<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3603" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=718552308-27112009>Dear colleagues,</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=718552308-27112009></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=718552308-27112009>I forward this message to you asking for comments on
the question of urgency of the subject. My personal opinion is that from an
ISPCP point of view the council should carefully discuss the item rather to
decide on a PDP initiation in a hurry. So if I don't get different opinion from
your side by Tuesday next week I'll Chuck inform accordingly</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=718552308-27112009></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=718552308-27112009>Thanks and have a nice weekend</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=arial color=#000000><SPAN lang=de><FONT face="Courier New"
size=2>Wolf-Ulrich</FONT></SPAN> </DIV></FONT><BR>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=de dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>Von:</B> owner-council@gnso.icann.org
[mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] <B>Im Auftrag von </B>Gomes,
Chuck<BR><B>Gesendet:</B> Mittwoch, 25. November 2009 22:20<BR><B>An:</B>
council@gnso.icann.org<BR><B>Betreff:</B> [council] Decision on whether to
initiate a PDP regarding vertical integration of registries &
registrars<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=105510121-25112009>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=730593120-25112009>In anticipation of
receiving the Vertical Separation of Registries and Registrars Issues Report
the end of next week (4 Dec), the current Bylaws require "<FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3>the Council shall meet within fifteen (15)
calendar days after receipt of such Report to vote on whether to initiate the
PDP.</FONT>" That means we need a motion (or motions) for our next meeting
on 17 Dec.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=730593120-25112009></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=730593120-25112009>It seems to me that for an issue like this
that will be somewhat complicated, making a decision on initiating a PDP
within<SPAN class=105510121-25112009> as little as</SPAN> 13 days of
receiving the issues report may be challenging, and even more so this time of
year. Also, we will not have finished our project prioritization exercise
by then. <SPAN class=105510121-25112009>On the other hand, to the
extent that a PDP could possibly result in delays of the introduction of
new gTLDs, I think we don't want to contribute to any more delays if
avoidable. </SPAN></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=730593120-25112009><SPAN
class=105510121-25112009></SPAN></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=730593120-25112009><SPAN
class=105510121-25112009></SPAN>So <SPAN class=105510121-25112009>I am
requesting Councilors to express your opinions in this regard. Should we
consider deferring </SPAN>the <SPAN class=105510121-25112009>PDP
</SPAN>decision until January<SPAN class=105510121-25112009> or should we vote
on whether to initiate</SPAN> <SPAN class=105510121-25112009>a PDP in
our 17 Dec meeting? Note that we have two meetings in January on
the 7th and the 28th. </SPAN> Your thoughts are
requested.</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=730593120-25112009></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=730593120-25112009><SPAN
class=105510121-25112009>Chuck</SPAN></SPAN></DIV></SPAN></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>