As far as I know, ICANN has never said it agrees with that claim.

You can listen to ICANN’s presentation of the issue and proposed way forward in 
the latest Thick Whois Implementation Review Team in the first minutes of the 
recording at 

A member of the RySG presents his view starting around minute 18, and around 
minute 27, recognizes that having RDAP in the CL&D policy was in response to 
community feedback and explains that the Implementation Review Team were in 
favor of it, however he later changed his mind.


P.S. The Thick Whois Implementation Review Team (a group of community members 
who have been working with the ICANN organization on the CL&D policy) has a 
page at 

On 9/22/16, 4:00 PM, "regext on behalf of Jay Daley" <regext-boun...@ietf.org 
on behalf of j...@nzrs.net.nz> wrote:

    OK, I’ll spell it out - the claim being made, and apparently upheld by 
ICANN, is that ICANN staff improperly added staff decisions onto a policy 
achieved under community consensus in order to get the board to approve those 
    Whether or not ICANN has the power to make these decisions is irrelevant - 
the issue is the inappropriate mechanism by which they were made, which a) is 
not consensus driven as all ICANN policies should be unless there’s a very good 
reason for the board to override that; and b) was not explicit in telling the 
board that so that they could make an informed decision.

regext mailing list

Reply via email to