<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [council] Motion on Whois Service requirements activity
- To: <avri@xxxxxxx>, GNSO Council <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [council] Motion on Whois Service requirements activity
- From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 14:29:27 -0400
- In-reply-to: <1239733110.13126.19252.camel@bower>
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- References: <1239733110.13126.19252.camel@bower>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: Acm9LpIupruskKpnSJ+YK9VFElcvUQAAFgfw
- Thread-topic: [council] Motion on Whois Service requirements activity
Second confirmed.
Chuck
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 2:19 PM
> To: GNSO Council
> Subject: [council] Motion on Whois Service requirements activity
>
>
> Hi,
>
> After a conversation with some of the staff about this motion
> and the work it involves, it became obvious I should amend
> the motion based on work load and work priorities.
>
> I am changing:
>
> The synthesis of requirements should be done in consultation
> with the SSAC, ALAC, GAC and the ccNSO and should be ready
> for community discussion in time for the Sydney meeting.
>
> to:
>
> The synthesis of requirements should be done in consultation
> with the SSAC, ALAC, GAC and the ccNSO and a strawman
> proposal should be prepared for these consultations. The
> Staff is asked to come back with an estimate of when this
> would be possible.
>
>
> Chuck, who has seconded the motion, accepts the amendment as well.
>
> thanks
>
> a.
>
>
>
>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|