[council] RE: Council report required for the Board on the recently approved WHOIS recommendation

[Maria Farrell]

Dear all, 

Some information which may help your deliberations on this issue:

The Preliminary Task Force report - which described in detail the compromise
the task force reached - was posted for public comments from 12 September to
2 October 2005.  Seven comments were received. These were compiled in the
Final Task Force Report which the Council voted on during the 28 November
meeting. 

The Final Task Force Report has been posted on the ICANN website, and
prominently featured on the GNSO home page, since 11 November, 2005.  

This issue was also included in Whois Task Force Chair, Jordyn Buchanan's
presentations to the GNSO Public Forum in Mar del Plata and Luxembourg. 

The bylaws state that a public comment period is called for when a
recommendation goes from Council to the Board if the proposal will have an
impact on the overall operation of the DNS.  The Board's role in this
respect is not to weigh up the policy aspects but to ensure that the
decision-making is not flawed and that the proposal will not have an adverse
effect on the DNS. As this recommendation's main objective was to create an
exception procedure to deal with a specific and to date unknown exception to
compliance with a section of the bylaws, staff's judgement is that it does
not meet the criteria that require a further public comment period. Staff
will of course respect the Council's wishes on this if the Council decides
that this judgement is in error.

All the best, Maria 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org] On
Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 6:29 PM
To: Thomas Keller
Cc: GNSO Council
Subject: Re: [council] RE: Council report required for the Board on the
recently approved WHOIS recommendation

Hi,

I understand how much consultation has gone into coming up to the
compromise.  But has the compromise itself been commented on?

In any case, I think that every stage of recommendation and decision should
be subject to public comment.  so as it moves from the council with its
responsibility for recommending policy to the board with its responsibility
for due diligence and for approving policy, i think there is a reasonable
opportunity for public comment.

a.

On 22 dec 2005, at 11.10, Thomas Keller wrote:

> just to make my point clearer. I don´t see why yet another round of 
> public comments would do any good, the arguments haven´t changed for 
> the last three years and that is the "compromise" the taskforce came 
> up with.
>
> tom
>
> Am 22.12.2005 schrieb Thomas Keller:
>> Avri,
>>
>> this recommendation has already been through various iterations of 
>> public comments at the taskforce and council level. What is presented 
>> to the board now is the final product of ICANNs policy body for gTLDs 
>> created through the ICANN policy process. As the board is not policy 
>> body itself it should not have a look at the recomendation in that 
>> respect but rather in terms of possible flaws or errors making the 
>> policy unworkable.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> tom