Em 18 de jul. de 2023, à(s) 11:59, Steve Crocker <steve@shinkuro.com> escreveu:

Of these two choices, (1) is, IMO, a non-starter.  (2), sending it back to the policy process, is a poor but available path.  If this is the path the group chooses, I recommend including a cover note that conveys this proposal as a possible solution but the group viewed it as outside its remit to consider.

Why a text approved by this IRT would be a non-starter puzzles me. It’s actually the only text that got consensus at any point in this IRT existence, while all the other suggestions from Org and from IRT members did not. 

Which is why not following any of the two choices I mentioned would be an immediate trigger for an RfR. We either respect the consensus and compromise reached before, or we throw it away completely and start over. Replacing by anything lacking consensus is not an option. 

Rubens

_______________________________________________
IRT.RegDataPolicy mailing list
IRT.RegDataPolicy@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/irt.regdatapolicy

_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.