[IOT] The latest IRP rulings

[Thomas Rickert]

Hi all,
I am pretty sure that the question of how many people should work on the IOT in order to keep it efficient was discussed at an earlier point in the process. I would need to dig the archives to find details on that. 

Personally, I think it would be great to get more brains working on this important topic, so why don't you encourage those who are interested in joining to send an e-mail to me and I will take this further, Avri?

Best,
Thomas


> Am 09.08.2016 um 16:12 schrieb avri doria <avri at acm.org>:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Thanks for the reply.
> 
> Yeah I was asked about adding members, had no idea how it was done, so
> asked.  So they would have to approach the CCWG chairs for such an
> indication if they wanted to join.  I will pass that on.  I understand
> that the CCWG chairs are probably subscribed to this list, so they can
> also respond if they wish.
> 
> Glad we are going to look at the implications of the recent IRP
> decisions. Seems it should have some impact on the whole discussion of
> discovery. I am curious to understand whether what we are putting in
> place prevents some of the mishaps that have been documented.
> 
> Have another question I was asked that I was uncertain about:
> 
> Can a panel under the new IRP  make binding relief recommendations (not
> interim relief which seems well defined) for a complainant, or will they
> still be limited to decision requiring further consideration by the
> Board.  I did not see substantive decisions as prohibited as is the case
> currently, but also do not see where they are specifically enabled.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> avri
> 
>> On 09-Aug-16 09:39, Burr, Becky wrote:
>> Yeah, the latest IRP declaration is pretty intense.  Good idea for the IOT to review.  I think official IOT participants are supposed to come from the CCWG, not through me.  
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: iot-bounces at icann.org [mailto:iot-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of avri doria
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2016 7:07 AM
>> To: iot at icann.org
>> Subject: [IOT] The latest IRP rulings
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> The latest rulings contain an amount of discussion of procedural issues.
>> 
>> Will be be reviewing these to make sure that we have covered all the issue that exist in the status quo?
>> 
>> Also I was asked, is the IOT still open for new participants?
>> 
>> thanks
>> 
>> avri
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.avast.com_antivirus&d=DQICAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=gZb6MWMVgmPEjX5A-Y2O9JC9VgN5QNWucbil6uKm56E&s=LZNxCv4bJk10khgMA7i7xwiHBNXvKRSlTRUaVnL_7yo&e= 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> IOT mailing list
>> IOT at icann.org
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_iot&d=DQICAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=gZb6MWMVgmPEjX5A-Y2O9JC9VgN5QNWucbil6uKm56E&s=-Tf6gZsJ6CRZ0tFykF_hX8BcbF3q0fTtXgNluN-MqhQ&e=
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> 
> _______________________________________________
> IOT mailing list
> IOT at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iot