<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [council] Initiation of IGO/INGO Protection PDP
- To: Brian Peck <brian.peck@xxxxxxxxx>, "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [council] Initiation of IGO/INGO Protection PDP
- From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 20:20:20 -0400
- Cc: Margie Milam <Margie.Milam@xxxxxxxxx>, Berry Cobb Mail <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>, iocRC DT <gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <CCB05ACD.9153%brian.peck@icann.org>
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- References: <CCB05ACD.9153%brian.peck@icann.org>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
My inclination is to disagree on the last point. Sub-group A is
likely to be superset of the DT (perhaps a large one) and I think the
original DT should do the analysis and comments of the PC input
(along with any changes to the recommendations of needed).
Alan
At 26/10/2012 06:13 PM, Brian Peck wrote:
Because the IOC/RCRC DT members will likely participate in the
IGO-INGO PDP, Staff suggests that the current IOC/RCRC DT be
suspended. It is expected that the remaining IOC/RCRC DT efforts,
after the close of the public comment period, will be addressed by
sub-group A of the PDP WG mentioned above.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|