Public Comments - Revisions to ICANN Expected Standards of Behaviors

[avri doria]

On 31-May-16 15:58, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
> From what I can read, I would not support the proposed policy. 

I find myself agreeing with the comment that we will eventually need
something more.
And I think that RFC7704 is a good model.

But I think getting into that issue before we resolve wider 
accountability issues WS2 (e.g. ombudsman, or SOAC accountabity)  of the
CCWG-Accountabity is impracticable.    I would suggest a statement that
said good start, lets go with this for now, and determine after WS2,
perhaps in next ATRT, whether more needs to be done. Some element of the
issue could probably also feed into WS2 work.

avri



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus