Dear Steve This would change the disappointment of GAC. There is the tis that GAC COULD CONSIDER POSSIBLE REJECTION OF REC.11 Regards Kavousd Sent from my iPhone
On 29 Jan 2016, at 16:12, Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@netchoice.org> wrote:
On yesterday’s CCWG call, we reviewed Recommendation 10 – SO/AC Accountability (latest doc).
I suggested one way to improve the community’s review of GAC-oriented activities lies in the AoC’s Accountability and Transparency Review (known as ATRT).
Here is the suggested edit [in red and brackets] to the AoC’s ATRT Review (Annex 9 para 85):
(b) assessing the role and effectiveness of GAC interaction with the Board [and with the broader ICANN community], and making recommendations for improvement to ensure effective consideration by ICANN of GAC input on the public policy aspects of the technical coordination of the DNS If this is acceptable to CCWG, we should amend Annex 9 para 85 as above. It might also be helpful to note the GAC-oriented review in Annex 10, under para 3 for Work Stream 1. As in:
“The periodic review of ICANN Accountability and Transparency required under the Affirmation of Commitments is being incorporated into ICANN bylaws as part of Work Stream 1. In Recommendation 9 and Annex 9, the Accountability and Transparency Review will include this among issues that merit attention in the review:
(b) assessing the role and effectiveness of GAC interaction with the Board [and with the broader ICANN community], and making recommendations for improvement to ensure effective consideration by ICANN of GAC input on the public policy aspects of the technical coordination of the DNS _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community