Hi, I think it is wonderful that the Board has finally awoken to it capability of requesting a PDP. I also think this is a good opportunity for us as a SG, as constituencies and as individuals to make comments both on the changes proposed in the RrSG/Staff negotiated changes and on the issues report. I wonder whether the staff is willing to use the new issues report methodology included in the new PDP process that include: 1. release of an initial issues report that is subject to a comment period and update 2. requires a rights impact analysis I know this has not yet been approved by the Board, but nonetheless, nothing in the current by-laws would prevent staff from using the new guidelines for this issues report. avri On 28 Oct 2011, at 18:04, Wendy Seltzer wrote: > As we had lots of discussion of the Registrar Accreditation Agreement at > and surrounding this ICANN meeting, I wanted to share this resolution > from the ICANN Board transcript at > <http://domainincite.com/docs/board-meeting-one-dakar-oct-28-2011.txt> > > Note particularly that the Board is initiating an Issue Report to the > GNSO Council, directing us to start a PDP on additional items. It's > good to see that recognition of the GNSO's responsibility, and puts > plenty of work ahead of us to respond. > > --Wendy > > Registrar Accreditation Agreement Amendments. > Whereas, the GNSO Council resolved on 4 March 2009 to support registrar > accreditation agreements, RAA, amendments as documented in the following > link, recommend to the board that they be adopted and to form a drafting > team to discuss further amendments to the RAA and to identify those on > which further action may be desirable. > WHEREAS, the Council provided a report from that working group the > prioritized recommendations for RAA amendment topics. > WHEREAS, law enforcement representatives have met on several occasions > to develop and deliver recommendations for registrar accreditation > agreement amendment topics and those recommendations have been endorsed > by icann's governmental advisory committee. > WHEREAS, the GNSO has extensively debated the process for developing and > approving amendments to the raa. > whereas, continuing to evolve the RAA is an important element in a > program to protect registrants and safeguard the stability of a single > interoperable internet. > WHEREAS, the gTLD registrars and ICANN are entering into negotiations to > consider existing recommendations and deliver a proposed seat of > meaningful amendments in the global public interest with the twin goals > of registrant protection and stability in mind. > RESOLVED, 2011.10.28, following the number, the ICANN board directs > negotiations to commence immediately, resulting in proposed amendments > to be provided for consideration at ICANN's meeting in Costa Rica in > March 2012. > RESOLVED, the subject of the negotiations should include law enforcement > and GNSO working group recommendations as well as other topics that > would advance the twin goals of registrant protection and DNS stability. > RESOLVED, the board also requests the creation of an issues report to > undertake a GNSO policy development process as quickly as possible to > address remaining items suited for a PDP. > > > > -- > Wendy Seltzer -- [log in to unmask] > Fellow, Yale Law School Information Society Project > Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University > http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html > https://www.chillingeffects.org/ > https://www.torproject.org/ > http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/