[council] Issues Report on specified Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy issues

[Avri Doria]

hi,

No one has objected to running a hour later on Saturday so we can  
talk about the Inter-Registrar Transfer Issues paper and the  
possibility of intiating a PDP.

So, please add to your schedules:  1800-1900 - Inter-registrar  
Transfer Issues.

Karen, can you give us an overview of the Issues paper at that time?

Thanks

a.



On 24 okt 2007, at 15.25, Avri Doria wrote:

> Hi,
>
> You are probably right, but while we are extending things, we might  
> as well make sure we allow enough time for any comments that may  
> come up, especially from observers at the meeting.
>
> And if we finish a half hour early, I am sure none of us will  
> complain.
>
> thanks
>
> a.
>
> On 24 okt 2007, at 14.03, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
>
>> I am okay with extending the time on Saturday if needed but I  
>> would suggest that we may not need a full hour.  I don't think  
>> there is much if any controversy on this issue.  I would be  
>> surprised if we even needed 30 minutes.
>>
>> Chuck Gomes
>>
>> "This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity  
>> to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is  
>> privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under  
>> applicable law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure  
>> is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in  
>> error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the  
>> original transmission."
>>
>>
>> From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner- 
>> council at gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 1:52 PM
>> To: Council GNSO
>> Subject: Re: [council] Issues Report on specified Inter-Registrar  
>> Transfer Policy issues
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Kristina, I am sorry to hear you won't be with us on Thursday as  
>> the conversations about comments received during the meeting will  
>> be as important as any vote we take and it would have been good to  
>> have your contributions to these discussions.  Though I understand  
>> that real life, families, and day jobs often get in the way.
>>
>> Would it be possible for you to attend this meeting, (17-20 EST),  
>> remotely?
>>
>> I will try to find a way to fit this discussion on the Inter- 
>> Rgistrar transfer policy into one of our earlier meetings, but am  
>> not sure where.  One idea is to extend the day on Saturday by an  
>> hour - not to vote, but to have the initial substantive discussion.
>>
>> So, would be people be willing to work an extra hour later on  
>> Saturday, i.e. until 19 instead of 18, so that we can have the  
>> initial discussion?  This might allow us to hold the vote on  
>> Wednesday because most of the discussion could have taken place.
>>
>> BTW, as additional background, people should check out http:// 
>> www.icann.org/topics/raa   and especially http://www.icann.org/ 
>> topics/raa/raa-public-comments-23oct07.pdf in addition to the  
>> materials that have been develped by the WG and the Issues paper.
>>
>> thanks
>>
>> a.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 23 okt 2007, at 16.26, Rosette, Kristina wrote:
>>
>>> I would prefer that we not vote on Thursday.  I will be traveling  
>>> back to DC, and made my travel plans on the assumption that  
>>> Wednesday was our only voting meeting.
>>>
>>> From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner- 
>>> council at gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 3:53 PM
>>> To: Council GNSO
>>> Subject: Re: [council] Issues Report on specified Inter-Registrar  
>>> Transfer Policy issues
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> This thread brings up the fact hat we did receive the Issue  
>>> report on 19 October and given our resolve to meet the time  
>>> limits in the by-laws, we should be discussing the issues report  
>>> and voting on whether to commence a PDP on the issues in the  
>>> report no later then 3 Nov 2007.
>>>
>>> Our schedule is already full for Wednesday and there is nothing  
>>> on that schedule I would feel comfortable either shortening the  
>>> time on, or moving to a later meeting.  We do have a meeting  
>>> scheduled for Thursday 1400-1700 which is slated for an open  
>>> discussion of input from the meetings.  I would like to spend 30  
>>> minutes of this 3 hour time slot to discuss the issues report and  
>>> decide on whether to initiate the PDP process; i.e. to vote on  
>>> two motions:
>>>
>>> 1. Whether to initiate a PDP process as recommended by Staff on  
>>> page 22 of the issues report:
>>>
>>>> 6.1 Staff has confirmed that the proposed issues are within the  
>>>> scope of
>>>> the policy development process and the GNSO.  It is reasonable from
>>>> the staff’s perspective to expect that greater precision and  
>>>> certainty
>>>> around the terms of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy would be
>>>> beneficial to the community generally, particularly for  
>>>> registrants, as
>>>> well as those parties (gTLD registries and registrars) who are  
>>>> obligated
>>>> to comply with the policy provisions.  Staff therefore  
>>>> recommends that
>>>> the GNSO Council proceed with a policy development process limited
>>>> to consideration of the issues discussed in this report.
>>>>
>>>
>>> 2. Whether to create a Task Force for this purpose.
>>>
>>>
>>> In the spirit of trying to met the timelines as outlined in the  
>>> by-laws, and as supported by the council in our last meting, I  
>>> hope there is not a strong objection to allowing this vote to  
>>> occur as part of the Thursday meeting.  If there is strong  
>>> objection, then I believe we will need to vote on a specific  
>>> delay as part of the Wednesday meeting.
>>>
>>> thanks
>>>
>>> a.
>>>
>>>
>>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20071026/7b28da79/attachment.html>