here’s a snip from the chat transcript of the recent CEO/Community-Leaders webinar.  i’m curious about the “broken TMCH” comment that Patrik made.  Patrik (or others) would you like to expand on that?  

i’m curious whether that would be an SSR topic that one/all of the GNSO constituencies might want to request a review by the SSAC.

here’s the chat transcript:

Patrik Fältström:               I would like to remind everyone that regarding the issues SSAC have seen on broken TMCH has not been acted on, at all. And I urge people to not rely on TMCH yet. In any process.

Patrik Fältström:               https://www.myicann.org/board-advice#advice-to-board_f=tmch&advice-to-board_d=false

Michele Neylon:                Security + stability issues should be core

Michele Neylon:                I thought they were core to ICANN’s mission

Patrik Fältström:               I also want to point out that we do have new gTLDs that are so broken technically that I think various clauses that say EBERO could be invoked has matched.

Michele Neylon:                Patrik - already?

Michele Neylon:                wow

Patrik Fältström:               Part from me supporting the issue that Michele mentioned, that the fact people in some legislations cannot sign contracts with ICANN due to US-centric clauses is something that MUST be addresses, or else our enemies might be able to say that "the internal ICANN change processes does not work"