[Gnso-newgtld-wg] Our Policy Work and a subsequent PDP Implementation Review Team

[Jeff Neuman]

All,

Lets please keep the tone civil on these discussions and not assume that there will be malice on any side.  I think we should expect that everyone will have good intentions in deciding what needs to be done.

All of that said, Steve is correct.  The wording I used was intention to convey that the Council in theory could elect not to constitute an IRT, but I think as past experience has shown (and even for the ePDP), the Council does tend to constitute IRTs and I can’t imagine this circumstance would be any different.  But that is not a decision for this Working Group.

I do agree with Rubens on the point that we may want to come up with another name for what we are now calling the “Standing IRT Panel” because it can easily get confused with the PDP IRT.  Standing Operation Review Panel (SORP) doesn’t sound quite right though not just because of the funny sounding Acronym, but also because it may be looking at non-operational things.  Perhaps something with Advisory in it.  I first thought of TLD Advisory Review Team, but TART is much worse 😊  Perhaps TLD Advisory Panel (TAP)?



Jeff Neuman
Senior Vice President

Com Laude | Valideus
1751 Pinnacle Drive
Suite 600, McLean
VA 22102, USA

M: +1.202.549.5079
D: +1.703.635.7514
E: jeff.neuman at comlaude.com
www.comlaude.com<http://www.comlaude.com/>

Liability cannot be accepted for statements made which are clearly the sender’s own and not made on behalf of Com Laude USA or Valideus USA. This message is intended solely for the addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in error, please send it back to us, and immediately and permanently delete it. Do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this message or in any attachment.Com Laude USA and Valideus are trading names of Consonum, Inc.

From: Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org> On Behalf Of Rubens Kuhl
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2019 11:12 AM
To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman at lrrc.com>
Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Our Policy Work and a subsequent PDP Implementation Review Team




Em 28 de mar de 2019, à(s) 20:39:000, Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman at lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman at lrrc.com>> escreveu:

I think maybe that if I am a registry or registrar Council member, I just vote “NO IRT” in the Implementation Phase cause that might slow things down.  (let’s get this next round going!)


Isn't that awful when Council members vote based only thinking of their constituencies instead of the greater good ? Guess what, this happened a few weeks ago. And it wasn't done by CPH councillors.



How is it that our Charter permits numerous recommendations for “Implementation Guidance” and permits a recommendation for a standing IRT after launch, but somehow prohibits a recommendation for an IRT during the Implementation Phase?


I believe Steve already covered this.


Rubens




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20190329/fe440db8/attachment.html>