[atrt2] Tonights call - GAC related recommendations

Carlos Raul carlosraulg at gmail.com
Tue Dec 17 19:58:39 UTC 2013

I found the USCIB comments quite good and thoroughly argued in terms of
increasins transparency, particularly in dealings of GAc with private


*Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez*
*NEW email*    carlosraul at gutierrez.se
Skype            carlos.raulg
Apartado 1571-1000

On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Fiona Alexander <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov>wrote:

> Hi Jorgen
> Both new points g and h come directly from the written public comment
> process, specifically by USCIB.  In the write up above I attempted to
> capture that within the summary of comments received.
> Fiona
> ________________________________________
> From: atrt2-bounces at icann.org [atrt2-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of
> Jørgen C Abild Andersen [jocaan at erst.dk]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 9:38 AM
> To: 'atrt2 at icann.org'
> Subject: [atrt2] Tonights call - GAC related recommendations
> Dear all
> Unfortunately I am prevented from attending the conference call tonight.
> Sorry about that - not least because I have few remarks/questions regarding
> the GAC-related recommendations, more specifically "Final recommendation: -
> Increased transparency of GAC related activities 1, g) and h)". I am sorry
> if I have missed possible answers to my questions in previous calls.
> Would it be possible to provide further background on the reasoning behind
> adding the two points (1 g) and h))? Reading through the corresponding
> paragraphs explaining facts and community input I wasn't able to identify
> the references that explain/provide basis for these new recommendations.
> Secondly, I am not completely sure that I understand the precise scope and
> meaning of the language of 1 g) "the role of GAC leadership" and again I
> apologise if I have missed information in any of the previous calls, but
> are we referring to a particular problem identified by the community? If
> that is not the case I am a bit reluctant inserting this point at this
> stage. My third point is related to the term "particular entity" used in 1
> h) - again I am uncertain about the exact meaning as the term is very
> broad. If the reference is to the AC/SO's it might be helpful to clarify
> this in the next.
> I think it would be helpful for the implementation of the recommendations
> if we could provide more information explaining the rationale and facts if
>  these new recommendations should be added to the final report.
> Best regards
> Jørgen
> _______________________________________________
> atrt2 mailing list
> atrt2 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/atrt2/attachments/20131217/3faf78cb/attachment.html>

More information about the atrt2 mailing list