ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


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

RE: [council] [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague

  • To: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Rickert <rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [council] [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague
  • From: "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 07:40:27 -0400
  • Accept-language: en-US
  • Acceptlanguage: en-US
  • Cc: GNSO Council List <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • In-reply-to: <7BBBE4FF-1425-40FD-9842-E4B10068553B@indom.com>
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • References: <7A077EDB-D1F3-41BE-A2A5-DA2AFACC4BB0@anwaelte.de> <EFB87369-A8F9-422C-AC8E-246860BF6D9C@anwaelte.de> <7BBBE4FF-1425-40FD-9842-E4B10068553B@indom.com>
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Thread-index: Ac09eCUNkTL+qr8BSyKJ73LGkhIxzAAFvmmA
  • Thread-topic: [council] [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague

I would actually like to see it discussed as part of the regular agenda rather 
than the consent agenda.  Not so much for the content of the wording of letter, 
but rather for the substance of the draft advice.  The way it is portrayed in 
the letter, although it says that it needs approval from the GNSO, it implies 
that the advice does have at least some endorsement from the GNSO community.  
Otherwise, why would we (the GNSO) be soliciting feedback on it.  In my mind, 
there is a difference between putting something out for general comment through 
a public comment period vs. sending it directly to SOs for their view on the 
GNSO’s work product.  I know it is a subtlety, but the GNSO Council should be 
somewhat comfortable with the substance of the draft advice prior to directly 
soliciting other SOs and ACs views on the matter.

Can we get an update on the draft advice at our June 7th Council meeting and 
then decide how we want to position the letter?


Jeffrey J. Neuman
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 4:48 AM
To: Thomas Rickert
Cc: GNSO Council List
Subject: Re: [council] [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague

Thanks Thomas.

So far, there has been no disagreement voiced on this list with sending this 
letter. I can therefore confirm that I have put this on the consent agenda for 
our June 7 meeting. I will be asking the Council to approve my sending of the 
letter as proposed.


Stéphane Van Gelder
Directeur Général / General manager
INDOM Group NBT France
Head of Domain Operations
Group NBT

Le 26 mai 2012 à 16:38, Thomas Rickert a écrit :

Forgot to copy the Council ....


Anfang der weitergeleiteten E‑Mail:
Von: Thomas Rickert <rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
Datum: 26. Mai 2012 12:10:00 MESZ
An: Stéphane Van Gelder 
Betreff: Re: [council] Fwd: [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague
I am fine with the letter. One question, though: Wouldn't it make sense to put 
all the topics we would like to discuss in one letter or is this a completely 
seperated matter?



Am 23.05.2012 um 16:31 schrieb Stéphane Van Gelder 
As indicated in my previous email, please find attached my proposed edits to 
the Consumer Metrics WG letter.

<Consumer Metrics GNSO to GAC.doc>
Stéphane Van Gelder
Directeur Général / General manager
INDOM Group NBT France
Head of Domain Operations
Group NBT

Le 23 mai 2012 à 16:21, Stéphane Van Gelder a écrit :


Please see below and attached a letter that the Consumer Metrics WG is 
suggesting I send as GNSO Chair to the GAC Chair.

I am adding this to our June 7 meeting as a consent agenda item so I would 
appreciate if prior to that meeting, we have discussed on the list so that we 
are all either comfortable with the text, or certain we do not want to send the 

In order to get the discussion started, I have a few suggested edits to this 
letter that I will send in a follow-up email.


Stéphane Van Gelder
Directeur Général / General manager
INDOM Group NBT France
Head of Domain Operations
Group NBT

Début du message réexpédié :

De : Rosemary Sinclair 
Objet : RE: [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague
Date : 22 mai 2012 23:23:51 HAEC
À : Stéphane Van Gelder 
Cc : "john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>" 
<john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>, Berry Cobb 

Hi Stephane

Here's my suggested note from you to GAC to encourage GAC to provide early 
feedback to our Working Group on Consumer Metrics.

The WG is currently considering public comments received, including from the US 
Government. We are working to have the work completed for consideration in 

This idea for specifically reaching out to GAC in this way came from discussion 
with Bruce Tonkin about how best to engage GAC in this work before we finalise 
the Draft Advice.

Cheers for now


Rosemary Sinclair | Director | External Relations
Australian School of Business | The University of New South Wales
Level 3, Building L5, UNSW Sydney 2052
Telephone: +61 (2) 9385 6228  | Fax +61 (2) 9385 5933 | Web: 

From: Stéphane Van Gelder 
Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2012 4:27 AM
To: Rosemary Sinclair
Cc: john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Neuman, Jeff; 
Berry Cobb; gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague

Looking forward to your note on this Rosemary. Thanks.


Le 18 mai 2012 à 03:07, Rosemary Sinclair a écrit :

Hi all

I have action to write note to Stephane on this very topic of GNSO reaching out 
to GAC on this work

Will circulate to our WG for discussion next Tues and then to Chair, GNSO 



Rosemary Sinclair
Director, External Relations
Australian School of Business
+61 413 734490

On 18/05/2012, at 4:43 AM, 
<john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:


Berry may be able to phrase it more eloquently, but the matter of
Consumer Metrics ought to be on our agenda.

The Council should offer a report on the work so far in setting the
definitions and metrics for Consumer Confidence, Competition and Trust
that results from the requirements of the Affirmation of Commitments.

As you know, the GAC has a keen interest in this subject and it would be
useful to our working relationship to showcase the progress made.


John Berard
Credible Context
58 West Portal Avenue, #291
San Francisco, CA 94127
m: 415.845.4388

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague
From: "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Thu, May 17, 2012 9:23 am
To: Berry Cobb <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>,


I am responsible for collecting the list of topics to be discussed
during that session.  Can you please give me a one or two sentence
description of what you would like to discuss and how much time you
believe it will take?

Best regards,

Jeffrey J. Neuman
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs

[mailto:owner-gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Berry Cobb
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 11:46 AM
To: gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague
Importance: High


It is confirmed that there will be a GNSO/GAC session in Prague.  There
is already an agenda forming and if we want Consumer Metrics topic on
the agenda, we need to expedite the request.

I also learned that the GAC has already contacted the GNSO stating their
interest on the Consumer Metrics topic.  However, John Berard, as our
Council Liaison, should send a note to the GNSO Council requesting this
be added to the proposed agenda.  The Council will have to agree that
this is a topic they wish to discuss.  I suspect it will be fairly easy
for the Council to approve this topic for the agenda.  The only concern
will be time allotted to discuss it.

John, can you send this notice to the Council ASAP?

Berry Cobb
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)

<GNSO to GAC CCI.doc>

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