ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


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

Re: [council] For your review - GNSO Review of GAC Communique Hyderabad

  • To: policy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: Re: [council] For your review - GNSO Review of GAC Communique Hyderabad
  • From: Rubens Kuhl <rubensk@xxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 21:02:20 -0200
  • Authentication-results: mail.nic.br (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nic.br
  • Cc: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>, "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nic.br; s=dkim; t=1481583741; bh=8PoqDFr31yvowK17pz/hlsW0tzOUFZfMtK9c2Zkyw1I=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To:From; b=HYsS6LnqOnSEL52LcRpW0i1rAedHRhVYwUTUZVGPk4PruBr5cEdTL4wYEMYrcsOlL pA5jLx57ShV3mcvPVKpMeIBlQD6TdSArdwtWQ0qGOhouTTaJy2sbGCIchS7hx3ByT3 BNqZ1nDa+6UMH3FZXP0KTlfVsvDcB39zIbRgHQe8=
  • Dmarc-filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.1 mail.nic.br F3DA91CF04C
  • In-reply-to: <20161212154619.196dc3a93c35c991bce5ceb11d0fbfbb.a04b9d70f6.wbe@email17.godaddy.com>
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • References: <20161212154619.196dc3a93c35c991bce5ceb11d0fbfbb.a04b9d70f6.wbe@email17.godaddy.com>
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> On Dec 12, 2016, at 8:46 PM, policy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Thanks Rubens.  The use of "best practices" was in the original version that 
> contracted parties sent around - I was pretty proud that I was able to keep 
> it in!

I know that, but I trace the origins of this to some ICANN propositions in the 
early days of the Spec 11 discussion.  

> Regarding your other comment, I guess I do't know where that leaves us since 
> at least the GAC seems to know what abuses are.  How do we solve this?

If elected officials in a city, state or country try to revoke the Law of 
Gravity, how citizens should deal with it ? 


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