<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<title>Re: AW: [council] RE: Motion re. VI WG</title>
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=WordSection1>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>I would be happy to work with the WG co-chairs and any interested
Councilors to arrange a meeting like this. In an exchange with Mikey O’Connor,
he suggested the possibility of having a WG representative associated with each
of the proposals present a coupled slides summarizing their proposal and then
giving Councilors a chance to ask questions.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Chuck<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style='border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt'>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Andrei Kolesnikov
[mailto:andrei@cctld.ru] <br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, October 01, 2010 9:01 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Gomes, Chuck; 'Caroline Greer'; council@gnso.icann.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: AW: [council] RE: Motion re. VI WG<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Chuck, separate meeting is OK and in general its good idea not
to mix it with general council agenda. There should be meeting about content,
not about process.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>--andrei<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style='border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt'>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span lang=RU style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
lang=RU style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Gomes,
Chuck [mailto:cgomes@verisign.com] <br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, October 01, 2010 3:55 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Caroline Greer; andrei@cctld.ru; council@gnso.icann.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: AW: [council] RE: Motion re. VI WG<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=RU><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Unfortunately, as is usually the case, our agenda is stretched
to the max. We should also realize that doing such a task would likely
require a meeting all its own, so maybe we should consider scheduling a
separate meeting for it and invite the co-chairs.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Chuck<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style='border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt'>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>
owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] <b>On Behalf
Of </b>Caroline Greer<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, October 01, 2010 7:46 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> andrei@cctld.ru; council@gnso.icann.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: AW: [council] RE: Motion re. VI WG<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>I quite like
this idea Andrei and I think that this is such a big issue for the GNSO that we
should ensure that we understand where the conflicts lie and where we go from
here. Not that any of us is incapable of reading and understanding the report
but it would be good to get a quick summary report and diagnosis (to use your
word Andrei) from the Chairs. I think it would be useful to hear from them
whether more time would be worthwhile or whether we really are just at the end
of the road (my own sense is the latter by the way).<br>
<br>
Would this be of interest to others and would we have time on the agenda Chuck?<br>
<br>
Thanks.<br>
<br>
----------------<br>
Caroline Greer<br>
Director of Policy<br>
dotMobi<br>
<br>
<br>
----- Original Message -----<br>
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org <owner-council@gnso.icann.org><br>
To: council@gnso.icann.org <council@gnso.icann.org><br>
Sent: Fri Oct 01 11:20:42 2010<br>
Subject: RE: AW: [council] RE: Motion re. VI WG<br>
<br>
May I ask a question. While there is no consensus within VI WG, instead of
discussing administrative / procedural issues on how to report / respond to the
Board, why don’t we try to discuss main issues of WG disagreements one more
time?<br>
<br>
It will be very convenient to have a short summary presentation of WG chair. To
be honest, scrolling 178 pages I’ve got an expression that this huge piece of
professional work, votes on variants, reference materials… all this just to get
around some very basic facts of conflicting interests. Should we try to
get right diagnosis at least?<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Thank you!<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
--andrei<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [<a
href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org">mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a>]
On Behalf Of Stephane Van Gelder<br>
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 11:04 AM<br>
To: Adrian Kinderis<br>
Cc: tim@godaddy.com; owner-council@gnso.icann.org; KnobenW@telekom.de;
cgomes@verisign.com; council@gnso.icann.org<br>
Subject: Re: AW: [council] RE: Motion re. VI WG<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Let me be clear: I don't want to drag this on anymore than anyone else.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
My question is: can the Council take it upon himself to call a WG's report
final and consider its work done, even though that's not what the WG itself has
reported to us?<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
I'm all for executive decisions, as long as they are made within the process
that's been set for the body making them.<br>
<br>
Stéphane Van Gelder<br>
<br>
Directeur général / General manager<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
INDOM.com Noms de domaine / Domain names<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Sent from my iPad<br>
<br>
<br>
Le 1 oct. 2010 à 03:04, Adrian Kinderis <adrian@ausregistry.com.au> a
écrit :<br>
<br>
I believe it was “hasn’t” and
“won’t” reach consensus, which is the key part here Stephane.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Let’s wind it up gang.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Adrian Kinderis<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [<a
href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org">mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a>]
On Behalf Of Stephane Van Gelder<br>
Sent: Friday, 1 October 2010 8:19 AM<br>
To: tim@godaddy.com<br>
Cc: owner-council@gnso.icann.org;
KnobenW@telekom.de; cgomes@verisign.com; council@gnso.icann.org<br>
Subject: Re: AW: [council] RE:
Motion re. VI WG<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
I disagree. The discussion isn't on
whether we end the WG or not. I was reacting to Wolf's proposed change
indicating that the WG was to submit a final report by a set date, something
which the WG has not confirmed to us.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
The only formal communication we
have from them is that they haven't reached consensus.<br>
<br>
<br>
Stéphane Van Gelder<br>
<br>
Directeur général / General manager<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
INDOM.com Noms de domaine / Domain
names<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Sent from my iPad<br>
<br>
<br>
Le 30 sept. 2010 à 19:35,
tim@godaddy.com a écrit :<br>
<br>
I think we (the Council) have enough
to go on to make a decision about it. The very fact that they are submitting a
"final" report tells us that we either need to reconstitute this PDP
under a new charter or end it all together. This is our call at this point, not
the WGs.<br>
<br>
Tim<br>
<br>
________________________________<br>
<br>
From: Stéphane Van Gelder
<stephane.vangelder@indom.com><br>
<br>
Sender: owner-council@gnso.icann.org<br>
<br>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 15:32:38 +0200<br>
<br>
To: <KnobenW@telekom.de><br>
<br>
Cc: <cgomes@verisign.com>;
<council@gnso.icann.org><br>
<br>
Subject: Re: AW: [council] RE:
Motion re. VI WG<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
I don't agree with your change Wolf
unless it is confirmed by the WG chairs.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
My understanding is the same as
Chucks: they are currently in discussion with the group on next steps and
nothing has been decided yet.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Stéphane<br>
<br>
Le 30 sept. 2010 à 15:19,
<KnobenW@telekom.de> a écrit :<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
I've inserted an amendment in the
"Whereas..." which reflects the co-chairs' response - as mentioned in
my E-Mail earlier today and would be glad you accept this as friendly.<br>
<br>
<br>
Best regards<br>
Wolf-Ulrich<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
________________________________<br>
<br>
Von: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [<a
href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org">mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a>]
Im Auftrag von Gomes, Chuck<br>
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 30. September
2010 14:37<br>
An: Gomes, Chuck; Council GNSO<br>
Betreff: [council] RE: Motion re. VI
WG<br>
<br>
I am accepting one of Adrian’s
suggested amendments to this motion as friendly and change it as highlighted in
the attached file. Other suggested amendments are welcome. Note
also that a second is needed.<br>
<br>
Chuck <<Motion - VI Board
Response 29 Sep 10 revised 30 Sep 10.doc>><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
_____________________________________________<br>
From: Gomes, Chuck<br>
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010
1:53 PM<br>
To: Council GNSO<br>
Subject: Motion re. VI WG<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<< File: Motion - VI
Board Response 29 Sep 10.doc >><br>
<br>
In response to the Board retreat
resolution regarding VI and in order to meet the 8-day advance requirement for
motions, I am submitting this motion and would appreciate a second.
Please forward this to your SGs and constituencies to determine support for the
motion on 7 October.<br>
<br>
I am not opposed to other ways of
accomplishing this, but thought that a motion is a clear way to kick it off.<br>
<br>
Chuck<br>
<br>
<Motion - VI Board Response 29
Sep 10 revised 30 Sep 10 -WUK amend.doc><br>
<br>
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>