ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-igo-ingo]


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

[gnso-igo-ingo] Re: Consolidated Draft of Initial Report for IGO/INGO PDP WG

  • To: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [gnso-igo-ingo] Re: Consolidated Draft of Initial Report for IGO/INGO PDP WG
  • From: Brian Peck <brian.peck@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 15:27:33 -0700

Chuck and David,

Thank you very much for your comments and edits; and for submitting them in
a timely manner, we appreciate it.  Our apologies for the conflicting calls
­ we will incorporate your comments/edits into the draft that will be sent
out prior to next Wednesday's meeting and look forward to following up
afterwards.

Best Regards,

Brian

Brian Peck
Policy Director
ICANN 

From:  <Gomes>, Chuck <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:  Friday, May 31, 2013 3:12 PM
To:  Brian Peck <brian.peck@xxxxxxxxx>, "gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx"
<gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc:  Erika Randall <erika.randall@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject:  RE: Consolidated Draft of Initial Report for IGO/INGO PDP WG

David Maher & I went through all of the proposed edits and comments pretty
thoroughly.  As you can see in the attached file, we did the following:
 
·         We made edits where I thought they were needed, mostly
non-substantive we believe.
 
·         If something was not clear, we flagged it and/or asked questions.
 
·         In a few cases, we confirmed changes made and in a couple cases
disagreed with some comments made.
 
·         In a few cases, we noted that we didn¹t think comments should be
made because the documents in question were simply attachments.
 
Note that we highlighted all of my edits in yellow to make them really
obvious or, if the yellow highlighting didn¹t show, we inserted comments
that are highlighted in yellow.
 
If we assume that a large part of this report is a collection of various
positions of WG members that do not necessarily have WG support, we don¹t
have any major problems with the edits that people have added.
 
We encourage all to check the edits we made to make sure that they are
accurate in terms of what was intended.
 
Because our next meeting conflicts with the regular RySG meeting, neither of
us will be able to attend the WG call but we hope that the input we attached
with this message will contribute to finalization of the report for public
posting.  In the meantime, please feel free to ask questions on the list or
make corrections to changes we suggested.  We will follow up after the WG
call.
 
Chuck
 
 

From: owner-gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Brian Peck
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 7:38 PM
To: gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: Erika Randall
Subject: [gnso-igo-ingo] Consolidated Draft of Initial Report for IGO/INGO
PDP WG 
 

Dear Working Group Members,

 

Thank you again for your comments and suggested edits to the draft Initial
Report, and for your time and contributions during today's WG call.

 

In order to facilitate your review of all the comments received on the first
draft, please find attached a consolidated version of the draft Initial
Report (v.0.8.6.1) ­ thanks to Berry for compiling and consolidating the
comments into one document.

 

This version (v0.8.6.1.) - which will serve as the current working document,
includes all proposed revisions and comments received prior to today's WG
meeting with the exception of those comments from Alan and Chuck which were
discussed and agreed upon during the WG call ­ the relevant revisions based
on those discussions are included in this draft.  Please note that staff is
still working on other comments discussed during today's call pending
further research, clarification and/or re-write.

 

We would like to request that you please review the suggested
revisions/comments in this draft (v.0.8.6.1) and provide any comments and/or
questions relating to any proposed revisions you may have concerns about and
believe the WG should discuss during next week's call.  In order to manage
the number of reviewers and possible comments, we would ask that you please
accommodate our following requests in making any comments:
1. If you would like to submit a comment or question regarding a proposed
revision submitted by other WG members, please use the comment box feature
(Insert Comment) and not embed in the text itself.
2. Please refrain from formatting changes - staff will re-format as
necessary.
3. In order to keep proper track of individual submissions, please only
respond to the version sent by ICANN staff.
Input Deadline:  3 June 23:59 UTC

Next Meeting:    5 June 16:00 UTC

 

Also attached for reference is a pdf version of all the comments originally
received prior to today's discussion (e.g., includes the comments from Alan
and Chuck which were addressed in the current consolidated version).

 

Thank you in advance for your cooperation with these requests ­ prior to
next Wednesday's meeting, we will re-consolidate additional comments and
provide a revised draft which will also include additional completed
revisions based on Alan and Chuck's comments discussed today.  This document
will serve as the basis for the next meeting's discussion.

 

We greatly appreciate your continued support, time and contributions to the
WG.

 

Best Regards,

 

Brian Peck

Policy Director

ICANN 

 


Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature



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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy