[council] FW: Proposed Amendments to the Fast Flux Motion

Avri Doria avri at psg.com
Thu Sep 3 18:39:23 UTC 2009


Wouldn't this be something that would need to worked out with the RAP  
WG in a WG charter amendment?
I tend to see changing the charter as a negotiation process between  
the council and the WG.



On 3 Sep 2009, at 20:04, Mike Rodenbaugh wrote:

> I agree with the RyC edits as friendly amendments, with one exception
> regarding the mandate to the RAP-WG.  Since indemnification is an  
> agreement,
> and the WG is examining in detail the various agreements in the  
> registration
> chain, I would clarify and simplify this as follows:
> The Registration Abuse Policy Working Group (RAPWG) should examine  
> whether
> existing policy and/or agreements empower Registries and Registrars to
> mitigate illicit uses of Fast Flux;

More information about the council mailing list