RE: [net-com] NeuLevel's comments and the call 22 June
- To: <net-com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [net-com] NeuLevel's comments and the call 22 June
- From: "Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 10:34:06 +0200
- In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.email@example.com>
- Sender: owner-net-com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AcRVeMrLpZZu7VylQ2uCocMaC95sPwB79eVA
Sub committee members,
Agenda for June 22
At the close of the first comment period, there are a
couple of comment received.
1. In the letter from Neulevel. Despite a rather
lengthy introduction, the letter has a useful appendix with specific
In essence the proposals mostly add substance to the general
concepts we have put in the report - it’s the job I had assumed ICANN staff
would be doing based on our broad brush recommendations. However, now that a
proposal is before us, I recommend that we take the time on the call Tuesday to
evaluate the proposed additions and decide what we can and what we cannot
include in our report.
2. The comments from the Progress and Freedom
Foundation - are similar is some respects in that they provide suggestions to
ICANN for more substance. Including some of the NeuLevel material should also
satisfy the comment here. Also there is some useful background on the
competitive aspects with respect to a bid process where an incumbent is also one
of the potential bidders.
Whatever we decide to change in any case the next
report will reference these comments.