Re: [gnso-ppsc] CALL FOR CONSENSUS: Revised Final GNSO Working Group Guidelines

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

I can accept the PPSC deciding it needs to do a comment period.  Not sure I 
agree (despite my urge to submit a comment), but can certainly accept.  But I 
agree with your logic about the PPSC being in the piston to decide to do one if 
it thinks one is warranted.

What I do not accept is that this group be in the position of telling the 
council whether it should or should not do one and when it should do it.

a.

On 20 Dec 2010, at 13:27, Alan Greenberg wrote:

> Although not a Const/SG rep in the GNSO sense, my answers follow.
> 
> If we think that a public comment period is warranted (which I do), then I 
> think that *we* should be the ones that do it, and then remand back to the 
> WG-WT for any needed adjustments. If Council does the comment period, it 
> would just have to go all the way back at that point anyway (since presumably 
> neither Council nor the PPSC will make content changes).
> 
> If the group does not believe that a comment period is needed, then it can go 
> to Council as is.
> 
> Alan
> 
> At 13/12/2010 12:02 PM, Neuman, Jeff wrote:
>> All,
>>  
>> Please find enclosed the final clean Working Group Work Team Final Report 
>> (and redline) that incorporates all of the changes agreed to by the PPSC.  
>> There have been some updates to the background section to reflect the 
>> current state of the document.
>>  
>> I would like to have affirmative responses from one person from each of the 
>> constituencies/stakeholder groups of the PPSC by no later than December 
>> 20th, 2010 to the following questions:
>>  
>> 1.  Do you accept this report to be final and ready to be transmitted to the 
>> GNSO Council?
>> 2.  Do you believe we should recommend to the GNSO Council that they 
>> commence a public comment period prior to acting on the recommendations 
>> contained within the report?
>>  
>> Although the ALAC does not have a formal „vote‰, I still would like to note 
>> the view of the ALAC representative to the Council when communicating the 
>> report.  Below is a list of members.  As I am the Registry representative, 
>> and also the Chair, I would normally delegate the „vote‰ to my alternate.  
>> Unfortunately, my alternate is no longer active.  I will therefore see 
>> advice from our registry rep on the Working Group work team (Caroline Greer) 
>> and make sure she is comfortable in communicating the registry response.
>> 
>> Thanks.
>> Current Members (updated 18 March 2010):
>> Organization
>> Primary
>> Alternate
>> Other
>> BC
>> Mike Rodenbaugh
>> Zahid Jamil
>>  
>> IPC
>> J. Scott Evans (alternate Chair)
>> Steve Metalitz
>>  
>> ISPC
>> Tony Harris
>> Tony Holmes
>>  
>> NCSG
>> Gabriel Pineiro
>> Konstantinos Komaitis
>> Avri Doria
>> RySG
>> Jeff Neuman (Chair)
>> Catherine Sigmar
>>  
>> RrSG
>> Tim Ruiz
>> Tom Keller
>>  
>> NCA
>> Olga Cavalli (GNSO Council Vice-Chair)
>>  
>>  
>> GNSO Council
>> Chuck Gomes (GNSO Council Chair)
>> Stephane van Gelder (GNSO Council Vice-Chair)
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> Other Participants in the PPSC:
>> Liaison
>> Primary
>> Alternate
>> ALAC
>> Alan Greenberg
>> Cheryl Langdon-Orr
>> GAC
>> Bertrand de la Chappelle
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> Jeffrey J. Neuman 
>> Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy
>> 46000 Center Oak Plaza Sterling, VA 20166
>> Office: +1.571.434.5772  Mobile: +1.202.549.5079  Fax: +1.703.738.7965 / 
>> jeff.neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx   / www.neustar.biz       
>> 
>> The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the 
>> use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or 
>> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have 
>> received this e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, 
>> distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have 
>> received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and 
>> delete the original message.
>>  
>>