ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]


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

AW: [council] Contingent RAA Motion


Thanks as well Kristina
 


Best regards 
Wolf-Ulrich 

 


________________________________

        Von: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Im Auftrag von Rosette, Kristina
        Gesendet: Mittwoch, 9. März 2011 16:09
        An: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
        Betreff: RE: [council] Contingent RAA Motion 
        
        
        Wolf, 
         
        Yes, technically.  As a practical matter, though, I suppose whether an 
amendment is an improvement depends on the amendment and your perspective on it.
         
        K  


________________________________

                From: KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx] 
                Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 5:11 AM
                To: Rosette, Kristina; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
                Subject: AW: [council] Contingent RAA Motion 
                
                
                Kristina and Mary,
                 
                just for my understanding since I haven't been deeply involved 
in the matter: "improvements" or "amendments" to the RAA means the same item?
                 


                Best regards 
                Wolf-Ulrich 

                 


________________________________

                        Von: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von Rosette, Kristina
                        Gesendet: Mittwoch, 9. März 2011 03:38
                        An: 'council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
                        Betreff: [council] Contingent RAA Motion 
                        
                        
                        
                        All,
                         
                        I would like to propose an RAA motion that recommends 
that Staff adopt an amended version of the process specified as Process B in 
the Final Report on Proposals for Improvements to the Registrar Accreditation 
Agreement.  Process B was proposed by the Registrar Stakeholder Group members 
of the Drafting Team.  I am hopeful that the amended process ("Process B+") is 
an acceptable compromise.  As you will see from the final Whereas clause, this 
motion is contingent on the failure of the motion Mary has just introduced (and 
that I have seconded), and will be voted upon only if that motion fails.
                         
                        Safe travels to San Francisco.
                         
                        K
                         
                        -*-
                         
                        Motion to Approve an Amended Recommendation in the 
Final Report on Proposals for Improvements to the Registrar Accreditation 
Agreement.
                         
                        Whereas, on 4 March 2009, the GNSO Council approved the 
form of the 2009 Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA) developed as a result 
of a lengthy consultative process initiated by ICANN;
                         
                        Whereas, in addition to approving the 2009 RAA, on 4 
March 2009 the GNSO Council convened a joint drafting team with members of the 
At-Large Community, to conduct further work related to improvements to the RAA; 
specifically to: (a) draft a charter identifying registrant rights and 
responsibilities; and (b) develop a specific process to identify additional 
potential amendments to the RAA on which further action may be desirable;
                         
                        Whereas, on 18 October 2010, the Joint GNSO/ALAC RAA 
Drafting Team published its Final Report describing specific recommendations 
and proposals to the GNSO Council for improvements to the RAA;
                         
                        Whereas, the GNSO Council has reviewed the Final Report 
and, in its resolution 20110113-2, the GNSO Council approved of the Form of 
Registrant Rights and Responsibilities Charter as described in Annex D of the 
Final Report and recommended that Staff commence the consultation process with 
Registrars in the RAA to finalize the Registrant Rights and Responsibilities 
Charter for posting on the websites of Registrars as specified in Section 3.15 
of the RAA;
                        Whereas, a GNSO Council motion recommending that Staff 
adopt the process specified as Process A in the Final Report to develop a new 
form of RAA with respect to the High and Medium Priority topics described in 
the Final Report did not pass;
                         
                        Whereas, the GNSO Council desires to approve an amended 
version of the process specified as Process B in the Final Report to develop a 
new form of RAA with respect to the High and Medium Priority topics described 
in the Final Report.
                         
                        NOW THEREFORE, BE IT:
                         
                        
                        RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council recommends that Staff 
adopt an amended version of the process specified as Process B in the Final 
Report to develop a new form of RAA with respect to the High and Medium 
Priority topics described in the Final Report.  As amended herein, Process B 
entails:
                         
                        1. The prioritized list of topics as set forth in the 
Final Report is sent to the GNSO Council and ICANN Staff for identification of 
any topics that would require consensus policy development rather than RAA 
contract amendment.  This step shall be completed not later than sixty (60) 
days after the date of this resolution.  
                         
                        2. ICANN Staff will schedule a public consultation, to 
be held at the first ICANN public meeting that occurs after completion of the 
review in Step 1, to provide members of the ICANN community with the 
opportunity to articulate their support of and/or objection to the High and 
Medium Priority topics described in the Final Report.
                         
                        3.  Within thirty (30) days after the public 
consultation described in Step 2, negotiations begin with the Negotiating Group 
consisting of ICANN Staff and the Registrar Stakeholder Group (as a whole).
                         
                        4.  The Negotiating Group shall provide, for public 
comment, written reports monthly on the status and progress of the 
negotiations.  Such reports shall include proposed text under consideration and 
identify items and text agreed upon by the Negotiating Group.  The monthly 
report shall identify (a) topics identified in the Final Report as High or 
Medium Priority and that were not determined in Step 1 as requiring consensus 
policy development; and (b) proposed amendments put forth by any Stakeholder 
Group, Constituency, and/or Advisory Committee (collectively, the "Rejected 
Topics and Amendments"), if any, that have been rejected by the Negotiating 
Group. 
                         
                        5.  The Negotiating Group reviews public comments 
received and continues negotiations as necessary. Steps 4 and 5 shall repeat as 
necessary; provided, however, that the full final draft of the new RAA must be 
posted for public comment not later than September 17, 2012. 
                         
                        6.  Subject to the date requirement in Step 5, ICANN 
Staff and the Registrar Stakeholder Group shall determine when the full final 
draft of the new RAA is ready to be posted for public comment.  The full final 
draft of the new RAA that is posted for public comment shall be accompanied by 
a detailed written explanation, approved by both Staff and the Registrar 
Stakeholder Group, that sets forth the basis for the rejection of all Rejected 
Topics and Amendments.
                         
                        7.  The GNSO Council shall review the full final draft 
of the new RAA, consider public comments, and vote on approval of the draft new 
RAA. A Supermajority vote of the GNSO Council is required to approve the new 
RAA.  
                         
                        8.  If the GNSO Council approves the new RAA, the new 
RAA goes to Board for approval.
                         
                        9.  If the GNSO Council does not approve the new RAA, 
the new RAA is sent back to the Negotiating Group with appropriate feedback for 
reconsideration.  Repeat from step 7.
                         
                        RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council recommends that 
this process be initiated by ICANN immediately.
                         
                         
                         
                         
                         
                         
                         



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