<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Councillors,<div><br></div><div>As Avri does not have posting privileges to the Council list, please find below her response to my earlier question.</div><div><br></div><div>Stéphane<br>
<div><br><div>Début du message réexpédié :</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;"><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium; color:rgba(0, 0, 0, 1);"><b>De : </b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium;">Avri Doria <<a href="mailto:avri@psg.com">avri@psg.com</a>><br></span></div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;"><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium; color:rgba(0, 0, 0, 1);"><b>Date : </b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium;">15 novembre 2010 12:09:22 HNEC<br></span></div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;"><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium; color:rgba(0, 0, 0, 1);"><b>À : </b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium;">Stéphane Van Gelder <<a href="mailto:stephane.vangelder@indom.com">stephane.vangelder@indom.com</a>><br></span></div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;"><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium; color:rgba(0, 0, 0, 1);"><b>Cc : </b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium;">Rafik Dammak <<a href="mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com">rafik.dammak@gmail.com</a>>, Chuck Gomes <<a href="mailto:cgomes@verisign.com">cgomes@verisign.com</a>>, carlos aguirre <<a href="mailto:carlosaguirre62@hotmail.com">carlosaguirre62@hotmail.com</a>>, <a href="mailto:evan@telly.org">evan@telly.org</a><br></span></div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;"><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium; color:rgba(0, 0, 0, 1);"><b>Objet : </b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium;"><b>Rép : [council] Announcement from JAS working group</b><br></span></div><br><div>Dear Stéphane,<br><br>Again removed the council from the cc list due to my lack of posting privileges.<br><br>The comments I made are, I believe, in keeping with the consensus already reached by the WG. Certainly the group was very committed to the need to investigate the basis of the 100 KUSD base charge and I suspect would be very disturbed to see it removed from the charter. Also the group has never shirked any task that was chartered by the chartering organizations, and thus my feeling that they would not reject an additional work item.<br><br>However, we had already scheduled a meeting for tomorrow where the agenda includes reviewing any issue that have come up in the GNSO council relating to our report or the motion. Chuck's issues will be reviewed.<br><br>So rest assured, the will of the JAS working Group has been and will continued to be taken into account.<br><br>Your humble servant,<br><br>a.<br><br><br><br><br>On 15 Nov 2010, at 11:58, Stéphane Van Gelder wrote:<br><br><blockquote type="cite">The comments you made about working with staff and the answers given to Chuck's comments.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Did I read that wrong?<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Stéphane<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Le 15 nov. 2010 à 11:38, Rafik Dammak a écrit :<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Hi Stephane,<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">what suggestions? <br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Rafik<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">2010/11/15 Stéphane Van Gelder <<a href="mailto:stephane.vangelder@indom.com">stephane.vangelder@indom.com</a>><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Rafik,<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Sorry if this is a stupid question, but I'm confused as well. Are these suggestions from the working group, or from Avri and yourself?<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Thanks,<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Stéphane<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Le 15 nov. 2010 à 10:57, Rafik Dammak a écrit :<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Hi Chuck,<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">maybe we need to make it more simple, my understanding is :<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">- Working with staff about base fee components and rationales behind them <br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">- and then Working on recommendations for cost-recovery of those fees waivers<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">I tend to agree with Avri about addition and no replacement, I assume that WG members are willing to do additional task if needed.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">does it make more sense?<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Rafik<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">2010/11/15 Gomes, Chuck <<a href="mailto:cgomes@verisign.com">cgomes@verisign.com</a>><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">I'm confused Avri. (Nothing new!) Please see below.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Chuck<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">-----Original Message-----<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri@psg.com]<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2010 10:51 AM<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">To: Gomes, Chuck<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Cc: <a href="mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com">rafik.dammak@gmail.com</a>; William Drake; <a href="mailto:evan@telly.org">evan@telly.org</a>; carlos<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">aguirre<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Subject: Re: [council] Announcement from JAS working group<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Hi Chuck,<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Again off list as per my posting rights. Feel free to forward it, if<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">that is seen as an appropriate thing to do. And please forgive me for<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">answering a question asked of Rafik. Jumping in where I don't belong<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">is a bad habit I have not conquered yet.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">There are two different questions here.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">1. In the recommendations we have made already, there are recommended<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">fee reductions based on the notion that various fees, like program<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">development costs for a program they are currently excluded from, are<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">not appropriate fees to charge applicants from developing countries.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">While staff and the Board have indicated that these recommendations<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">are<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">non starters, the WG has continued in recommending them, and we await<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">comments on the proposal to do so. Your suggestion for work items<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">that<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">would look into the basis on which these fee reductions might be made,<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">as you laid out in your message, is a work item that was neither in<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">our<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">previous charter, nor is it currently in the charter the JAS WG is<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">proposing the the GNSO council and to the ALAC. That is why in my<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">previous message I indicated that perhaps this is a work item you wish<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">to add. Specifically:<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Work with the ICANN new gTLD implementation staff to determine how<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">the fee waivers would be funded."<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Of course it is not for me to say, but I would not see why adding this<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">work item might not be considered friendly.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">[Gomes, Chuck] So you would consider my amendment friendly if you were<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">the one to decide? Correct<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">2. One part of the fee that we did not have the ability to understand<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">was the $100, 000 USD base fee. I might note, that many people before<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">us have had the same questions we had, so we are not alone in not<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">understanding this fee. There are members in the group who believe<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">that<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">some portion of this fee may also be inappropriate for developing<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">economies, but as we do not understand the full basis of this fee, we<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">cannot make recommendations in this regard. The charter item:<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">"Review the basis of the US$100,000 application base fee to<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">determine<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">its full origin and to determine what percentage of that fee could be<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">waived for applicants meeting the requirements for assistance."<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Is a work item that requires the JAS WG to work more closely with<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">staff<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">to understand the components of this fee and to see whether any parts<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">of that fee are inappropriate for applicants from developing<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">economies.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">So changing this charter item as you suggest, is something I do not<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">understand and would not personally support, again not that that<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">matters.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">[Gomes, Chuck] Now you oppose my amendment. What am I missing?<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Best regards,<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">a.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">On 14 Nov 2010, at 14:05, Gomes, Chuck wrote:<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Rafik,<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Here is my thinking on the second amendment:<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">* Any waiving of fees will reduce the funds available for<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">processing applications.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">* Because the fees were calculated to cover actual<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">application processing costs and assuming that the calculations are<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">accurate, there may be a shortfall of funds to cover application<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">processing costs.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">* How will that shortfall be covered?<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">* Keep in mind that there are no specifically designated<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">funds budgeted in the regular ICANN budget for application processing.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">* In proposing the amendment there was no intention on my<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">part to pass judgment on the motion itself; rather, it seemed to me<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">that if there is a shortfall, we should find out whether that has an<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">impact, and if so, have some idea how that impact will be mitigated.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">* All the amendment does is add another task for the JAS WG,<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">asking the group to work with Staff to get information on the new gTLD<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">budget implications if fees are waived and explore ways to mitigate<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">those impacts, if any.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Does this help?<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">From: Rafik Dammak [mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com]<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2010 2:42 AM<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">To: Council GNSO<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Cc: Gomes, Chuck; Avri Doria; William Drake<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Subject: Re: [council] Announcement from JAS working group<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Hello,<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">I am forwarding Avri's answers to Chuck's questions which are below.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">For the first amendment, I accept the first one as friendly.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">about the second ones, I am not understanding the aim, maybe other<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">rewording can work?<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Regards<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Rafik<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">2010/11/13 Avri Doria <<a href="mailto:avri@psg.com">avri@psg.com</a>><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Dear Chuck,<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Some initial answers from my perspective as one of the co-chairs.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Of course I do not have Council list posting rights, and am not even<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">sure whether Rafik and Bill would want my raw answers passed on raw.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">A reminder, as a Joint AC/SO WG this motion is also being put before<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">ALAC. Any changes etc will eventually need to be ironed out between<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">the two groups.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">My comments in-line.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">On 12 Nov 2010, at 09:39, Gomes, Chuck wrote:<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">In advance of our consideration of this motion I want to propose a<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">couple amendments (re just a typo) and ask a few questions that<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">hopefully can be answered on the list before our meeting on the 18th.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Resolved 1(a)<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">* The second sentence of this part of the resolution says,<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">"Financial need has been established as the primary criterion for<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">support. The group should be argumented to have the necessary<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">expertise<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">to make a specific recommendation in this area, especially given the<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">comparative economic conditions and the cross-cultural aspects of this<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">requirement."<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">* Proposed amendment (typo correction): In 1(a) under<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Resolved, change 'argumented' to 'augmented'.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Yes, Thank you for catching that.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">* Have the experts needed been identified yet? If not,<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">how<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">will they be identified?<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">No. There have been some background conversations with Staff about<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">this and there was an offer of help in terms of bringing in some<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">visitors to the group to discuss various issues. Discussing the type<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">of expertise needed would be an initial item for the WG.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">* Is it anticipated that adding experts will require<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">funding? If so, from where would the funding come?<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">It has not been anticipated that there will be an expense. But if<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">there is, we do not have any idea of where funding would come from.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Perhaps Karla can let us know if there is any funding in the new<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">budget<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">for such support if needed.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">It is also possible that there are volunteers either within the<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">ICANN<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">community or outside of it who could be brought in without expenses. I<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">tend to look at this whole process of trying to get help for<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">applicants<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">from developing regions as pro-bono work. If the charter extensions<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">are approved, I expect I will make an outreach to people I know, as I<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">expect others in the group would.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Resolved 1(c)<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">* The resolution says, "Establishing a framework,<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">including<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">a possible recommendation for a separate ICANN originated foundation,<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">for managing any auction income, beyond costs. for future rounds and<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">ongoing assistance".<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">* What does 'ICANN originated foundation' mean?<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">The specifics are far from clear and hence the work item. There has<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">been a conversation for a long while, including the days of GNSO<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">policy<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">making and in some of the DAG discussions, that processing any funds<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">gained in auctions beyond costs might be best dealt with outside of<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">normal ICANN budgeting and accounting. This item recommends that we<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">start working on those idea, including the idea of an independent<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">foundation set up by ICANN for just this purpose. Of course we are<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">also looking for funds beyond just auction proceeds, but the source of<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">those funds is as of yet unclear, and hence a work item.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">* Has this idea been vetted with the ICANN General<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Council's office?<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Not that I know of. Does looking into this need to be vetted with<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">them? Certainly they would need to be part of any discussions and<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">planning, and of course execution if such were ultimately recommended<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">and approved, but do GNSO and ALAC need their permission to talk about<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">it? This is not consensus policy that affects contractual conditions.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">All the JAS WG can do is make recommendation to our chartering<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">organizations, the community and the Board.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Resolved 1(h)<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">* The resolution says, "Review the basis of the US$100,000<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">application base fee to determine its full origin and to determine<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">what<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">percentage of that fee could be waived for applicants meeting the<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">requirements for assistance."<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">* Understanding that the application fees are intended to<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">cover application processing costs and no more, from where is it<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">envisioned that the offset of the fee waivers would come?<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">This was discussed in the recommendations themselves. The<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">suggestion<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">is in keeping with the GNSO policy decision that while the program<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">needs to be self funding as a whole, there can be differential fees<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">paid by the applicants.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">For each of the fees that the JAS WG has recommended being waived<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">for<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">applicants who meet the criteria, there is a reason for why that fee<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">would not be appropriate for someone from a developing region to have<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">to pay.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">In terms of this US$100,000 fee, however,that basis of that fee was<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">not clear and hence the need to investigate the basis of that fee<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">further to see if any parts of it are not appropriate for those from<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">developing regions.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">* Proposed amendment: Add a new sentence that says, "Work<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">with the ICANN new gTLD implementation staff to determine how the fee<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">waivers would be funded."<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">I would not think this an equivalent item.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">This could be another work item, however..<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">If the answers to the questions can be provided in advance of the<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Council meeting on 18 November, I think the chances of acting on this<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">motion on the 18th will be increased and the sooner the better so that<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Councilors can provide the answers to their respective groups.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Rafik/Bill: Do you consider the two proposed amendments as<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">friendly?<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Chuck<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Thanks<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">a.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><br></div></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>