ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


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

RE: [dow1-2tf] Vote for 2 Drafts to send to GNSO Council

  • To: Maggie.Mansourkia@xxxxxxx, mueller@xxxxxxx, tim@xxxxxxxxxxx, tom@xxxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: RE: [dow1-2tf] Vote for 2 Drafts to send to GNSO Council
  • From: "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 05:03:39 -0500
  • Cc: dow1-2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, bruce.tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx
  • In-reply-to: <EB7597BFB1C65844898A6D153DE09DB517D44B@DGEXCH02.mcilink.com>
  • Sender: owner-dow1-2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<html><div style='background-color:'><DIV class=RTE>
<P>I have been advised that my concurrence with putting this forward has not been received. My apologies. I 
have been traveling and was relying on my blackberry while in transit. The BC will have comments and further 
contributions during the process,&nbsp;but I support putting this forward for public 
<DIV></DIV>&gt;From: "Mansourkia, Magnolia" &lt;Maggie.Mansourkia@xxxxxxx&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt;To: "'Milton Mueller'" &lt;mueller@xxxxxxx&gt;, tim@xxxxxxxxxxx, 
<DIV></DIV>&gt;CC: dow1-2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, 
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Subject: RE: [dow1-2tf] Vote for 2 Drafts to send to GNSO Council
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 22:06:52 +0000
<DIV></DIV>&gt;The ISPs likewise vote to move this forward for further 
comment.&nbsp;&nbsp;I'm sure
<DIV></DIV>&gt;we will provide our own at the appropriate time, but for now, we 
see it as a
<DIV></DIV>&gt;workable recommendation.
<DIV></DIV>&gt;-----Original Message-----
<DIV></DIV>&gt;From: owner-dow1-2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
<DIV></DIV>&gt;On Behalf Of Milton Mueller
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 2:28 PM
<DIV></DIV>&gt;To: tim@xxxxxxxxxxx; tom@xxxxxxxxxx
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Cc: dow1-2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; bruce.tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Subject: Re: [dow1-2tf] Vote for 2 Drafts to send to GNSO Council
<DIV></DIV>&gt;I have consulted all three NCUC participants and we are agreed 
that this
<DIV></DIV>&gt;draft should be sent out for public comment and represents an 
<DIV></DIV>&gt;compromise among the stakeholder groups
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt;&gt;&gt; Thomas Keller &lt;tom@xxxxxxxxxx&gt; 11/29/2004 6:40:02 AM 
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Well, thats not quite true. I support the drafts and I'm one of 
<DIV></DIV>&gt;elected RC reps ever since . Keeping in mind that this wording 
is the
<DIV></DIV>&gt;result of long debates during varios calls over the last weeks I 
<DIV></DIV>&gt;suggest that we move on with the documents as presented by Jeff.
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Am 27.11.2004 schrieb Tim Ruiz:
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; &lt;div&gt;If you actually read my posts, as well as Paul
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; rewording does NOT appear to have the support of one of 
the elected
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; reps to this task force nor the alternative RC rep to this 
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; force.&lt;/div&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; &lt;div&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; &lt;div&gt;My suggested change is something to the 
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; &lt;div&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; &lt;div&gt;The General Counsel shall consider the entirety 
of its mission
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; core values in any such 
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; &lt;div&gt;I suspect that anyone who cannot accept that 
change may have
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; agenda not completely on the table. I would request that 
our elected
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; reps speak up here so that at the very least this 
difference of
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; on this issue&amp;nbsp;is included as a minority view in 
the report to
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; GNSO Council.&lt;/div&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; &lt;div&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; &lt;div&gt;Tim&lt;/div&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; &lt;div&gt;&lt;BR&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; &lt;BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 8px; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; 
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; blue 2px solid"&gt;&lt;BR&gt;-------- Original Message 
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; [dow1-2tf] Vote for 2 Drafts to send to GNSO 
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; Jeff" 
&amp;lt;Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx&amp;gt;&lt;BR&gt;Date: Fri, November 26, 2004
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; 7:34 pm&lt;BR&gt;To: dow1-2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx&lt;BR&gt;Cc:
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; &amp;nbsp;I have reworded the contentious section in the 
last few
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; with&lt;BR&gt;Milton's suggested language of "in order to 
preserve the
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; operational&lt;BR&gt;stability, reliability, security, or 
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; interoperability of the&lt;BR&gt;Internet's unique 
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; systems."&lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;With that said, unless I get 
a strong objection by
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; Monday at 11:59:59 am&lt;BR&gt;Eastern US time, I will 
forward the 2
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; to the GNSO Council. &amp;nbsp; The&lt;BR&gt;reason I am 
doing it this way is
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; that in following the e-mail chain, I&lt;BR&gt;believe 
with the wording
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; change above, it has support from the 
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; Noncommercial, IPC and Business Users constituency.
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; &amp;nbsp;In&lt;BR&gt;addition, I believe the ISPs (Tony 
and Maggie) expressed
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; approval on the&lt;BR&gt;last 
call.&lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;Here are the 2 drafts.
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; have been no changes to the
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; TF Conflict (clean).doc&amp;gt;&amp;gt; 
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; NOTIFICATION.doc&amp;gt;&amp;gt; &lt;BR&gt;As stated in 
the prior e-mails, we will
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; ask the Council to formally solicit&lt;BR&gt;constituency 
statements on
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; reports (20 day period), and then include&lt;BR&gt;those 
statements in a
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; Preliminary Report which will then go out for
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; 
public&lt;BR&gt;comment.&lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;Thanks.&lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq.
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; &lt;BR&gt;Director, Law &amp;amp; Policy &lt;BR&gt;NeuStar, Inc. 
&lt;BR&gt;Loudoun Tech
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; Center &lt;BR&gt;46000 Center Oak Plaza &lt;BR&gt;Building X 
&lt;BR&gt;Sterling, VA
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; &lt;BR&gt;p: (571) 434-5772 &lt;BR&gt;f: (571) 434-5735 
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx &lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;The information 
contained in this
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; message is intended only for the&lt;BR&gt;use of the 
recipient(s) named
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; and may contain confidential and/or&lt;BR&gt;privileged 
information. If
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; are not the intended recipient you have&lt;BR&gt;received 
this e-mail
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; in error and any review, 
dissemination,&lt;BR&gt;distribution, or copying
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; this message is strictly prohibited. If you 
have&lt;BR&gt;received this
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; communication in error, please notify us immediately 
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; original message. &lt;/BLOCKQUOTE&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt;(oo)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;/|\ A cow is not entirely full of
<DIV></DIV>&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp; | |--/ | *&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;milk some of it 
is hamburger!
<DIV></DIV>&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp; w w w&nbsp;&nbsp;w

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