ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [council] Fwd: Postponed to Tuesday 14 June 2011 @ 1300 UTC / JAS WG - Board - GAC proposed June 7 meeting

  • To: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [council] Fwd: Postponed to Tuesday 14 June 2011 @ 1300 UTC / JAS WG - Board - GAC proposed June 7 meeting
  • From: Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2011 23:38:44 +0900
  • Cc: "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Council" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=mJUo6lro+3N+VFpghWN8dWS5v4nngWUa2DFlYxggelw=; b=hlHiUcoXCN+s0P8yQgqM/EpABjIyaMcPA81ihZ9JZRYrxb6Z7NLwjGf8nSpzzr98Be NkTwp7rRY6lcsua4QSOgr+iQECLodrS6dN1hmrjTBICUCkx8uh+U9Fx/MX52/oYKNeg+ ZjQ4gdS3/EFQynlMQtwh5DTIGQdBEjSbcyflQ=
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; b=rzLCHk9UTnqnpNI70WcT+GYItu2TrhOUgcQDhM4yOnte0KkixIcJDx1ECqasjus3C5 L+aTkXzCPIlpJx/8crtImKnr7RY8qSrJtofMyWVMlwDol3Vr12YVXBx5DrRJEa9qwG9I BGBO7RgkX/nn9z6C6tp3CFpoTTCHds8YX1kkc=
  • In-reply-to: <12177D81-ED1D-43F3-9544-7002BF180E4A@indom.com>
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • References: <CA1322FF.2AFCF%gisella.gruber-white@icann.org> <12177D81-ED1D-43F3-9544-7002BF180E4A@indom.com>
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hello Stephane,


> This call continues to puzzle me. There has been little reaction on this
> list to the emails I've sent informing of the call, so I have not pushed
> this in any way. But this call does make me uncomfortable.
>
JAS is a co-chartered group. It has produced an INTERIM report. Without much
> consultation with the GNSO, a call is organised by ALAC for the Board and
> the GAC to ask questions on this interim report.
>
>
I think that you were informed via Olivier about the organizing this call
and he coordinated with you in that matter.



> In essence, I don't have any problem with this. I think it's actually very
> useful for a group like the JAS to explain its interim reports if people
> have questions.
>
> But part of me is thinking that because its an interim report, I am
> surprised that the Board would want to ask questions at this stage. I hear
> that the JAS WG is preparing a 3rd milestone report. I don't know if this is
> true and if this means that there will be a final report after this 3rd MS
> report (Rafik, can you perhaps shed some light on this please?). If that's
> the case, then this seems early days to get direct Board involvement.
>

Jeff asked the same question before and I replied it: the WG is working to
finish the remained items in the charter, not covered in MR2. there was no
any decision made about 3rd MR, the WG is only committed to finish it works
in regard to the mandate given by its chartering organizations. I think that
is possible to receive questions and feedback at any stages.

Best,

Rafik
<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>