[council] Status of meeting planning for Feb 2006 in Washington

[Antonio Harris]

Tom,

No cynicism intended. By the same token as, for
example, some could attend if the meeting is in
Germany, I could attend one in this part of the world,
but dont have budget foreseen to travel to Europe
or the USA ? Also, since references were made
to cost optimization in some suggestions, I thought
I would contribute my five cents.

On maximizing, this inevitably means some get
excluded, right?

Best

Tony

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Thomas Keller" <tom at schlund.de>
To: <council at gnso.icann.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 12:59 PM
Subject: Re: [council] Status of meeting planning for Feb 2006 in Washington


> Tony,
>
> I don't understand the cynicism. Isn't it all about maximizing
> the participation?
>
> Best,
>
> tom
>
> Am 24.01.2006 schrieb Anthony Harris:
>> How about having it in Buenos Aires ?
>> Cant think of a city with lower overall prices...
>>
>> Tony Harris
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Ute Decker" <Ute.Decker at ifpi.org>
>> To: "Thomas Keller" <tom at schlund.de>; "Bruce Tonkin"
>> <Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au>
>> Cc: <council at gnso.icann.org>
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 7:33 AM
>> Subject: RE: [council] Status of meeting planning for Feb 2006 in
>> Washington
>>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >Bruce, Tom, all,
>> >
>> >I will likely not attend in DC, but could of course attend a meeting in
>> >Frankfurt. No objections to 21 Feb (and around).
>> >
>> >Ute
>> >
>> >
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: Thomas Keller [mailto:tom at schlund.de]
>> >Sent: 24 January 2006 08:45
>> >To: Bruce Tonkin
>> >Cc: council at gnso.icann.org
>> >Subject: Re: [council] Status of meeting planning for Feb 2006 in
>> >Washington
>> >
>> >Bruce, all,
>> >
>> >how about relocating the meeting to Frankfurt. I haven't ask but I'm
>> >sure DENIC would certainly provide us with a meeting accomodation.
>> >The DENIC headquarter is about 15 Minutes away from the airport and
>> >in walking reach of several adequate hotels.
>> >
>> >Best,
>> >
>> >tom
>> >
>> >Am 24.01.2006 schrieb Bruce Tonkin:
>> >>Hello All,
>> >>
>> >>The topic of a physical meeting on gtlds in Feb 2006 is on the agenda
>> >>for our next Council meeting on 6 Feb 2006.
>> >>
>> >>However if we want to do this, we need to make progress in making
>> >>arrangements prior to our scheduled conference call.
>> >>
>> >>Purpose of meeting
>> >>==================
>> >>- using the initial report on new gtlds from the ICANN staff - carry
>> >out
>> >>further drafting work on a policy position
>> >>- if the Council decides to progress on additional policy issues
>> >>identified in the issues report requested at the last meeting - carry
>> >>out further work to complete constituency position statements and
>> >begin
>> >>to draft proposed policies
>> >>- provide an opportunity for any additional public comment on the
>> >>reports published so far
>> >>
>> >>Given the need to work more quickly on substantive policy issues, a
>> >>physical meeting may assist progress.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>Location of meeting
>> >>===================
>> >>- the Washington region has several major gtld registries and
>> >registrars
>> >>- it is easy to travel to from most locations in the Northern
>> >Hemisphere
>> >>- we have local contacts that can assist with logistics
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>Planning so far
>> >>===============
>> >>- current date under consideration is around 21 Feb 2006
>> >>- locations under consideration include
>> >>  -- at a location in the city of Washington, DC itself
>> >>  -- or at a location near Dulles airport, Washington
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>A location in Washington, DC may be appropriate for any further public
>> >>comment/dialog on the policy issues and may get press coverage with
>> >>respect to encouraging further contributions with respect to new
>> >gtlds.
>> >>Marilyn Cade has volunteered to investigate this option further.
>> >>
>> >>A location near the airport - will most likely make it far cheaper in
>> >>terms of accommodation costs, and probably easier to find available
>> >>accommodation at short notice.  This might be a better location for
>> >the
>> >>planning meetings.   Maybe a registry or registrar in the area may be
>> >>able to host a drafting meeting.
>> >>
>> >>It is possible that a combination of both might work best.  E.g one
>> >>morning or afternoon in the downtime area, and the rest of the time
>> >near
>> >>the airport.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>Participation
>> >>============
>> >>- given that many Council members will be planning to attend the ICANN
>> >>meeting in New Zealand in March, and may not have sufficient time or
>> >>budgets to also travel to Washington, I recommend we allow each
>> >>constituency to appoint 3 representatives (which do not need to be
>> >>Council members) to represent the position of the constituency in
>> >>Washington.  I expect that most constituencies will have members
>> >within
>> >>a reasonable radius of Washington.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>Further input needed
>> >>=====================
>> >>
>> >>I am interested to hear from Council members regarding any issues
>> >around
>> >>the proposed date (21 Feb 2006) - ie whether there are clashes with
>> >>other major international meetings etc, and also any preferences
>> >>regarding meeting near Dulles airport near Washington, or in the city
>> >>itself.
>> >>
>> >>Regards,
>> >>Bruce Tonkin
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >Gruss,
>> >
>> >tom
>> >
>> >(__)
>> >(OO)_____
>> >(oo)    /|\ A cow is not entirely full of
>> > | |--/ | *    milk some of it is hamburger!
>> > w w w  w
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
> Gruss,
>
> tom
>
> (__)
> (OO)_____
> (oo)    /|\ A cow is not entirely full of
>  | |--/ | *    milk some of it is hamburger!
>  w w w  w
>
>