I was unable to be on the call when this discussion took place. (I decided to grab 2 hours of sleep instead, between 5 and 7 am.)  For the record, I'll state my strong objection to attempting to drop or change the WHOIS commitments in the AoC as part of the transition.  This is certainly not necessary to the IANA Transition or to ensuring that future changes can take place.  Allowing this to be a subject for the post-transition ATRT seems reasonable.

Greg

On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@netchoice.org> wrote:
Today (17-Jul) we reviewed and revised the proposal to bring AoC Reviews into the ICANN Bylaws.

By my notes, here are the changes we agreed today:

Preference for option 2 on team composition, so removed 3-May proposal and Option 1.

Allow ATRT to amend these reviews, too.  

Add 1 ICANN board member to each review team under option 2.  Note that our 3-May draft had a board member on each team.

Bruce Tonkin suggested requiring review teams to Prioritize their recommendations.   We heard several objections to making that a requirement, so I added it as a suggestion: "The review team should attempt to assign priorities to its recommendations."

Remaining challenges:

How to give review team access to ICANN Internal documents, while preventing disclosure/publication of information that is sensitive, confidential, or proprietary?  Do we impose sanctions for unauthorized disclosure?  HELP NEEDED HERE.

Steve Crocker recommended changing the AoC commitments for WHOIS/Directory Services.  We heard some agreement with that idea, but strong cautions about attempting to drop WHOIS commitments as part of the transition.  Instead, amendments to the WHOIS/Directory Services review could be recommended by the first post-transition ATRT.


—
Steve DelBianco
Executive Director
NetChoice



_______________________________________________
WP1 mailing list
WP1@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1