ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]

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

Re: [council] FOR YOUR INFORMATION: Update from Chris Disspain on the IGO protections issue

  • To: "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [council] FOR YOUR INFORMATION: Update from Chris Disspain on the IGO protections issue
  • From: Johan Helsingius <julf@xxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 11:18:03 +0200
  • In-reply-to: <B316B205-F31B-47D4-B01A-AC84A56BAEEC@icann.org>
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • References: <B316B205-F31B-47D4-B01A-AC84A56BAEEC@icann.org>
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
In the note from Chris Disspain, he on one hand states
"As we noted in Helsinki, this would be the appropriate next
step since the GNSO is responsible for gTLD policy development",
so he acknowledges that the GNSO is indeed responsible for gTLD
policy development, but then continues with "The outcome of the
GNSO’s deliberations will then be considered by the Board in its
determination of whether it will accept the GNSO’s recommendations
as consistent with GAC advice or not."

So what happens (procedurally) if the Board does not accept the
GNSO recommendations as "consistent with GAC advice"?

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