[IOT] IRP IoT message post-ICANN57

[Malcolm Hutty]

Firstly, if this is the intended meaning, I think the wording needs to make it more clear, and less readily open to a different reading. 

Secondly, you've ignored the "and in no case more than a year after the action" clause (I paraphrase from memory) which operates independently of the 45 day limit. Isn't that one-year limit supposed to be fixed to the date of the adoption of the policy, rather than roll with the application of it to an individual case? Again, if not, the wording is terribly confusing. 

Come to that, ICANN may not be applying the policy at all: it may be implemented by a Registry. A registrant may still wish to allege that the policy itself is facially improper, not merely that the Registry's interpretation was unreasonable, and so seek to have ICANN withdraw the policy.  But in such a case, what is the action of ICANN that the registrant wishes to dispute, and when would you date it for the purposes of this time bar? The Registry's implementing action cannot be the basis of an IRP, can it?

Sent from my iPhone

> On 21 Nov 2016, at 22:28, Burr, Becky <Becky.Burr at neustar.biz> wrote:
> 
> I think this means that the 45 day period runs from the time ICANN
> interprets or applies a policy in a way that violates the bylaws and
> materially affects a specific individual/entity - but ONLY with respect to
> that individual/entity, only with respect that that particular application
> of the policy.  This has no relation to 45 days from the time the policy
> is adopted - because no one can be materially affected until the policy is