ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [council] Draft Agenda for Council meeting - Thursday 7 June 2007

  • To: "Council GNSO" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [council] Draft Agenda for Council meeting - Thursday 7 June 2007
  • From: "Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 08:36:18 +1000
  • In-reply-to: <676449.73363.qm@web58715.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
  • References: <000901c7a1ca$7f1cad40$e601a8c0@PSEVO> <676449.73363.qm@web58715.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Thread-index: AceiF00ZMN5xwn3URDGYnquNZxSW6QAjLP7A
  • Thread-topic: [council] Draft Agenda for Council meeting - Thursday 7 June 2007

Hello Mawaki,

> 
> Do you have anything specific in mind? what and where are the
> provisions to ensure such flexibility? I think it is important
> to know concretely how this can be handled, should the need
> arise.


I was referring to the PDP process.  A PDP can be used at any time to
update an existing policy.

I had envisaged a process (which certainly should be clarified in the
report) that involves a fast track review process after the first round
(preferably against a clear set of measurable parameters), and then the
Council could decide to initiate a PDP process (again hopefully of a
duration of say 90 days) to make any policy adjustments needed, or the
staff could simply improve the implementation of the existing policy.
I recall some discussion of this in Marina Del Ray where we talked about
the need to have some measures of success and set out a clear review
process.

We did actually build in such a review process for the transfers policy
- but this has been a bit resource constrained (probably mostly from the
volunteer side) and has not yet concluded.

Regards,
Bruce Tonkin




<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>