<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [ispcp] Impact of new gTLD program
- To: tonyarholmes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ispcp@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [ispcp] Impact of new gTLD program
- From: MAEMURA Akinori <maem@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2012 03:23:30 +0900
- In-reply-to: <006401cd964d$5bb8ac50$132a04f0$@btinternet.com>
- List-id: ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- References: <006401cd964d$5bb8ac50$132a04f0$@btinternet.com>
- Sender: owner-ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Tony,
Thank you for your kind response.
Maybe I need to know more context to think this, and Toronto would be the nice place for it.
Akinori
In message <006401cd964d$5bb8ac50$132a04f0$@btinternet.com>
"[ispcp] Impact of new gTLD program"
""tony holmes" <tonyarholmes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>" wrote:
|
|
| All
|
| Many thanks for your quick response on the draft. The attached version
| should contain all proposed changes. Please let me know promptly if I've
| missed anything, I intend to send the final version to ICANN today.
|
|
|
| Akinori - in answer to the issue you raised; if the proposed Stakeholder
| Advisory Platform remained within the GNSO it wouldn't solve the problem as
| each group would still discuss common issues within their own domain before
| broader discussion occurred. Neither would that reduce the load on the
| existing policy development groups. I hope that answers your question.
|
|
|
| Regards
|
|
|
| Tony
|
|
|
|
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|