[GNSO-TPR] Post Call | Transfer Policy Review PDP WG | Tuesday, 22 March 2022
steinar at recito.no
Wed Mar 23 07:00:02 UTC 2022
The minutes from the call connected to my update from the At-Large discussion on the transfer locks. The sentence “The results showed support for a 60-day period for locks as well as 30 days” is not correct. More accurate is that the “majority of the CPWG members were in favor of reducing the lock period for post-create and post transfer locks”.
The poll results – as distributed to the GNSO-TPR mailing list, show that the 60 days alternative had 7% of the votes, while the 10 days and 30 days lock were favored.
I hope the minutes can be updated accordingly.
From: GNSO-TPR <gnso-tpr-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Julie Bisland <julie.bisland at icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, 22 March 2022 at 18:58
To: gnso-tpr at icann.org <gnso-tpr at icann.org>
Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org <gnso-secs at icann.org>
Subject: [GNSO-TPR] Post Call | Transfer Policy Review PDP WG | Tuesday, 22 March 2022
All recordings for the Transfer Policy Review PDP WG call held on Tuesday, 22 March 2022 at 16:00 UTC can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/KBAiCw> (attendance included) and the GNSO Master calendar [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar/2022__;!!PtGJab4!vZdE84iVM-1QJ1D7deBk7YLs762A0a7CKZCW9WEuS-kwSDVItUTQIDSY2VVe4xM40A6qESvEAw$>.
* Audio recording
* Zoom chat archive
* Zoom recording (including audio, visual, rough transcript)
As a reminder only members and alternates can join the call as a Panelist, observers can join as an Attendee to listen.
For additional information, you may consult the mailing list archives <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-tpr/> and the main wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/P4aUCQ>.
With kind regards,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the GNSO-TPR