On 2 Dec 2014, at 17:00, Milton L Mueller <mueller@SYR.EDU> wrote:

Desiree:
So, according to you, the lawyer (counsel) who authorizes delegations/redelegations would be provided by the ccNSO? Or from some other “group of ccTLDs”?

I don't think that there is so much form or detail necessary right now, as long as there is a foreseen mechanism that can be used. 
what if the ccNSO lawyer had one opinion and the lawyer provided by another group had a different opinion? Not criticizing, just trying to understand what is being proposed.

Right.

+1 to Becky and Paul. As long as there is a way for a ccTLD ( be it part or not part of the ccNSO group or not) to challenge the process or the decision, that is all that is required.  {who knows, nonccNSO ccTLDs may all join the ccNSO in the foreseable future}

hope this helps


Desiree
--
 
Erick:
My opinion of the legal status of a ccTLD is not relevant to answering those questions. I repeat:  I am not criticizing the proposal, I am just trying to understand what is being proposed.
 
 
From: Desiree Miloshevic [mailto:dmiloshevic@afilias.info] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 2, 2014 10:51 AM
To: Milton L Mueller
Cc: CWG Stewardship
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] authorization function for ccTLDs
 
Milton
 
Before you respond to Erick - I'll just say add that, for example, the ccNSO FOIWG worked on interpretation of RFC 1591 and other IANA related policy guidelines.
 
My understanding is that bodies like the ccNSO or group of ccTLDs are there to develop policies regarding the delegation and redelegation of ccTLDs.
It's my personal view that it could potentially form such a council in future and give opinions. (independent of ICANN board).
 
Desiree
--
 
On 2 Dec 2014, at 15:30, Erick Iriarte <eiriarte@iriartelaw.com> wrote:


Milton
to understand better your message and position: for you exactly what is the legal status of a cctld ?
Erick


El 2/12/2014, a las 10:16, Milton L Mueller <mueller@syr.edu> escribió:

I have some questions regarding this: 

"The CWG is considering replacing the authorization role, at least with regard to ccTLDs, with a written opinion from counsel (independent of ICANN) that each delegation and re-delegation request meets the policy requirements cited in the publicly posted reports." 

Where would this counsel come from? 
Whose counsel is it if it is independent of ICANN and ICANN is supplying the IANA service? 
Since most of the policy requirements related to ccTLD delegation/redelegation are not laws, but things like RFC 1591, on what basis is the counsel's opinion made? Precedent? 

Milton L. Mueller
Laura J. and L. Douglas Meredith Professor
Syracuse University School of Information Studies
http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/mueller/Home.html 

_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship


_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship