<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [council] Motion regarding New gTLDs
Hi,
As I mentioned in an earlier note, it has become a practice in the
council that any constituency can request that a vote be postponed one
meeting if they need more time to study it within the constituency.
Generally, I cannot think of an exception, we have honored these
requests.
a.
On 18 Dec 2008, at 14:28, Stéphane Van Gelder wrote:
I have seen just as many comments calling for the process to be, if
not
accelerated, at least kept on schedule.
This motion seeks to clarify something which was a part of the
initial GNSO
recommendations for the new TLD program.
I think it is a useful motion and would rather voting on it not be
deferred.
Thanks,
Stéphane Van Gelder
Le 17/12/08 22:50, « Rosette, Kristina » <krosette@xxxxxxx> a écrit :
The overall effect of the motion is to hasten the opening of the
application
round. Many of the comments I've read thus far (starting with the
most recent
and working backwards) have expressed concern about the current
timetable -
let alone an expedited one.
K
-----Original Message-----
From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 4:47 PM
To: Rosette, Kristina; St?phane Van Gelder; Avri Doria
Cc: Council GNSO
Subject: RE: [council] Motion regarding New gTLDs
Kristina,
How would public comments affect the issues in this motion?
Regardless of the
comments, we still have the possibility of a gap between the
implementation of
fast track IDN ccTLDs and IDN gTLDs.
Chuck
-----Original Message-----
From: Rosette, Kristina [mailto:krosette@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 4:30 PM
To: Gomes, Chuck; St?phane Van Gelder; Avri Doria
Cc: Council GNSO
Subject: RE: [council] Motion regarding New gTLDs
Given the volume of public comment, I suggest that we defer voting
on
this motion until all GNSO Councilors who intend to read the public
comments have done so.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 4:21 PM
To: St?phane Van Gelder; Avri Doria
Cc: Council GNSO
Subject: RE: [council] Motion regarding New gTLDs
As I said before, I accept Stephane's amendment as a friendly
amendment.
Chuck
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of St?phane
Van Gelder
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 3:53 PM
To: Avri Doria
Cc: Council GNSO
Subject: Re: [council] Motion regarding New gTLDs
Importance: High
I still see the same text on the wiki.
This is the text with my friendly amendment that I had on record:
Whereas:
? Implementation Guideline E states, ?The
application submission date
will be at least four months after the issue of the Request for
Proposal and ICANN will promote the opening of the application
round.? (See Final Report, Part A, Introduction of New Generic
Top-Level Domains, dated 8 August 2007 at
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/new-gtlds/pdp-dec05-fr-parta-08aug07.htm#
_Toc4379
8015 )
* The intent of the GNSO with regard to Guideline E was to
attempt to
ensure that all potential applicants, including those that
have not
been active in recent ICANN activities regarding the
introduction of
new gTLDs, would be informed of the process and have
reasonable time
to prepare a proposal if they so desire.
* The minimum 4-month period for promoting the opening of the
application round is commonly referred to as the
?Communications Period?.
* Considerable delays have been incurred in the
implementation of new
gTLDs and the GNSO wishes to minimize any further delays.
* It appears evident that a second Draft Applicant
Guidebook (RFP)
will be posted at some time after the end of the two
45-day public
comment periods related to the initial version of the
Guidebook (in
English and other languages).
Resolve:
? The GNSO Council changes Implementation
Guideline E to the
following:
o Best efforts will be made to ensure that the
second Draft Applicant
Guidebook is posted for public comment at least 14 days
before the
first international meeting of 2009, to be held in Mexico
from March 1 to March 6.
o ICANN will initiate the Communications Period at
the same time that
the second Draft Applicant Guidebook is posted for
public comment.
o The opening of the initial application round will
occur no earlier
than four (4) months after the start of the Communications
Period and
no earlier than 30 days after the posting of the final Applicant
Guidebook (RFP).
o As applicable, promotions for the opening of the
initial application
round will include:
? Announcement about the public comment period
following the posting
of the second Draft Applicant Guidebook (RFP)
? Information about the steps that will follow
the comment period
including approval and posting of the final Applicant
Guidebook (RFP)
? Estimates of when the initial application round
will begin.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|