[council] Some initial reactions from the ccNSO on the GNSO's message to Board regarding IDN TLDs

Adrian Kinderis adrian at ausregistry.com.au
Tue Jan 15 09:13:58 UTC 2008


Thanks for this follow up.

I think both points are valid and desirable.

I would certainly support them.

Adrian Kinderis
Managing Director
AusRegistry Group Pty Ltd
Level 8, 10 Queens Road
Melbourne. Victoria Australia. 3004
Ph: +61 3 9866 3710
Fax: +61 3 9866 1970
Email: adrian at ausregistry.com
Web: www.ausregistrygroup.com

The information contained in this communication is intended for the
named recipients only. It is subject to copyright and may contain
legally privileged and confidential information and if you are not an
intended recipient you must not use, copy, distribute or take any action
in reliance on it. If you have received this communication in error,
please delete all copies from your system and notify us immediately.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org]
On Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Tuesday, 15 January 2008 7:59 PM
To: Council GNSO
Subject: [council] Some initial reactions from the ccNSO on the GNSO's
message to Board regarding IDN TLDs


I have been having some background discussions with Chris Desspain,  
the chair of the ccNSO council, and others regarding the GNSO  
council's message and request to the Board.    At, at least, the first  
reading, there has been some level of concern on his part and the part  
of others in the ccNSO community with our message to the Board  
relating to IDN TLDs.  It has been interpreted by some as indicating  
that the GNSO is against the fast track and against IDNs.  While I  
tried to explain that this is neither what was written nor what was  
intended, it does seem to be interpreted that way by some.  The ccNSO  
is meeting today to discuss a reaction to the GNSO council's message.   
I expect to have more information on that tomorrow.

Regardless of what happens with their reaction two possibilities have  
come out of the discussion:

- the possibility of a face to face meeting between the two councils  
in New Delhi to discuss some of the different perspectives on the IDN  
TLD issue

- the exchange of liaisons between the two councils, so that in the  
future there would be a better understanding of each others  
intentions, processes and decisions.

I would like to find out if there is support for these two items among  
others on the council.



More information about the council mailing list