<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [council] Update on status of implementation of PEDNR Recommendations
- To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>, "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [council] Update on status of implementation of PEDNR Recommendations
- From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:04:18 -0500
- Cc: Mike Zupke <Mike.Zupke@xxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <CD42CF76.26D9D%marika.konings@icann.org>
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- References: <CD42CF76.26D9D%marika.konings@icann.org>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
One comment, and I am copying Mike on this.
I find the wording regarding educational materials curious.
Obviously, the consultation with ALAC, registrars, and other
stakeholders will require more time than would have been required
were we to develop materials in house, but this is the course the
GNSO and the Board recommended, and I think it will result in a
better final product.
I presume that what is meant is that the process will take longer
than if the materials were "developed in house without any community
involvement". The intent of the recommendation was always for ICANN
to develop the materials (possibly contracted out of course), but
that this be done with input from the designated communities, and
pre-deployment verification.
I would like to think that going forward, ICANN would never consider
developing this kind of material would some involvement of the
concerned parties.
Alan
At 14/02/2013 11:29 AM, Marika Konings wrote:
Dear All,
As requested on today's GNSO Council meeting, please find below an
update on the status of implementation of the PEDNR recommendations
from Mike Zupke, Director Registrar Programs:
We are pleased to inform the Council that we plan to announce
implementation of the Expired Registration Recovery Policy (ERRP)
within the next 10 days. I understand there might be some
frustration over the time it has taken to get here, but in light of
the many parallel projects currently underway, such as RAA
negotiations & registrant bill of rights, several significant
amendments to the IRTP, and our new gTLD operational readiness
initiatives, I think the state of progress is about where we might
have expected it to be, and is in fact, more or less on target with
our original project plan.
The one last bit we need to do before rollout of the ERRP is get
input from affected parties (registries, registrars) about the
amount of time they will reasonably need to implement the policy
changes. The PEDNR implementation review team can expect to hear
from me about that tomorrow. With regard to PEDNR's recommendation
to create educational materials, we are scheduled to join ALAC on
its 26 February call to initiate the recommended consultative
process. We will also need to engage registrars and other
stakeholders and are in the process of determining what might be
appropriate for the Beijing meeting. Obviously, the consultation
with ALAC, registrars, and other stakeholders will require more time
than would have been required were we to develop materials in house,
but this is the course the GNSO and the Board recommended, and I
think it will result in a better final product.
I hope this information is helpful. Please let me know if I can be
of further assistance. And as always, I'm available to councilors
off list if they have questions they'd prefer to ask directly.
With best regards,
Marika
Sr. Policy Director
ICANN
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|