[council] Transfers task force and the NC expectations

["Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard@aim.be>]

Ken,

thanks for your note on deletes. I share your concern. You may not have seen the earlier posting to the Transfers TF which copy and pasted NC minutes.

 

On deletes themselves, now that the TF has completed its work on WLS I have asked the TF chair, in consultation with the TF itself,  to propose to the NC revised terms of reference (charter) so that we can be sure the TF will be focused and on-track. The NC will need to adopt or amend these TOR and then instruct the TF accordingly.

Philip

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Philip Sheppard

To: nc-transfer@dnso.org

Sent: 20 August 2002 12:05

Subject: [nc-transfer] Transfers task force and the NC expectations

Transfers TF,

For the record allow me to remind you what the Names Council has asked of the Transfers Task Force.

 

1. Transfers

11 October 201 The NC resolved to establish a Transfers TF.

 

2. Deletes

The NC meeting of 29 May confirmed the referral of the ICANN board request on WLS to the Transfers TF and in addition adopted the following outline for the broader issues raised:

"- Deletion issue,
- Possible solutions
- Verisign Wait Listing Service proposal
The report will comment on the:
- the status of deletions,
- possible steps for ICANN to take on the redemption policy
- options to ameliorate harm done to Registrants
- ways of lessening the load on Registries
- the Wait Listing Service proposal from Verisign."

 

By this action the NC has assumed that the Transfers TF would produce recommendations to the NC on the relevant policy issues surrounding transfers, deletes, WLS, redemption grace period. The NC has not established any other body to do this work.

 

It was left to the TF to prioritise the issues and its order of work. If that means constituencies choose to change their reps to bring expertise as the subject matter of the TF changes, that is acceptable, prudent and efficient.

 

 

Philip Sheppard
NC Chair