[council] Another Friendly Amendment to the IRTP-B Motion

["Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I am making a friendly amendment to the IRTP-B motion that we will be
considering Wednesday. Staff has had the motion reviewed by Counsel and
they suggest that we clarify Resolves D and E so it is clear that we are
not giving prior approval before seeing what Staff develops/proposes.
The amendment is to replace Resolves D and E with the following:
 
RESOLVED (D), prior to the consideration of approval of the
recommendation which states: "denial reason #7 should be replaced by
adding a new provision in a different section of the IRTP on when and
how domains may be locked or unlocked", the GNSO Council requests ICANN
Staff to provide a proposal for such a new provision, taking into
account the IRTP Part B WG deliberations in relation to this issue (see
IRTP Part B Final Report - (Recommendation #9 - part 2). Upon review of
the proposal, the GNSO Council will consider whether to approve the
recommendation.

RESOLVED (E), prior to the consideration of approval of the
recommendation regarding the standardizing and clarifying WHOIS status
messages regarding Registrar Lock status, the GNSO Council requests
ICANN staff to provide a proposal designed to ensure a technically
feasible approach can be developed to meet this recommendation. Staff
should take into account the IRTP Part B WG deliberations in relation to
this issue (see IRTP Part B Final Report). (IRTP Part B Recommendation
#8). The goal of these changes is to clarify why the Lock has been
applied and how it can be changed. Upon review of the proposed plan, the
GNSO Council will consider whether to approve the recommendation.


Tim