ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


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

[council] Re: Uniform Rapid Suspension Discussion

  • To: Kurt Pritz <kurt.pritz@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [council] Re: Uniform Rapid Suspension Discussion
  • From: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 13:07:40 +0200
  • Cc: GNSO Council List <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • In-reply-to: <CC7E2311.6592F%kurt.pritz@icann.org>
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • References: <CC7E2311.6592F%kurt.pritz@icann.org>
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Thanks Kurt. I am copying the Council for their information.

The Council will no doubt follow-up on this in the near future.


Stéphane Van Gelder
Directeur Général / General manager
INDOM NetNames France
Registry Relations and Strategy Director
T: +33 (0)1 48 01 83 51
F: +33 (0)1 48 01 83 61

Le 18 sept. 2012 à 22:09, Kurt Pritz a écrit :

> Hi Stephane:
> I am writing to let you know that we are planning a set of discussions on 
> Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) implementation in the near future and seek the 
> input of GNSO leadership. As you know, a meeting in Prague we indicated that 
> URS, as currently designed, did not appear to meet cost requirements. In 
> Prague, contributors in the meeting described briefly several potential 
> solutions. In the next set of meetings, we want to flesh out some of those 
> models for possible implementation.We want to have one meeting in about two 
> weeks (probably a webinar type of format with a possibility for some 
> face-to-face interaction), and then we have a meeting in Toronto is 
> scheduled. The first meeting will be announced shortly.
> I am writing you because some of the proposed solutions, while feasible, do 
> not match up with the specific conclusions of the STI team when it did its 
> work. We recognize the role of the GNSO in those discussions. While the 
> meetings we are having are open to all, we understand that the GNSO 
> leadership might want to conduct the URS discussions in a certain way. Having 
> the twin goals of developing a solution in time for use by new gTLDs and 
> ensuring that all those interested can participate in the discussion, we can 
> work in whichever way the GNSO wishes to proceed. (Of course, we also seek to 
> meet the cost and timeliness goals for which the the URS was designed and 
> also seek to ensure that registrants enjoy the protections written into the 
> current model by the IRT and STI.)The output of the next meetings can inform 
> GNSO discussion or we can carry on in a way acceptable to the GNSO.
> I am also copying Olivier as ALAC members participated in the STI.
> I hope you find this helpful. Contact me anytime with questions.
> Regards,
> Kurt

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