RE: [council] Issues Report on specified Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy issues

["Karen Lentz" <karen.lentz@xxxxxxxxx>]

Avri,

 

Yes -- I will plan to be in the meeting at that time for the discussion of
the Issues paper.

 

Best regards,

 

Karen

 

 

 

  _____  

From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri@xxxxxxx] 
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 5:03 AM
To: Council GNSO; Karen Lentz
Subject: Re: [council] Issues Report on specified Inter-Registrar Transfer
Policy issues

 

hi,

 

No one has objected to running a hour later on Saturday so we can talk about
the Inter-Registrar Transfer Issues paper and the possibility of intiating a
PDP.

 

So, please add to your schedules:  1800-1900 - Inter-registrar Transfer
Issues.

 

Karen, can you give us an overview of the Issues paper at that time?

 

Thanks

 

a.

 

 

 

On 24 okt 2007, at 15.25, Avri Doria wrote:





Hi,

 

You are probably right, but while we are extending things, we might as well
make sure we allow enough time for any comments that may come up, especially
from observers at the meeting.  

 

And if we finish a half hour early, I am sure none of us will complain.

 

thanks

 

a.

 

On 24 okt 2007, at 14.03, Gomes, Chuck wrote:





I am okay with extending the time on Saturday if needed but I would suggest
that we may not need a full hour.  I don't think there is much if any
controversy on this issue.  I would be surprised if we even needed 30
minutes.

 

Chuck Gomes

 

"This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which
it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any
unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you
have received this message in error, please notify sender immediately and
destroy/delete the original transmission." 

 

 


  _____  


From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 1:52 PM
To: Council GNSO
Subject: Re: [council] Issues Report on specified Inter-Registrar Transfer
Policy issues

Hi, 

 

Kristina, I am sorry to hear you won't be with us on Thursday as the
conversations about comments received during the meeting will be as
important as any vote we take and it would have been good to have your
contributions to these discussions.  Though I understand that real life,
families, and day jobs often get in the way.

 

Would it be possible for you to attend this meeting, (17-20 EST), remotely?

 

I will try to find a way to fit this discussion on the Inter-Rgistrar
transfer policy into one of our earlier meetings, but am not sure where.
One idea is to extend the day on Saturday by an hour - not to vote, but to
have the initial substantive discussion.

 

So, would be people be willing to work an extra hour later on Saturday, i.e.
until 19 instead of 18, so that we can have the initial discussion?  This
might allow us to hold the vote on Wednesday because most of the discussion
could have taken place.

 

BTW, as additional background, people should check out
http://www.icann.org/topics/raa and especially
http://www.icann.org/topics/raa/raa-public-comments-23oct07.pdf in addition
to the materials that have been develped by the WG and the Issues paper.

 

thanks

 

a.

 

 

 

On 23 okt 2007, at 16.26, Rosette, Kristina wrote:





I would prefer that we not vote on Thursday.  I will be traveling back to
DC, and made my travel plans on the assumption that Wednesday was our only
voting meeting.

 


  _____  


From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 3:53 PM
To: Council GNSO
Subject: Re: [council] Issues Report on specified Inter-Registrar Transfer
Policy issues

Hi, 

 

This thread brings up the fact hat we did receive the Issue report on 19
October and given our resolve to meet the time limits in the by-laws, we
should be discussing the issues report and voting on whether to commence a
PDP on the issues in the report no later then 3 Nov 2007.

 

Our schedule is already full for Wednesday and there is nothing on that
schedule I would feel comfortable either shortening the time on, or moving
to a later meeting.  We do have a meeting scheduled for Thursday 1400-1700
which is slated for an open discussion of input from the meetings.  I would
like to spend 30 minutes of this 3 hour time slot to discuss the issues
report and decide on whether to initiate the PDP process; i.e. to vote on
two motions:

 

1. Whether to initiate a PDP process as recommended by Staff on page 22 of
the issues report:

 

6.1 Staff has confirmed that the proposed issues are within the scope of 

the policy development process and the GNSO.  It is reasonable from 

the staff's perspective to expect that greater precision and certainty 

around the terms of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy would be 

beneficial to the community generally, particularly for registrants, as 

well as those parties (gTLD registries and registrars) who are obligated 

to comply with the policy provisions.  Staff therefore recommends that 

the GNSO Council proceed with a policy development process limited 

to consideration of the issues discussed in this report.  

 

 

2. Whether to create a Task Force for this purpose.

 

 

In the spirit of trying to met the timelines as outlined in the by-laws, and
as supported by the council in our last meting, I hope there is not a strong
objection to allowing this vote to occur as part of the Thursday meeting.
If there is strong objection, then I believe we will need to vote on a
specific delay as part of the Wednesday meeting.

 

thanks

 

a.