ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[At-Large Advisory Committee]

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [alac] RE: [council] Request for issues report from ALAC

  • To: "'Bret Fausett'" <bfausett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "'Bruce Tonkin'" <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "'Council GNSO'" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [alac] RE: [council] Request for issues report from ALAC
  • From: "Roberto Gaetano" <roberto@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 00:31:17 -0000

Please tell me if I have missed something.

The facts that I recall are the following:
- there has been the launch of a workshop on different issues related to
domain names market, including domain name tasting
- there has been some confusion about ALAC participation, due also to the
fact that I have been offline for events beyond my control, and did not
answer a nominative request
- there has been a discussion on the matter, during which somebody (I can't
remember if John or Wendy) has proposed a PDP on grace period & domain name
- I have replied verbatim:
"I have mixed feelings about this PDP. 
We had extensive discussion in the Board about the whole matter of grace
period, and we came to the conclusion that even if the system seems
obviously wrong, it is not at all clear whether the registry, who seems to
suffer more, does not even end up in having benefits from it. 
I believe that we should see what comes up in the round table."
- nobody else, to my recollection, picked up the subject of the PDP

Here's my question:
How comes that the proposal from one or two individuals becomes the
consensus position of ALAC without further discussion, and translates in an
official request from ALAC to a Supporting Organization?

As I do not have access to the GNSO Council mailing list, may I kindly
request Bruce to forward this message to the appropriate recipients.

Best regards,
Roberto Gaetano
ICANN Board Liaison

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-alac@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-alac@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Bret Fausett
> Sent: 29 June 2006 20:45
> To: 'Bruce Tonkin'; 'Council GNSO'
> Cc: annette.muehlberg@xxxxxx; alac@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [alac] RE: [council] Request for issues report from ALAC
> Yes, Bruce. The ALAC will send a formal request on this. You 
> should receive it in the next day or so. We will transmit to 
> Staff and the Board as well.
>           Bret
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin
> > Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 3:19 AM
> > To: Council GNSO
> > Cc: annette.muehlberg@xxxxxx
> > Subject: [council] Request for issues report from ALAC
> > 
> > Hello All,
> > 
> > I have just heard the ALAC presentation in the public forum.
> > 
> > There was mention of a request to produce an issues report 
> on domain 
> > name tasting.
> > 
> > For reference, please note from the Policy Development process in 
> > Annex A: GNSO Policy-Development Process
> > 
> > http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#AnnexA
> > 
> > 1. Raising an Issue
> > 
> > An issue may be raised for consideration as part of the PDP 
> by any of 
> > the following:
> > 
> > c. Advisory Committee Initiation. An Advisory Committee may 
> raise an 
> > issue for policy development by action of such committee to 
> commence 
> > the PDP, and transmission of that request to the GNSO Council.
> > 
> > I assume if ALAC wants an issues report on this topic that 
> they will 
> > formally transmit a request to the GNSO Council.
> > 
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Bruce Tonkin
> > Chair, GNSO Council
> > 
> > 

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy