Final response from DT-M regarding public
comments
Hi,
I am part of DT-M and partly responsible for this.
But. It has a cost, which I did mention on the DT-M list:
There is currently no mechanism defined for the Board to initiate a SIFR.
Should there be?
avri
On 04-Jun-15 16:10, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
Here is DT-M's final proposed response to comment review tool item #
246 regarding AFRALO's suggestion that the PTI Board be allowed to
initiate a SIFR directly: *"DT M carefully considered the
recommendation to allow the PTI Board to initiate a Special IFR but
decided against that while at the same time noting that the PTI Board
could request that the ICANN Board consider doing so."*
If there are any questions, please let me know.
Chuck
"This message (including any attachments) is intended only
for the use of the individual or entity to which it is
addressed, and may contain information that is non-public,
proprietary, privileged, confidential and exempt from
disclosure under applicable law or may be constituted as
attorney work product. If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any use,
dissemination, distribution, or copying of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this message in error, notify sender immediately and delete
this message immediately."
_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship at icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship at icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship at icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship at icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
--
Matthew Shears
Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
+ 44 (0)771 247 2987
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150605/9e71360b/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the CWG-Stewardship
mailing list