ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


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

Re: [gnso-secs] RE: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: Mp3, Attendance & AC Chat from SCI call 02 June 2016

  • To: "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman@xxxxxxxx>, "'Amr Elsadr'" <aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Sara Bockey <sbockey@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [gnso-secs] RE: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: Mp3, Attendance & AC Chat from SCI call 02 June 2016
  • From: Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2016 07:01:45 +0000

Dear Anne,

Outlook appointments are, and have been for two years now, sent as both. First 
as direct appointments, and immediately afterwards, as ics attachments, as some 
members’ calendars did not accept our direct appointments. The direct 
appointments however, still do need to be accepted by the recipient, before 
appearing on the recipient’s calendar.

We have asked tech-support for work arounds and they have tried many solutions. 
The mailing server we use, mailman, is the best suited for most calendars, but 
not all.

Here is the reply from tech support:


Sending from the Outlook Policy Calendar is not the issue here. The issue 
arises from using mailman lists to perform calendaring tasks.

Different email systems (think Gmail vs. Yahoo vs. Exchange) handle the 
attached calendar items sent via mailman differently. This is a particularly a 
problem with updates to already placed calendar items. Most email systems will 
manage it just fine, but some important ones don't: specifically gmail.”

The way forward here I believe is to always download the ics attachment, which 
takes seconds, to hyour calendar, to ensure the invitation is o there. As a 
reminder, the direct appointment and the ics attachment are always sent as a 
first invitation to the meeting, NOT with the reminder. They are also always 
sent from the same mailing list; ntfy-gnso-improvement-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx so a 
quick inbox search should be quicker.

Please let us know if this helps,

Kind regards


From: "owner-gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx>" 
<owner-gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx>> on behalf of 
"Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman@xxxxxxxx<mailto:AAikman@xxxxxxxx>>
Date: Monday, June 6, 2016 at 11:39 PM
To: Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx>>, Sara Bockey 
Cc: Terri Agnew <terri.agnew@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:terri.agnew@xxxxxxxxx>>, Lori 
Schulman <lschulman@xxxxxxxx<mailto:lschulman@xxxxxxxx>>, Michelle DeSmyter 
Subject: [gnso-secs] RE: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: Mp3, Attendance & AC Chat 
from SCI call 02 June 2016

TO STAFF – I am still wondering why the Outlook appointments are not sent as 
direct Outlook appointments rather than attachments.  I do not think I have 
been getting any direct Outlook appointment requests from SCI.  I wonder 
whether this manner of proceeding would take care of the problem that has been 
reported by many members to have caused them to miss meetings.


Anne E. Aikman-Scalese

Of Counsel

520.629.4428 office

520.879.4725 fax




Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP

One South Church Avenue, Suite 700

Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611


 [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Amr Elsadr
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2016 6:47 AM
To: Sara Bockey
Cc: Terri Agnew; Lori Schulman; Michelle DeSmyter; 
Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: Mp3, Attendance & AC Chat from SCI 
call 02 June 2016


Same here. Not having a calendar invite, I had checked the GNSO Calendar to 
confirm that the SCI call was scheduled on June 2nd — just to be sure.

I did however, receive an email notification from Terri on June 2nd for the 
June 16th call.



On Jun 2, 2016, at 10:53 PM, Sara Bockey 
<sbockey@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:sbockey@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

I’ve checked all files and I didn’t receive either of the emails.


From: Terri Agnew <terri.agnew@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:terri.agnew@xxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Thursday, June 2, 2016 at 1:49 PM
To: Sara Bockey <sbockey@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:sbockey@xxxxxxxxxxx>>, Lori 
Schulman <lschulman@xxxxxxxx<mailto:lschulman@xxxxxxxx>>, Michelle DeSmyter 
Cc: "gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx>" 
Subject: RE: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: Mp3, Attendance & AC Chat from SCI 
call 02 June 2016

I see Michelle sent out both the calendar invite and email invite for the next 
call taking place on 16 June at 18:00 UTC.

Do you see the emails? One would have been from Michelle, the other from the 
policy calendar.

Make sure to check your spam folders.

Let me know.

Thank you,


From: owner-gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Sara Bockey
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 3:41 PM
To: Lori Schulman <lschulman@xxxxxxxx<mailto:lschulman@xxxxxxxx>>; Michelle 
DeSmyter <michelle.desmyter@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:michelle.desmyter@xxxxxxxxx>>; 
Cc: gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx>; Sara Bockey 
Subject: [gnso-secs] Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: Mp3, Attendance & AC Chat 
from SCI call 02 June 2016

I’ve had a similar issue.  While I didn’t receive a calendar invite I had 
entered today’s meeting manually to my calendar during our last meeting 2 wks 
ago.  Yesterday I added the AdobeConnect link (the entry was still there), but 
this morning it was gone.  This is the second time this has happened but it’s 
only been with SCI for me. So strange!


 on behalf of Lori Schulman <lschulman@xxxxxxxx<mailto:lschulman@xxxxxxxx>>
Date: Thursday, June 2, 2016 at 1:22 PM
To: Michelle DeSmyter 
Cc: "gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx>" 
Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: Mp3, Attendance & AC Chat from SCI call 02 
June 2016

My apologies for today’s meeting.  Once again, the call was dropped from my 
calendar.  This seems to be an ongoing issue with ICANN invites not just for 
SCI but for other groups as well.  I will work with my IT department to see if 
the problem is  on our end.

Lori S. Schulman
Senior Director, Internet Policy
International Trademark Association (INTA)
+1-202-704-0408, Skype: lsschulman

 [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Michelle DeSmyter
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 3:47 PM
To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Mp3, Attendance & AC Chat from SCI call 02 
June 2016

Dear All,
Please find the MP3 recording of the Standing Committee on Improvements 
Implementation meeting held on Thursday, 02 June 2016: 


(transcripts and recording are found on the calendar page)

Anne Aikman-Scalese – IPC – Primary – Vice Chair
Rudi Vansnick – NPOC –Primary –Chair
Sara Bockey – RrSG – Primary
Wolf-Ulrich Knoben – ISPCP – Primary
Angie Graves – BC – Primary
Renata Aquino-Ribeiro – NCUC - Alternate

Amr Elsadr – NCUC – Primary
Lawrence Olawale-Roberts – BC - Alternate

ICANN Staff:
Mary Wong
Julie Hedlund
Glen de Saint Gery
Michelle DeSmyter

 ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list **
Let me know if you have any questions.
Thank you.
Kind regards,
Michelle DeSmyter

Adobe Chat Transcript 02 June 2016
 Michelle DeSmyter:Dear All, Welcome to the Standing Committee on Improvements 
Implementation call on Thursday, 02 June 2016 at 18:00 UTC.
  Wolf-Ulrich Knoben:Hi all
  Sara Bockey:hello
  Rudi Vansnick:welcome Wolf-Ulrich, Sara
  Rudi Vansnick:waiting for the other members
  Rudi Vansnick:we have apologies from Amr
  Rudi Vansnick:welcome Angie, Anne
  Angie Graves:Thank you.  Dialing in now
  Angie Graves:My apologies for my delay
  Wolf-Ulrich Knoben:now I understand the point...
  Anne Aikman-Scalese:I don't have a strong opinion either way - just would 
like to know what our draft language actually means in this regard.
  Anne Aikman-Scalese:We should add after "on an interim basis" the following 
(i.e. during the 14 days)
  Sara Bockey:I agree with Anne on #4...I think we should be explicit in what 
is meant and currently some could view this as a grey area
  Wolf-Ulrich Knoben:+1
  Mary Wong:Shall we just insert "within the allotted time period" in 4, after 
"interim basis"? ie remove from 2 & 3 as noted, but iinsert in 4 for clarity?
  Anne Aikman-Scalese:@ Mary - that would certainly also work for me - for 
  Rudi Vansnick:good proposal Mary ... let's get agreement on this ...
  Anne Aikman-Scalese:FYI that was my original proposal - put in 4 the language 
you are taking out of the last sentence of 3.
  Mary Wong:@Anne, so it was!
  Anne Aikman-Scalese:I think we can still send out for consensus call with 
changes in language made today.
  Mary Wong:Two weeks from today will be 16 June, so Amr can provide a written 
update to the Council at that time, before people start traveling to Helsinki.
  Anne Aikman-Scalese:@Mary - sounds good!
  Anne Aikman-Scalese:When does GNSO meet in Helsinki?  is there a weekend 
meeting before or no such meeting?  (Not as to SCI - just a question.)
  Julie Hedlund:@Anne: The GNSO Council meeting is on Thursday, and a short 
meeting on Monday for preparation, and no weekend session.
  Anne Aikman-Scalese:Thank you Julie.  I have Accountability on Sunday so was 
just checking.
  Michelle DeSmyter:Welcome Renata!
  renata aquino ribeiro:apologies for joining so late. connection issue.
  Julie Hedlund:Thanks so much everyone!
  renata aquino ribeiro:Planning for Hyderabad?
  Julie Hedlund:Drinks sound good :-)
  Anne Aikman-Scalese:Thanks everyone.  Goodbye - hope we can all have a drink 
together in Helsinki!
  renata aquino ribeiro:ok thanks
  Sara Bockey:Thank you all!
  Mary Wong:Thanks all!
  Anne Aikman-Scalese:Thank you Rudi.
  Wolf-Ulrich Knoben:Thanks Rudi, Anne and all. See you in Helsinki


This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the 
individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message 
or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent 
responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient 
you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this 
message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. 
The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be 
privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the 
intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy 
Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.

Attachment: image003.png
Description: image003.png

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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy