[council] For your review - GNSO Review of GAC Communique Hyderabad

[Austin, Donna]

Paul

Notwithstanding your discussions with Michele and Rubens, I have received some suggested alternate text from the RySG for consideration, specifically as it relates to the following sentences:

Paul McGrady text:
Some contracted parties to ICANN have or are in the process of developing a number of “best practices” initiatives related to registry and registrar operations. ICANN is responsible for setting standards for abuse reporting and performance when determining compliance with contractual obligations.

RySG alternative text:
Contracted parties, either through the respective Stakeholder Groups or other avenues, have or are in the process of developing a number of ‘best practice’ initiatives related registry and registrar operations. ICANN is not a regulator and, while it has responsibility to manage its contracts, it is not appropriate for one party to unilaterally define the standards for reporting enforcement.

In addition, I also wonder whether it would be worthwhile raising your concerns about the use of the term “advice” as an overarching issue in the covering transmission letter to the Board? It seems important enough to warrant such elevation.

Look forward to your response.

Donna

From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of policy at paulmcgrady.com
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2016 12:11 PM
To: Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>; council at gnso.icann.org
Subject: RE: [council] For your review - GNSO Review of GAC Communique Hyderabad

Hi All,

The IPC has had a chance to consider the draft language for Section 2 and propose the following (heavily) edited draft response:

___________________________
The GNSO Council would like to express concern that the list of questions set out in Annex 1 has been categorised as “advice”.  In this context, the term “advice” ought to be given its ordinary dictionary meaning, and a request to the Board to provide various data and information does not constitute “GAC Advice”, as this term is used in the ICANN Bylaws.  Since GAC Advice has a specific status and treatment under the under the ICANN Bylaws, precision of terminology is crucial to avoid any perception that there is an attempt to direct the Board, rather than making a request for information and attempting to impose a reasonable deadline for its provision.  That said, the GNSO Council looks forward to reviewing ICANN’s responses to the questions listed in Annex 1 to the Communiqué.   Some contracted parties to ICANN have or are in the process of developing a number of “best practices” initiatives related to registry and registrar operations. ICANN is responsible for setting standards for abuse reporting and performance when determining compliance with contractual obligations. The issue of DNS Abuse Mitigation raised by the GAC may also be dealt with by the GNSO in GNSO PDP Working Groups, producing relevant Consensus Policy recommendations then duly adopted by the Board.  Further, the issue of DNS Abuse Mitigation raised by the GAC is dealt with by the GNSO as the issue arises, whether it be various active and/or open projects on the Projects List<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_meetings_projects-2Dlist-2D28nov16-2Den.pdf&d=DgMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=b_o3-i0H2nKfE3BqYDYucWO1-3N1E4XVLXqlYXkqZ4Y&s=OnENUeYwFCPLqmH6BhL_VfSwze9IjfPBwZtjrj6smAM&e=>, or as part of GNSO Policy Activities<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_council_policy&d=DgMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=b_o3-i0H2nKfE3BqYDYucWO1-3N1E4XVLXqlYXkqZ4Y&s=DAh8dGjoP-HlunMGgxErthrt2L98OaFx7eNjhl28kT4&e=>.
___________________________

I'm very happy to discuss the rationale for these proposed changes.

Best,
Paul


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [council] For your review - GNSO Review of GAC Communique
Hyderabad
From: Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>>
Date: Thu, December 08, 2016 11:48 am
To: "council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>" <council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
Dear All,

Please find attached for your review the proposed GNSO Review of the GAC Communique. This draft has been developed by the small drafting team that was formed at ICANN57 consisting of Donna Austin, James Bladel, Heather Forrest, Phil Corwin, Michele Neylon, Paul McGrady and Carlos Guttierez. Please share any comments and/or input you may have with the mailing list. Consideration of this document is also on the agenda for the GNSO Council meeting on 15 December.

Best regards,

Marika

Marika Konings
Senior Policy Director & Team Leader for the GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Email: marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>

Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO
Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses_gnso&d=DgMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=b_o3-i0H2nKfE3BqYDYucWO1-3N1E4XVLXqlYXkqZ4Y&s=dNjsiuWO3xdzLW4v1BH88xcBii9uiGCBDGesqG9gB7I&e=> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gnso.icann.org_files_gnso_presentations_policy-2Defforts.htm-23newcomers&d=DgMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=b_o3-i0H2nKfE3BqYDYucWO1-3N1E4XVLXqlYXkqZ4Y&s=gtfl9Z6dWYQL3zTtk15ezDF16TnJlbluKDGvMZg5xaE&e=>.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20161213/b53e7906/attachment.html>