Irrespective of whether 50+ is policy or implementation, I don't believe the BGC recommendation's interpretation that the "rules of implementation" are solely in the discretion of staff, not subject to the MS participation and supervision, be accurate. Hong On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 2:56 AM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>wrote:
At 21/05/2013 01:35 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
On 21 May 2013, at 06:40, Alan Greenberg wrote:
One of the arguments that registries have made is that this option was already discussed several years ago and was discarded at that time, SO IT SHOULD NOT BE RAISED AGAIN. In effect, the elimination of that option several years ago enshrined NOT doing it in effective policy.
at least not without another PDP to change the policy.
avri
So you are saying that something that was implementation several years ago when discussed during the various versions of the AG, is now policy, and moreover, it would require a PDP to change (not just a GNSO policy process but a formal PDP even though it is not a subject for Consensus Policy as per Bylaws Annex A - "If the GNSO is conducting activities that are not intended to result in a Consensus Policy, the Council may act through other processes.")
Alan
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
-- Professor Dr. Hong Xue Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL) Beijing Normal University http://www.iipl.org.cn/ 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China