[APAC-Discuss] [ALAC] Fwd: For consideration: RAA Discussion Paper

[Cheryl Langdon-Orr]

Thank you Alan  I am FWD  to AP-Discuss and our AP Leadership / ExCom as
this is most certainly if specific interest to us...  We shall read as
homework and perhaps discuss more in Dakar...

Cheryl Langdon-Orr
(CLO)



On 14 October 2011 14:13, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:

> I am forwarding this note from Kurt Pritz related
> to options for amending the Registrar Accreditation Agreement.
>
> The discussion paper itself may be found at:
> <http://gnso.icann.org/issues/final-raa-discussion-paper-13oct11-en.pdf>
> http://gnso.icann.org/issues/final-raa-discussion-paper-13oct11-en.pdf.
>
> Feel free to redistribute this to your RALOs if desired.
>
> Alan
>
>
> >From: Kurt Pritz <kurt.pritz at icann.org>
> >To: "council at gnso.icann.org" <council at gnso.icann.org>
> >Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 11:36:41 -0700
> >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
> >
> >
> >Kurt Pritz
> >ICANN
> >
> >4676 Admiralty Way, #330
> >Marina del Rey, CA 90292
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC mailing list
> ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>
> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> ALAC Working Wiki:
> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
>