ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


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

Re: [gnso-idnc-initial] Notes from today's call

  • To: "Olof Nordling" <olof.nordling@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [gnso-idnc-initial] Notes from today's call
  • From: "Olga Cavalli" <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 15:38:32 -0300

Dear collegues,
Thanks Olof for the notes.
Please note that I waited for the operator´s call as usual, as the 0800
number does not work when calling from Argentina.
I usually make this arrangements with Glen, perhaps I should have told this
to Edmond before, my apologies for this.
Unfortunately I was not called so I could not participate. Let me know next
steps or date/time for next conference calls.

2008/2/19, Olof Nordling <olof.nordling@xxxxxxxxx>:
> Dear all,
> Please find some very brief notes from today's call below.
> Best regards
> Olof
> PS. The meeting was recorded so full information from the call will be
> available shortly. Marilyn - please provide this to the list when you get
> it.
> -------------------
> GNSO IDNC Initial Report response drafting group
> Notes from conference call 19 February 2008
> Participants: Edmon Chung (chair), Cary Karp, Charles Sha'ban; ICANN
> staff: Tina Dam, Marilyn Vernon, Olof Nordling
> The meeting addressed the chair's draft response as sent to the list. This
> draft is largely based on statements in the GNSO response to the Issues
> Report and in the GNSO IDN WG Outcomes Report.
> 1. General comments
> - neutral statements on registry eligibility criteria preferred, to avoid
> bias in favour of existing ccTLD registries
> - some statements could be drafted in a less prescriptive way
> - structure of the document could be clarified, with "comments" and
> "responses" possibly merged
> -
> 2. Comments per section
> 2.1. Introduction
> - clarification of items 4 and 5 could be considered
> 2.2. Mechanisms
> - regarding the "currency" question/statement, it should be realized that
> not all relevant territories print their own money
> - regarding A(i), there was good progress on this matter at the workshop
> in ND. The need to express minority statements at this stage is not obvious.
> Also, the sensitivities relating to sovereignty aspects should be kept in
> mind when drafting.
> 3. Conclusions, next steps
> - Edmon will amend the text, with Cary's and Tina's assistance on selected
> matters, and send a new draft to the list
> - Tina will try to get an early release of the transcript from the
> workshop in ND, for the group's information
> - a new call is needed early next week, 25 or 26 February, with a view to
> enable discussions in Council on 28 February
> - a GSO response needs to be submitted by 4 March

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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy