<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [council] Draft Agenda for New gTLD meeting 15 Jan
- To: Council GNSO <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [council] Draft Agenda for New gTLD meeting 15 Jan
- From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 18:46:17 -0500
- In-reply-to: <20090113215631.UGYN1703.tomts10-srv.bellnexxia.net@toip4.srvr.bell.ca>
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- References: <97DB02CF-0746-4D7E-8795-2D013FD14294@acm.org> <E1037911-E90B-470C-BDC3-142B32EB14AA@acm.org> <20090113215631.UGYN1703.tomts10-srv.bellnexxia.net@toip4.srvr.bell.ca>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<html><body class="ApplePlainTextBody" style="word-wrap: break-word;
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;
">Hi,<br><br>If the invitation already went out inviting observers, it would
seem rude to rescind it at this point. Although I was hoping to keep the
meeting somewhat focused.<br><br>if no one objects, I will go back on my
previous suggestion and accept that it is too late for that suggestion.
I.e. the invitation as Glen has sent it stands and observers are
invited.<br><br><br>a.<br><br><br>On 13 Jan 2009, at 16:56, Alan Greenberg
wrote:<br><br><blockquote type="cite">Based on Glen's announcement that the
meeting was open to observers, I have already issues an invitation. I am
expecting Cheryl, Sebastian and perhaps Danny.<br></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">I take it that you now
want me to withdraw that?<br></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite">Alan<br></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">At 13/01/2009 04:45 PM,
Avri Doria wrote:<br></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite">Hi,<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">I was asked whether this meeting was open
to observers as the previous<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">meetings had been. Since we are
focusing mainly on issues related to<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">possible variance between the GNSO Council
recommendations and the<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">implementation plan and on our recent
motions, I thought it better<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">that it be essentially an extended council
meeting - but one without<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">motions. In that respect I suggest we
follow the practice we have<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">followed with other such extended council
meetings, most recently wih<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">the Whois study DT, and allow for
substitutions but not observers.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">The meeting will be recorded and that
recording will be available to<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite">all.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite">thanks<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">a.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">On 12 Jan 2009, at 11:29, Avri Doria
wrote:<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite">Hi<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Based on what I
have heard spoken of so far, the following is
a<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">draft agenda for the New gTLD meeting on 15
January.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">1 - Discuss areas
at variance with GNSO policy
principles,<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">recommendations and
guidelines. Possible areas include,
i.a.:<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"> -
Principle G: Do the review criteria infringe on freedom
of<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite">expression<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"> -
Recommendation 1: Are the price levels
discriminatory?<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"> -
Recommendation 2: Extent of confusing
similarity<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"> -
Recommendation 5: Reserved names
issues<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">
-
geographic<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">
- 2 char
IDN<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"> -
Recommendation 17: what is the clear compliance and
sanctions<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite">process?<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"> - IG B:
Recommended cost based fees with different
applicants<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">paying different
fees. Are these fees really cost based? Are
some<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">applicants
subsidizing other
applicants?<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"> - IG F:
Board resolution process was recommended instead
of<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite">Auction<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"> - IG O: Are
there any plans for a fee reduction schedule for
gTLS<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">applicants from
economies classified as least
developed?<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"> -
Others?<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">2 - Discuss the
motions we passed vis a vis new
gTLDs<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"> - introducion of
idn tlds<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"> - Implementation
guideline (IG) E<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">3 - Discuss the
comments received<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">4 - Discuss
follow-up process to this
meeting<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><br></blockquote><br></body></html>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|