RE: [council] JAS

["Rosette, Kristina" <krosette@xxxxxxx>]

I would prefer that it not go to the Board until we've reviewed and acted on.  
(I have no objection to our commenting via list, but we'd have to have a formal 
motion and we can't do that until the 19th, right?)  

If ALAC nonetheless forwards, the report should clearly indicate, via front 
cover black box (or something equally visually prominent), that the GNSO has 
not yet acted on the report (or received it, for that matter, if that's true at 
the time).

K 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
Sent: Friday, May 06, 2011 2:23 PM
To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx GNSO
Cc: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
Subject: [council] JAS


Councillors,

Just a heads up on a conversation I had today with ALAC Chair Olivier Crepin 
Leblond.

The JAS group is apparently ready with its final report and ALAC would like to 
send it to the Board asap. The deadline for consideration at the next Board 
meeting is May 9 (yes, that's this Monday). ALAC could apparently make this 
deadline.

I explained to Olivier that there was no way the GNSO could have that a quick a 
turnaround (also bearing in mind the fact that we have not had the report from 
the JAS group yet).

I indicated that, depending on when we get the report, the earliest we could 
consider it is at our next meeting (May 19). I also said that I thought the 
GNSO would prefer that the report not be forwarded by ALAC before we had had a 
chance to see it, although I did not know that for sure. But I told Olivier of 
our recent experiences with the JIG and the ccNSO.

Please do not hesitate to comment. Do you think we can move faster? Should we? 
Rafik, your thoughts on this are of course very much appreciated, as I am only 
painting the picture from what I understand the situation to be, and may be 
wrong.

Thanks and a great weekend to you all.
 
Stéphane