krosette at cov.com
Fri May 6 21:16:48 UTC 2011
I would prefer that it not go to the Board until we've reviewed and acted on. (I have no objection to our commenting via list, but we'd have to have a formal motion and we can't do that until the 19th, right?)
If ALAC nonetheless forwards, the report should clearly indicate, via front cover black box (or something equally visually prominent), that the GNSO has not yet acted on the report (or received it, for that matter, if that's true at the time).
From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
Sent: Friday, May 06, 2011 2:23 PM
To: council at gnso.icann.org GNSO
Cc: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
Subject: [council] JAS
Just a heads up on a conversation I had today with ALAC Chair Olivier Crepin Leblond.
The JAS group is apparently ready with its final report and ALAC would like to send it to the Board asap. The deadline for consideration at the next Board meeting is May 9 (yes, that's this Monday). ALAC could apparently make this deadline.
I explained to Olivier that there was no way the GNSO could have that a quick a turnaround (also bearing in mind the fact that we have not had the report from the JAS group yet).
I indicated that, depending on when we get the report, the earliest we could consider it is at our next meeting (May 19). I also said that I thought the GNSO would prefer that the report not be forwarded by ALAC before we had had a chance to see it, although I did not know that for sure. But I told Olivier of our recent experiences with the JIG and the ccNSO.
Please do not hesitate to comment. Do you think we can move faster? Should we? Rafik, your thoughts on this are of course very much appreciated, as I am only painting the picture from what I understand the situation to be, and may be wrong.
Thanks and a great weekend to you all.
More information about the council