Re: [council] Fast Flux motion

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

On thinking about this some more plus some background conversations, I  
would like to offer the following for consideration as a friendly  
amendment.
Add to the end of the resolution

To form a Drafting Team to work with support staff on developing a  
plan with set of priorities and schedule that can be reviewed and  
considered by the new Council as part of its work in developing the  
Council Policy Plan and Priorities for 2010
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