<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [council] RAA Motion

Thanks for your work on this, Chuck.  Because I do not agree that "there is strong support for the agreed-to amendments" across the entire ICANN community, I suggest that that language be removed or, alternatively, revised to indicate the segments of the community within which there is strong support.
 
K

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 9:59 AM
To: Council GNSO
Subject: [council] RAA Motion

Attached and copied below is a motion regarding the revised RAA for consideration of the Council in our 18 Dec meeting.
 
Chuck
 

RAA Motion for GNSO Council – 11 Dec 08

 

Whereas:

 

  • ICANN has undertaken a lengthy consultative process related to amending the Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA).
  • In response to community input via that process, ICANN Staff and the Registrars Constituency agreed on a set of proposed amendments to the Registry Registrar Agreement (RAA).
  • There is strong support for those agreed-to amendments, albeit many have suggested that the amendments should go further.
  • The current terms in the RAA date back to 1999 and many have needed revision for years.

 

Resolve:

 

  • The GNSO Council asks Staff to work with registrars and the Council to define the most expeditious process for implementing the agreed-to proposed amendments to the RAA as soon as possible.
  • The GNSO Council will form a drafting team to review the superset of proposed RAA issues and amendments not addressed in the presently proposed and agreed-to amendments and develop a request for an Issues Report, including clear identification of the policy issues that are involved.