RE: [council] Vertical Integration

[Margie Milam <Margie.Milam@xxxxxxxxx>]

Stéphane and Adrian,

Yes,  the Issues Report  on Vertical Integration discussed this issue  (see 
page 24 of 
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/vertical-integration/report-04dec09-en.pdf).    
Because the outcome of a PDP is uncertain (it is possible that no 
recommendation will be produced or that the PDP will take years to conclude),  
the implementation activities will continue to be pursued in parallel with the 
GNSO's PDP activities.

Best Regards,

Margie Milam
_____________

Margie Milam
Senior Policy Counselor
ICANN
______________


From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 3:34 AM
To: Adrian Kinderis
Cc: GNSO Council List
Subject: Re: [council] Vertical Integration

Isn't this what Staff told us in the issues report, that the work Staff are 
doing on this for the DAG would continue whether (I hesitate to use the term 
"despite") the Council initiated a PDP or not?

Stéphane
Le 17 févr. 2010 à 05:33, Adrian Kinderis a écrit :


Council,

Further to my previous email please see the following from the ICANN website 
(http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-4-15feb10-en.htm);

Vertical Integration (aka Registry/Registrar Separation)
Based on debates on the subject held at the ICANN meetings in Seoul, discussion 
during the consultation with certain community representatives held on 7 
January 2010 in Washington D.C., and ongoing study, ICANN will propose for 
community comment a new registry-registrar separation model for inclusion in 
the next draft of the gTLD agreement. Additionally, the Board and community 
members will be discussing the issue in Nairobi.

ICANN are proposing what?

Huh?

What about the PDP?

I'm still confused!


Adrian Kinderis