<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
AW: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report
- To: <rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>, <william.drake@xxxxxx>
- Subject: AW: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report
- From: <KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 15:56:06 +0200
- Cc: <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <BANLkTi=TY75fZYenAwfwPJEk+ukEw7-TTg@mail.gmail.com>
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- References: <2CFA03BA9889274B88587EE2DF303C820208C0D118@CBIvEXMB05DC.cov.com> <832DB5D1-A2ED-4DAD-9DBD-4BE3EF72FD00@uzh.ch> <BANLkTi=TY75fZYenAwfwPJEk+ukEw7-TTg@mail.gmail.com>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AcwWEWYIMCJePxipS06rCSg1wAJH0gAGvRKg
- Thread-topic: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report
vote for B.
Kind regards
Wolf-Ulrich
________________________________
Von: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Im Auftrag von Rafik Dammak
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 19. Mai 2011 12:40
An: William Drake
Cc: GNSO Council List
Betreff: Re: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant
Support Second Milestone Report
hard choice but definitely vote for A ;)
Regards
Rafik
2011/5/19 William Drake <william.drake@xxxxxx>
And here's one for A
Bill
On May 19, 2011, at 5:16 AM, Rosette, Kristina wrote:
and another one.
K
________________________________
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2011 1:22 PM
To: stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: tim@xxxxxxxxxxx;
owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [council] Re: Statement of the
ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report
One more vote for B
Berard
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [council] Re: Statement of the
ALAC on the Joint Applicant
> Support Second Milestone Report
> From: Stéphane Van Gelder
> Date: Tue, May 17, 2011 9:23 am
> To: "Neuman, Jeff"
> Cc: "'tim@xxxxxxxxxxx'" ,
> "'owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx'" ,
> "'council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx'"
>
> So that's one vote for version B, right?
>
> Stéphane
>
>
>
>
>
> Le 17 mai 2011 à 17:54, Neuman, Jeff a écrit :
>
> Unfortunately, I cannot commit on behalf of
the rysg to that last sentence on "observance" and would prefer its deletion
since on our last rysg call questions were raised and I am not sure it adds to
the substance of the note.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq.
>
> Vice President, Law & Policy
>
> NeuStar, Inc.
>
> Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Stéphane Van Gelder
[mailto:stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx]
>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2011 11:43 AM
> To: tim@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Cc: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx ; Council
GNSO
>
> Subject: Re: [council] Re: Statement of the
ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report
>
>
>
> Thanks Tim, Jeff, Mary and Alan,
>
> This would be the proposed message then.
Either (I call this version A):
>
> Dear Peter,
>
>
> We understand that ALAC has forwarded to the
Board the Joint SO/AC New gTLD Applicant Support Working Group (JAS WG)'s
Second Milestone Report. As the other chartering organization of the JAS WG,
the GNSO Council notes that it has not yet approved the Report. We acknowledge
the Board's desire to move forward with new gTLDs, including issues relating to
applicant support, and hope to provide the Board with our advice and
recommendations as soon as possible.
>
> The GNSO Council would also like to inform
the Board that it appreciates the JAS WG's scrupulous observance of the
GNSO-chartering process, in submitting its Report simultaneously to ALAC and
the GNSO for review.
>
> I would be grateful if you could convey the
GNSO Council's message to the Board.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
> Stephane van Gelder
> GNSO Council Chair
>
>
> Or (this my version B):
>
>
> Dear Peter,
>
>
> We understand that ALAC has forwarded to the
Board the Joint SO/AC New gTLD Applicant Support Working Group (JAS WG)'s
Second Milestone Report. As the other chartering organization of the JAS WG,
the GNSO Council notes that it has not yet approved the Report. We acknowledge
the Board's desire to move forward with new gTLDs, including issues relating to
applicant support, and hope to provide the Board with our advice and
recommendations as soon as possible.
>
>
> I would be grateful if you could convey the
GNSO Council's message to the Board.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
> Stephane van Gelder
> GNSO Council Chair
>
>
>
> As Olga had requested a vote, I would like to
suggest that we give ourselves until Thursday's meeting to vote by return email
to the list on either version A or B, and whichever has the most votes is the
one I send.
>
>
> Is that acceptable to everyone?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Stéphane
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Le 17 mai 2011 à 14:12, tim@xxxxxxxxxxx a
écrit :
> No objection if you remove the last sentence.
There is no chartering process for CWGs. The ALAC and GNSO could not even agree
on what the charter should be. And at least a few of us have concerns about how
and why CWGs are being formed.
>
>
> Tim
> From: Stéphane Van Gelder
>
> Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 10:45:21 +0200
> To: Council GNSO
> Subject: Re: [council] Re: Statement of the
ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report
>
> Councillors,
>
> Please find below the NCSG's suggestion on a
message which I could send to the Chairman of the Board in my capacity as Chair
of the GNSO.
>
> Thanks Mary for providing this draft.
>
> Please let me have your comments.
>
> Stéphane
>
>
>
>
>
> Le 14 mai 2011 à 16:31, a écrit :
>
> Hi - sorry for the delay in getting back to
you on the Council letter; there has been some lively discussion among some
NCSG folks about it.
>
> We suggest the following draft:
>
> Dear Peter,
>
>
> We understand that ALAC has forwarded to the
Board the Joint SO/AC New gTLD Applicant Support Working Group (JAS WG)'s
Second Milestone Report. As the other chartering organization of the JAS WG,
the GNSO Council notes that it has not yet approved the Report. We acknowledge
the Board's desire to move forward with new gTLDs, including issues relating to
applicant support, and hope to provide the Board with our advice and
recommendations as soon as possible.
>
> The GNSO Council would also like to inform
the Board that it appreciates the JAS WG's scrupulous observance of the
chartering process, in submitting its Report simultaneously to ALAC and the
GNSO for review.
>
> I would be grateful if you could convey the
GNSO Council's message to the Board.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
> Stephane van Gelder
>
> Cheers
> Mary
>
>
>
>
> Mary W S Wong
> Professor of Law
> Chair, Graduate IP Programs
> Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP
> UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW
> Two White Street
> Concord, NH 03301
> USA
> Email: mary.wong@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Phone: 1-603-513-5143
> Webpage:
http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php
> Selected writings available on the Social
Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584>>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From:
> Stéphane Van Gelder
>
> To:
> Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond , Council GNSO
>
> Date:
> 5/14/2011 5:18 AM
>
> Subject:
> [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC on the
Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone ReportThanks Olivier.
>
>
> GNSO Council, FYI.
>
>
> A good weekend to all.
>
>
> Stéphane
>
>
>
>
> Le 14 mai 2011 à 11:03, Olivier MJ
Crepin-Leblond a écrit :
>
>
> Dear Stéphane,
>
> please find enclosed, a copy of our follow-up
message to the Board including ALAC comments.
> Please don't hesitate to get in touch if you
have any query about its contents.
> Have a good week-end!
> Kind regards,
>
> Olivier
>
> -------- Message original --------
>
>
>
> Sujet:
> Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant
Support Second Milestone Report
>
> Date :
> Fri, 13 May 2011 20:26:34 -0700
>
> De :
> ICANN At-Large Staff
>
> Pour :
> Secretary
>
> Copie à :
> ocl@xxxxxxx , carlton.samuels@xxxxxxxxx ,
rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx , ICANN At-Large Staff
>
> Dear all,
>
>
> The At-Large staff has the honor of
transmitting to you, on behalf of the At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC):
>
> The Second Milestone Report of the Joint
SO/AC New gTLD Applicant Support Working Group ( JAS WG), with a revised ALAC
introduction (entitled �Status of this Document�); and
> The Statement of the ALAC on the Joint
Applicant Support Second Milestone Report.
>
> We request that these documents (attached
here) be forwarded to the members of the ICANN Board.
>
> The Second Milestone Report was received by
the ALAC and the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) on 7 May 2011.
Then, the At-Large staff, on behalf of the ALAC, initially forwarded this
Report to the Board on 9 May 2011. Please note that the Report itself has not
been substantively changed since the Board initially received it on 9 May.
>
> During the period 7�13 May, comments on the
Report were collected from the At-Large Community. These comments are the
basis for the Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second
Milestone Report attached here.
>
> The ALAC ratification process for the Second
Milestone Report and the ALAC Statement will begin on 14 May, and the results
will be forwarded to the Board.
>
> Please note that GNSO approval of this
document is being conducted independently and has not reached the approval
stage.
>
> Regards,
>
> Heidi Ullrich, Seth Greene, Matt Ashtiani,
Gisella Gruber-White, and Marilyn Vernon
> ICANN At-Large Staff
>
> email: staff[at]atlarge.icann.org
> website: www.atlarge.icann.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|