<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[gnso-policyimpl-wg] RE: For review - Updated draft Final Report - Deadline for flagging issues for further consideration - Wednesday 20 May
- To: "'Marika Konings'" <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>, "gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] RE: For review - Updated draft Final Report - Deadline for flagging issues for further consideration - Wednesday 20 May
- From: "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 17:25:21 +0000
Thanks Marika. I am still a bit concerned that we will get a question as to
why anyone would ever initiate a GGP if it takes just as long as an EPDP.
People might have a tendency to say - why do a GGP when you may determine in
that process that Consensus Policy is involved and if it will take just as
long? Why not just start with an EPDP and eliminate the complication of having
two different procedures to initiate?
I am asking this because I think it is a question that could reasonably be
asked by a Council Member when we make our Final Report. I do not think that
“Yes, but it MIGHT be shorter” is a good answer to that question.
I wish I had a suggestion for shortening the GGP process – or a mechanism for
the GGP Team to determine within a fixed shorter period of time – e.g. 60 days,
whether an EPDP is necessary.
Anne
[cid:image001.gif@01D0921B.75E26D10]
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese, Of Counsel
Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP |
One South Church Avenue Suite 700 | Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
(T) 520.629.4428 | (F) 520.879.4725
AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx> |
www.LRRLaw.com<http://www.lrrlaw.com/>
From: owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Marika Konings
Sent: Monday, May 18, 2015 6:26 AM
To: gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] For review - Updated draft Final Report -
Deadline for flagging issues for further consideration - Wednesday 20 May
Dear All,
Please find attached the latest version of the draft Policy & Implementation
Final Report. This version includes the changes made during last week’s PI
meeting as well as proposed language to reflect that the GGP and IRT should not
be used to re-open previously dealt with policy issues (note, I’ve marked these
changes with a comment). You’ll also find included a new annex H with the
estimated timelines. Staff comments that were addressed during the last meeting
have been removed, but please note that there are a still a couple of staff
comments in Annex I and K that have not been discussed yet.
As noted before, please flag any other items that require further discussion by
the WG prior to the WG meeting on Wednesday 20 May.
Best regards,
Marika
From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Wednesday 13 May 2015 22:47
To: "gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>"
<gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Deadline for flagging issues for further
consideration - Wednesday 20 May
Dear All,
Following today’s meeting, please note that the deadline for flagging any other
items that need further consideration by the WG in relation to the draft Final
Report is next Wednesday 20 May prior to the PI WG meeting. For your
convenience, you’ll find the latest draft attached. Note that an updated
version incorporating the issues discussed during today’s meeting will be
circulated early next week.
Best regards,
Marika
________________________________
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.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|