[Ws2-jurisdiction] Agenda for Meeting #16 at 13:00 UTC

[Kavouss Arasteh]

Dear Greg,
Thank for your efforts. White am studying your text and that of
Parminder, please kindly note  that after I agreed with your explanation ,
I have suggested a very simple amendments to the text of Astérix, by adding
the word " including " before ICANN and by also adding a comma with the
following text
" as the case may be"
Pls kindly include that simple amendments
Regards
Kavouss


2017-01-10 13:34 GMT+01:00 Perez Galindo, Rafael <RPEREZGA at minetad.es>:

> +1 Ghislain.
>
>
>
> Rafael
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *De:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-
> bounces at icann.org] *En nombre de *DE SALINS Ghislain
> *Enviado el:* martes, 10 de enero de 2017 11:05
> *Para:* gregshatanipc at gmail.com; ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org
> *CC:* acct-staff at icann.org
> *Asunto:* Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] Agenda for Meeting #16 at 13:00 UTC
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> I’m a bit surprised by all the tension generated in this subgroup due to
> the mere possibility of sending a one-page questionnaire to gather the
> input from the broader community.
>
>
>
> I am also confused about the repeated claim that because the current
> jurisdiction has worked for 19 years, then we should not change anything at
> all. Why did we through the whole IANA transition and accountability
> process then?
>
>
>
> Just because it worked – for some – does not mean it can’t be enhanced,
> nor does it mean that new problems won’t arise in the near future. Farzaneh
> and Parminder gave very precise examples of current problems that are
> specifically caused by the current US jurisdiction.
>
>
>
> Based on my reading of previous exchanges, I think *it is important to
> keep question 4* and, like Jorge, in the spirit of compromise, I would
> accept to support alternative 1, if we include the change proposed by Seun
> and supported by Parminder (taking into account “future” cases in which the
> current jurisdiction might be a problem).
>
>
>
> We owe the community a thorough examination of the jurisdiction issue, and
> for those of you who might not remember that, the acceptance of the
> Marrakech package was based on the commitment to deliver that through WS2.
>
>
>
> That being said, asking for knowledge regarding alternative jurisdictions
> is, in my opinion, yet another issue. It sounds more like a theoretical /
> academic question at this stage. My suggestion would be to add a Question 5
> on possible alternative jurisdictions – Eric and Parminder already
> presented some possible ways – that would be distinct from Question 4.
>
>
>
> Anyway, please let’s keep an open mind, talk to each other with respect
> and try not to prevent anyone from expressing their views. Let’s work in
> the spirit of compromise.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
>
>
> Ghislain de SALINS
>
> GAC French representative
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *De :* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-
> bounces at icann.org <ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org>] *De la part de*
> Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch
> *Envoyé :* mardi 10 janvier 2017 10:26
> *À :* gregshatanipc at gmail.com; ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org
> *Cc :* acct-staff at icann.org
> *Objet :* [***] Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] Agenda for Meeting #16 at 13:00 UTC
>
>
>
> Dear Greg and all
>
>
>
> Please accept my apologies for missing this meeting, but it collides with
> a prior F2F engagement.
>
>
>
> @staff: if any polling takes place, please take into account that I favor
> alternative 1 for question 4. Also, that I believe that a flexible and
> constructive approach from all participants regarding this specific
> questions would help to get our work out of the present impasse. After all,
> “it’s only a question”… the answers which may come in will be analyzed on
> their merits by us and the wider CCWG…
>
>
>
> Best regards
>
>
>
> Jorge
>
>
>
> *Von:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-
> bounces at icann.org <ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org>] *Im Auftrag von *Greg
> Shatan
> *Gesendet:* Dienstag, 10. Januar 2017 06:18
> *An:* ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org>
> *Cc:* acct-staff at icann.org
> *Betreff:* [Ws2-jurisdiction] Agenda for Meeting #16 at 13:00 UTC
>
>
>
> All,
>
>
>
> Here is the Agenda for the upcoming meeting.  Supporting materials will be
> sent shortly.
>
>
>
> Greg
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list
> Ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-jurisdiction/attachments/20170110/5af9bc31/attachment-0001.html>