Re: [council] Staff Proposals - IRTP Part B Recommendation #8 and #9 part 2
- To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [council] Staff Proposals - IRTP Part B Recommendation #8 and #9 part 2
- From: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2012 15:58:08 +0100
- Cc: "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <CB28A8E0.1DA73email@example.com>
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- References: <CB28A8E0.1DA73firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I think it would be helpful for the Council to have two motions to consider at
its next meeting, so that these staff proposals can be acted upon.
Le 3 janv. 2012 à 12:45, Marika Konings a écrit :
> Dear All,
> First of all, best wishes for 2012!
> As you may recall, the GNSO Council resolved in June of last year in relation
> to two of the IRTP Part B recommendations (recommendation #8 concerning the
> standardization and clarification of Whois status messages regarding
> Registrar Lock status and recommendation #9 part 2 concerning a new provision
> to lock and unlock domain names) to request ICANN staff to provide proposals.
> In consultation with the IRTP Part B Working Group, ICANN Staff prepared
> these proposals which were subsequently put out for public comment (see
> http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-22nov11-en.htm). As no
> comments were received as part of the public comment forum, these proposals
> are now submitted to the GNSO Council for its consideration (see attached).
> If you have any questions, please let me know.
> With best regards,
> <IRTP Recommendation #9 Part 2 - Proposal from ICANN Staff - 22 November
> 2011.pdf><IRTP Recommendation #8 - Proposal from ICANN Staff - 22 November