[council] FW: Letter from the GAC regarding IOC/RC Protections

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

Other than the fact that he needs to include ALAC and ccNSO in the Cross community mix, I think this is a great idea.

I did a bit of research on this yesterday since I was trying to answer the question. In the context of writing my application for the ATRT, which remains undone, I noticed that included in the last ATRT report was a requirement that the distinction between policy and administrative action be defined.  Administrative action may be somewhat different than implementation, but i tend to think of implementation as a form of administrative action.  In replying to this ATRT requirement, what they did was describe the process for SO policy making, and the policy for Admin action making and give a few examples.  In other words the definition, in so far as I understand it, is that if an SO does it, it is policy and if the Board or Staff does it, it is Administrative action. And that it is a Board or Staff decision as to whether community input is required.  While I am sure I can be shown that I am simplifying somewhat, this is what I understood from the response they gave.  I personally find this lacking.

So yes, I think doing this is a great idea.

avri


On 30 Nov 2012, at 06:59, joy wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Hi all - sharing this message with you.
> This letter has sparked a debate among GNSO Councillors about whether
> or not there should be some work on defining "policy" vs
> "implementation" and/or some GNSO principles. the discussion began
> with Jeff Neumann's suggestion:
> "I believe we all need to take a step back from the issues immediately
> and decide once and for all an agreed upon bottom-up multi-stakeholder
> definition of what is ?policy? and what is ?implementation.?  Or at
> the very least a framework for making that assessment when issues
> arise.  I would advocate for a cross community group made up of
> members from ICANN staff, the GNSO, the GAC and others to come
> together to figure this issue out, so that we get out of this rut we
> are now in.  At the same time, we need to fix the image of the GNSO
> policy processes so that they are no longer feared, but embraced.
> They need to not be used as vehicles for delay, but rather utilized
> for the common good."
> 
> It would help us as Councillors to have your views on this idea.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Joy
> 
> 
> - -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: 	[council] FW: Letter from the GAC regarding IOC/RC Protections
> Date: 	Thu, 29 Nov 2012 09:59:54 -0000
> From: 	Jonathan Robinson <jonathan.robinson at ipracon.com>
> To: 	<council at gnso.icann.org>
> 
> 
> 
> All,
> 
> 
> 
> FYI.  Please see the attached letter received from the GAC last night my
> time.
> 
> 
> 
> Jonathan
> 
> 
> 
> *From:*GAC Secretariat [mailto:gacsec at gac.icann.org]
> *Sent:* 28 November 2012 21:38
> *To:* jonathan.robinson at ipracon.com
> *Cc:* Steve Crocker; Fadi Chehade; Heather Dryden; Maria Häll;
> alice at apc.org; Choon Sai LIM (IDA)
> *Subject:* Letter from the GAC regarding IOC/RC Protections
> 
> 
> 
> Sent on behalf of Heather Dryden, GAC Chair
> 
> 
> 
> Dear Jonathan,
> 
> 
> 
> Attached please find a letter from the GAC regarding IOC and Red
> Cross/Red Crescent protections.
> 
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> 
> 
> Jeannie Ellers
> 
> 
> 
> Jeannie Ellers
> Manager, GAC Coordination
> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
> 1101 New York Avenue NW, Suite 930
> 
> Washington, DC 20005
> Ph. +1 202 570 7135
> M. +1 310 302 7552
> 
> 
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/
> 
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQuCEaAAoJEA9zUGgfM+bqyFUH+QEupaWuP0Y6Vb7NV/vd1+UI
> X/qkrHqc42p8lYSa057tz0RimfwJrP848bid5VuOzbSrnJLNvPrCv405ENX3ldG7
> Sfob89CG9kosEmFfNO7vxzUxGFFaZWQrWwLKYcmjIovvkPGONOBsXH6Sx4URvCf3
> VaRD/YNzTVCeWnX4eWA916I/ppa7p3vXtkbhjPHVFlE4XxY/LKXTrffdDoFZh+mA
> 4GO+8mfaWO+F80J5Nz5d/lkccf5r3ycZnbJeoV3pSyu2dDzTPWtv8zpShEvtfZRu
> 1kEsW0qfiWt4dK0ZIGDrQp8SoAAMD954IoIuCu5K6wi7/zMVZF+MV8UNWiwzZi8=
> =b5WL
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> <GAC_GNSOCouncil_20121128.pdf>