<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [council] Draft Initial Report for IDNC
Hi,
That would be a good idea, but i would suggest also sending it out on
the list.
thanks
a.
On 3 Feb 2008, at 09:49, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
I will go ahead and draft a motion Avri. Should I put into into the
new
Council workspace?
Chuck
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
]
On Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 3:51 AM
To: Council GNSO
Subject: Re: [council] Draft Initial Report for IDNC
Hi,
I would think it would be better to have a motion in place a week
before
we vote, especially for a public meeting on a substantial issue.
This can always be amended.
a.
On 2 Feb 2008, at 16:17, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
I am willing to take a crack at a motion but wonder if I should wait
until after our working session on Sunday in New Delhi?
Chuck
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
]
On Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2008 10:39 AM
To: Council GNSO
Subject: Re: [council] Draft Initial Report for IDNC
Hi,
This should probably be framed into a motion by someone for
Wednesday's meeting.
a.
On 2 Feb 2008, at 09:37, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
Note that ICANN pusblished the Draft Initial Report for the IDNC for
public comment:
http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/draft-initial-report-idnc-
wg-01fe
b08.pdf
A decision we need to consider is whether we want to provide GNSO
comments on this. In particular, we could provide relevant comments
from our response to the ccNSO/GAC Issues Paper on IDN ccTLDs.
Because the comment period ends 26 February, we probably should
decide
this in New Delhi when we are talking about this topic.
On a related note, the public comment period on the Introduction of
IDN ccTLDs ends on 25 February. We had previously discussed whether
we should submit our full response to the ccNSO/GAC Issues Paper on
IDN ccTLDs. I personally support this because our response directly
answers the questions in that issues paper. But we should decide
that
in New Delhi. Certainly, we need to provide our response to the
Board
because they requested it.
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."
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|