Re: [gnso-iocrc-dt] [gnso-igo-ingo] IGO-INGO PDP WG Action Items

[Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>]

Regarding incumbents, the current reserved lists have changed from 
time to time, and if I remember correctly, the contracts have words 
that allow them to renew registrations for strings that are added, 
but not accept new registrations. Of course that was before the 
concept of registrations never really expiring but being transferred 
to knew owners (auction, etc) without going through the drop procedure.
Alan

At 01/11/2012 12:39 AM, Avri Doria wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Thanks.  From the note with the charter, I got the impression that 
> the work was nearly done.
> Another suggestion for a spilt.
>
> The deliverable for how to handle any recommendation on the 
> incumbents might take longer than the decisions for having new reservations.
> A separate group may want to work on ways of achieving the results 
> in incumbents, though that may be able to wait a bit.
> I am going to download the call for the flight to Baku.
>
> avri
>
>
>
> On 31 Oct 2012, at 23:42, Alan Greenberg wrote:
>
> >
> > Avri, the request was not rejected. We didn't come anywhere near 
> discussing the content of the charter with the exception of the 
> concept of splitting into two groups and the need for an external 
> legal review of laws/legislation.
> >
> > Happy listening.
> >
> > Alan
> >
> > At 31/10/2012 09:41 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> >
> >
> >> On 31 Oct 2012, at 20:39, Brian Peck wrote:
> >>
> >> > <IGO-INGO_WG_WorkPlan_07NOV2012.doc>
> >>
> >>
> >> As I indicated in my previous note where sent apologies due to conflict:
> >>
> >> > One request I would like to make on the issues up-front is 
> that the work items include doing impact analysis (rights, 
> competition etc) on any recommendations made.
> >> > I know this is in the defined PDP process, but many of the 
> elements of the PDP are, for example the process to be used, yet we 
> repeat them in the charters of WG.  Until such time as impact 
> analysis (rights, competition etc..) is an understood and expect 
> element that needs no mention, I beleive it is critical that it be mentioned.
> >> >
> >> > In this case I expect that impact analysis goes beyond 
> pro-forma but is substantive given the arguments of the RCRC and 
> others related to to humanitarian principles, human rights and 
> international law.
> >>
> >> I will try to listen to the recording to understand why this 
> request was rejected.
> >>
> >> In the meantime I request that the following be aded to the 
> Mission and Scope under elements for the final Report
> >>
> >> - Impact analysis, including rights, competition and other , for 
> any recommendations made by the WG.
> >>
> >> thanks
> >>
> >> avri
> >
> >