RE: [gnso-raa-b] Draft Presentation on Initial Report for Monday's Session

["Trachtenberg, Marc H." <MTrachtenberg@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree as well.

Marc H.  Trachtenberg
Winston & Strawn LLP
35 W. Wacker Drive
Chicago, IL 60601-9703
D: +1 (312) 558-7964
M: +1 (773) 677-3305      
F: +1 (312) 558-5700
http://www.winston.com
http://twitter.com/winstonadlaw


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-raa-b@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-raa-b@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf 
Of Rosette, Kristina
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 3:30 PM
To: Avri Doria; gnso-raa-b@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: gnso-rrc-a@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-raa-b] Draft Presentation on Initial Report for Monday's 
Session


+1 (or should that be 2?)

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-raa-b@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-raa-b@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 3:49 PM
To: gnso-raa-b@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: gnso-rrc-a@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-raa-b] Draft Presentation on Initial Report for
Monday's Session


+1


On 16 Jun 2010, at 14:34, Metalitz, Steven wrote:

> I disagree, this is part of our assignment, and part of our report.
It is up for public comment and should be at least mentioned in the
presentation.
>
> From: Hammock, Statton [mailto:shammock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 2:01 PM
> To: Metalitz, Steven; Margie Milam; gnso-raa-b@xxxxxxxxx;
> gnso-rrc-a@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gnso-raa-b] Draft Presentation on Initial Report for
> Monday's Session
>
> Steve,
> 
> I am not sure that I agree that we should have a slide that lays out
the three staked out positions on next steps because this might generate
a debate on this particular topic which is not the purpose of the
meeting, nor I believe, the forum for it.  We need to be sure we
complete our presentation and that we have enough time for the panel
discussion. 
> 
> Statton
> 
> 
> 
> From: owner-gnso-raa-b@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-raa-b@xxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Metalitz, Steven
> Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 4:49 PM
> To: Margie Milam; gnso-raa-b@xxxxxxxxx; gnso-rrc-a@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gnso-raa-b] Draft Presentation on Initial Report for
> Monday's Session
> 
> Thanks Margie, these look good.
> 
>  (1)  We need an additional slide regarding the recommended next steps
on RAA amendments (this would go just before law enforcement
perspectives):
> 
> Strong Support:  Include observers in negotiations (representing
> interests of affected non-parties)
> 
> Substantial Opposition:  Only registrars and ICANN staff in
> negotiations
> 
> Some Subteam Members:  Third parties should be full participants in
> negotiations
> 
> Agreement that there must be periodic reports from negotiations,
including text.
> 
> (2)  Should the blank slide read "Questions/Comments"?
> 
> Steve
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> From: owner-gnso-raa-b@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-raa-b@xxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Margie Milam
> Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 3:38 PM
> To: gnso-raa-b@xxxxxxxxx; gnso-rrc-a@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [gnso-raa-b] Draft Presentation on Initial Report for
> Monday's Session
>
> Dear All,
> 
> Please find attached for your review draft slides  for Monday's
presentation on the RAA Initial Report.
> 
> Please provide your comments or revisions by COB on this Thursday,  17
June 2010.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Margie
> 
> _______________
> Margie Milam
> Senior Policy Counselor
> ICANN
> _______________






The contents of this message may be privileged and confidential. Therefore, if 
this message has been received in error, please delete it without reading it. 
Your receipt of this message is not intended to waive any applicable privilege. 
Please do not disseminate this message without the permission of the author.
******************************************************************************
Any tax advice contained in this email was not intended to be used, and cannot 
be used, by you (or any other taxpayer) to avoid penalties under the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.