Re: [council] Fast Flux motion

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

Thanks for this.

Perhaps we should amend the motion to request that Policy Staff come  
back with an implementation recommendation by the publication date for  
Seoul meeting.
a.



On 3 Sep 2009, at 16:17, Marika Konings wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> In order to inform your deliberations on the Fast Flux Final Report  
> and the motion you have before you, I thought it might be helpful to  
> share some background information on the deliberations of the FFWG  
> and some points you might want to take into consideration when  
> making a decision.
> 1) The report does not include any recommendations for new policy or  
> changes to existing policies, but it does include ‘recommended next  
> steps’. When the group discussed these ideas for possible next  
> steps, staff pointed out that all of these ideas would entail  
> substantial further work by ICANN staff as well as the ICANN  
> community as these ideas would need to be further worked out before  
> being able to implement them. An attempt was therefore made to  
> prioritize these in order to be able to present the GNSO Council  
> with a top-two or three of ideas to pursue in the short term and  
> leave the rest for a later point in time if those top-two/three  
> ideas would not work out. Unfortunately, there was no clear  
> consensus on such a top-two or three and as a result all of the  
> ideas were included, albeit in order of importance.
> 2) As the resolve clauses are currently written in the proposed  
> motion, there is little direction as to what is expected or what the  
> next steps and expected timing is (e.g. ‘encourage ongoing  
> discussions within the community regarding the development of best  
> practices and / or policy changes to identify and mitigate the  
> illicit uses of Fast Flux’). It might be helpful to discuss clearer  
> direction on what the expected next step(s) are (e.g. Organise a  
> workshop at next ICANN meeting to encourage discussions within the  
> community regarding the development of best practices and / or  
> policy changes to identify and mitigate the illicit uses of Fast  
> Flux) and whether the proposed actions in the resolve clauses should  
> be undertaken at the same time, or whether there is a sequence that  
> should be followed, again taking into account that almost all of  
> these resolve clauses will require further work and discussion by  
> ICANN Staff as well as the ICANN Community.
> With best regards,
>
> Marika