Bruce, Tom, all,
I will likely not attend in DC, but could of course attend a meeting in
Frankfurt. No objections to 21 Feb (and around).
Ute
-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Keller [mailto:tom@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 24 January 2006 08:45
To: Bruce Tonkin
Cc: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [council] Status of meeting planning for Feb 2006 in
Washington
Bruce, all,
how about relocating the meeting to Frankfurt. I haven't ask but I'm
sure DENIC would certainly provide us with a meeting accomodation.
The DENIC headquarter is about 15 Minutes away from the airport and
in walking reach of several adequate hotels.
Best,
tom
Am 24.01.2006 schrieb Bruce Tonkin:
Hello All,
The topic of a physical meeting on gtlds in Feb 2006 is on the agenda
for our next Council meeting on 6 Feb 2006.
However if we want to do this, we need to make progress in making
arrangements prior to our scheduled conference call.
Purpose of meeting
==================
- using the initial report on new gtlds from the ICANN staff - carry
out
further drafting work on a policy position
- if the Council decides to progress on additional policy issues
identified in the issues report requested at the last meeting - carry
out further work to complete constituency position statements and
begin
to draft proposed policies
- provide an opportunity for any additional public comment on the
reports published so far
Given the need to work more quickly on substantive policy issues, a
physical meeting may assist progress.
Location of meeting
===================
- the Washington region has several major gtld registries and
registrars
- it is easy to travel to from most locations in the Northern
Hemisphere
- we have local contacts that can assist with logistics
Planning so far
===============
- current date under consideration is around 21 Feb 2006
- locations under consideration include
-- at a location in the city of Washington, DC itself
-- or at a location near Dulles airport, Washington
A location in Washington, DC may be appropriate for any further public
comment/dialog on the policy issues and may get press coverage with
respect to encouraging further contributions with respect to new
gtlds.
Marilyn Cade has volunteered to investigate this option further.
A location near the airport - will most likely make it far cheaper in
terms of accommodation costs, and probably easier to find available
accommodation at short notice. This might be a better location for
the
planning meetings. Maybe a registry or registrar in the area may be
able to host a drafting meeting.
It is possible that a combination of both might work best. E.g one
morning or afternoon in the downtime area, and the rest of the time
near
the airport.
Participation
============
- given that many Council members will be planning to attend the ICANN
meeting in New Zealand in March, and may not have sufficient time or
budgets to also travel to Washington, I recommend we allow each
constituency to appoint 3 representatives (which do not need to be
Council members) to represent the position of the constituency in
Washington. I expect that most constituencies will have members
within
a reasonable radius of Washington.
Further input needed
=====================
I am interested to hear from Council members regarding any issues
around
the proposed date (21 Feb 2006) - ie whether there are clashes with
other major international meetings etc, and also any preferences
regarding meeting near Dulles airport near Washington, or in the city
itself.
Regards,
Bruce Tonkin
Gruss,
tom
(__)
(OO)_____
(oo) /|\ A cow is not entirely full of
| |--/ | * milk some of it is hamburger!
w w w w