Hi all!
I support
@Bart: could you check the very last sentence: “Alternatively, the ccNSO Council suggests an effective launch of the IFR until such time the Fundamental Bylaw change has become effective.” Looks like a verb is missing (i.e. suggests TO DELAY)
From: Ccnso-council <ccnso-council-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Bart Boswinkel via Ccnso-council
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2023 9:34 AM
To: ccnso-council@icann.org
Subject: [ccnso-council] Decision on ccNSO Council submission IANA Naming Function Review Bylaw changes
Importance: High
Dear all,
Please find included the draft submission on ICANN’s proposed IANA Naming Function Review Bylaws Changes. Note that this is a Fundamental Bylaw change, hence ultimately According to the drafting team the proposed changes are logical and build on earlier changes ( ccNSO appointed members to IFRT), or implement other change requests ( recommendations first IFRT or request from RySG). In addition the drafting identified additional points:
Please note that the proposed change of frequency of the IFR was never discussed recently nor with other SO/AC'. However, as this was suggested with in context of the CSC Effectiveness Review, it is suggested to propose it for the IFR as well. Note that the previous IFR concluded in 2021 and the proposed Bylaw change implements one of the recommendations form the first IANA Naming function Review.
As you will recall closing date is 18 April 2023, 23.59UTC.
For this reason, please let the list know if you support, have any objection, or suggest changes to the proposed suggestion by Tuesday 18 April 2023, noon UTC.
On behalf of the drafting team (Irina, Jennifer, Molehe and Stephen)
Bart