[council] Motion to delay thick WHOIS PDP

Liz Gasster liz.gasster at icann.org
Wed Apr 11 21:26:20 UTC 2012

Hi Stéphane and all,

I really appreciate the concerns about staff workload, which continue to be significant.  In this case, Marika has just completed the implementation of the PDP revision and the PEDNR PDP, and has almost completed the IRTP part B PDP, so if the Council elected to proceed, her work load is freeing up a bit, and she would be in a position to support this WG.  Steve Sheng would also be available to assist with any technical matters.  This assumes that there is sufficient GNSO community bandwidth to participate in the WG, it is much harder for staff to support a group when community participation is spotty.

Best, Liz

From: Stéphane Van Gelder [mailto:Stephane.vangelder at indom.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 1:09 PM
To: Liz Gasster
Cc: Jonathan Robinson; council at gnso.icann.org
Subject: Re: [council] Motion to delay thick WHOIS PDP

Thanks Liz and all for moving this along.

Liz, on the Staff resource issue, let me ask you the question outright: does Staff feel it has the bandwidth to take on this extra work should the Council decide to do so?

The reason I am asking is that in past months, you have been very clear about the fact that Staff resources are stretched so thin that if the Council opted to start new work, it may need to consider dropping something else on its pending project list to accommodate the new requirement.

As you know, I think you have been absolutely right to make this point and to help the Council understand what staff resources it can expect to call on.

So I have to admit to being slightly confused at your apparent hesitation to cite the Staff resource issue in this motion, as Jonathan suggests doing. Although you are of course absolutely right: as far as I know, Staff has not been asked about their ability to take up this specific task and staff has been nothing short of stellar in their willingness to step up and take on any work that the Council has thrown at it up to known.



Le 11 avr. 2012 à 18:48, Liz Gasster a écrit :

Dear Jonathan and all,

I would respectfully like to make two friendly suggestions to this motion (I've redlined in the attached):

1.       To delete reference to ICANN staff resources.  Staff has not been asked about our specific resources available to do this PDP (we are constrained overall but we have consistently stepped up to new work, if sometimes making modified arrangements to address workload).  So I am not comfortable with the language making this a staff workload issue.  I understand the issue of GNSO community resources, so that language is retained in my suggested edit.
2.       To add a "date certain" which still would need to be inserted.  The end time for a delay needs to be specifically defined, even if adjusted later on.

I'm happy to explain these suggestions further.  Thanks so much for considering.

Best regards, Liz

From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org> [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org]<mailto:[mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org]> On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 8:33 AM
To: 'Stéphane Van Gelder'; council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>
Subject: RE: [council] Motion to delay thick WHOIS PDP

Dear Stéphane & fellow councillors,

We have today discussed this motion during the course of the Registries SG meeting.

A concern was expressed and discussed in some detail about the reason for delay and directly linking a PDP process (on Thick WHOIS) with contractual negotiations (on .com).
The PDP process and the contractual negotiation processes are essentially distinct and separate processes.

Therefore, I'd like to propose a friendly amendment to modify the motion in order to deal with this concern.

I have attached suggested re-wording of the motion to accommodate this concern.

Best wishes,


From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org> [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org]<mailto:[mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org]> On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
Sent: 04 April 2012 14:22
To: council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:council at gnso.icann.org> GNSO
Subject: [council] Motion to delay thick WHOIS PDP


You will remember that in CR the Council expressed a desire to delay the thick whois PDP.

Since then, the Council leadership and Staff have discussed this at length.

First, it has been deemed necessary to have a formal motion to do this. Due to the deadline for motions being today, I have asked that a motion to that effect be prepared and I am submitting this today. I am doing this as Chair, from an administrative point of view, to help see this process moved forward.

Second, we've had extensive discussions on what voting threshold should be used for this motion. In the end, we have ascertained that as there is no specific reference to a PDP suspension process in the bylaws, the default threshold should be used (see bylaws section 3.9: http://www.icann.org/en/about/governance/bylaws#X-3.9).

Motion attached.


<Motion to delay the 'thick' Whois PDP - 30 March 2012 LizG.doc>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20120411/787e99f5/attachment.html>

More information about the council mailing list