RE: [council] Response to ccNSO/GAC Issues report

["Edmon Chung" <edmon@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Agreed.
Edmon


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Adrian Kinderis
> Sent: Monday, February 11, 2008 10:11 AM
> To: Avri Doria; Council GNSO
> Subject: RE: [council] Response to ccNSO/GAC Issues report
>
>
> The same issue was raised at our table Avri.
>
> I believe your suggested change would be appropriate.
>
> Regards,
>
> Adrian Kinderis
> Managing Director
> AusRegistry Group Pty Ltd
> Level 8, 10 Queens Road
> Melbourne. Victoria Australia. 3004
> Ph: +61 3 9866 3710
> Fax: +61 3 9866 1970
> Email: adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Web: www.ausregistrygroup.com
>
> The information contained in this communication is intended for the
> named recipients only. It is subject to copyright and may contain
> legally privileged and confidential information and if you are not an
> intended recipient you must not use, copy, distribute or take any action
> in reliance on it. If you have received this communication in error,
> please delete all copies from your system and notify us immediately.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Monday, 11 February 2008 12:59 PM
> To: Council GNSO
> Subject: [council] Response to ccNSO/GAC Issues report
>
>
> Hi,
>
> At my table this evening, we had a conversation about Executive
> summary point #5 - specifically the last phrase "... without GNSO's
> concurrence"
>
> While explaning it this, I explained that it really refered to the
> need to have have resolved the issue as explained in #2 and the ICANn
> community had  achieved a common agreement of an interim procedure.
>
> I am wondering whether we might be to change it to say: " without
> prior community concurrence"
>
> thanks
>
> a.