ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


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

[council] For consideration: RAA DIscussion Paper

  • To: "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [council] For consideration: RAA DIscussion Paper
  • From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:42:01 -0700
  • Accept-language: fr-FR, en-US
  • Acceptlanguage: fr-FR, en-US
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Thread-index: AcyJ1x3sEh2nJRkbQW6P1BJdGYglIgAB/LRg
  • Thread-topic: For consideration: RAA DIscussion Paper

Dear Councillors,

For your convenience the Discussion Paper On Next Steps to Produce a New Form 
of Registrar Accreditation Agreement (including reference documents)
13 October 2011
is posted on page:
and be directly referenced at:

Thank you.
Kind regards,


Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Kurt Pritz
Sent: jeudi 13 octobre 2011 20:37
To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [council] For consideration: RAA DIscussion Paper

Dear GNSO Council Members,

I would appreciate it if you could please review the attached "Discussion Paper 
on Next Steps to Produce a New Form of the RAA". This paper suggests possible 
options for consideration by the community to move the RAA amendment process 
forward in a cooperative and timely manner.

This paper was prepared in response to a request from the Board to categorize 
proposed amendment topics and summarize possible options for next steps.

The recent efforts by the GNSO Council to address some of the law enforcement 
recommendations demonstrate progress and are encouraging. There are many other 
proposals to be addressed. We believe that this paper can be useful in 
identifying additional alternative paths. To be clear, this is not intended to 
interrupt current work or advance ICANN Board or staff opinion in the policy 
discussions. The paper is meant to be responsive to requests for information. 
It is also meant to signal that there will be a high level of staff support to 
facilitate the development of RAA amendments and any related policy activities.

Two additional points:  You will find that the categorization of topics is not 
as straightforward as we all might prefer. As described in the paper, it is 
difficult to determine whether a proposal is a policy issue or is within the 
picket fence without considering specific amendment language. Finally, the 
paper indicates a preference for undertaking substantive discussion now, to 
develop specific recommendations for amendments through negotiation or policy 
development or both.

We hope that this Discussion Paper will encourage further dialogue in Dakar 
with the GNSO Council, the Registrar Stakeholder Group, and the ICANN community 
with regard to identifying an acceptable path forward. I am sure this paper is 
likely to raise questions also. I think an exchange of questions and answers is 
important to realize the full benefit of the thought that went into this - a 
writing does not always capture or describe all the ideas generated. Please 
direct those questions to Margie Milam, who will share them with the 
cross-functional team that worked on this for your consideration.

Best regards,


Kurt Pritz

4676 Admiralty Way, #330
Marina del Rey, CA 90292

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