RE: [gnso-rn-wg] Report for Other Names at the 2nd Level

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

It seems like it would be good to  at least add a statement similar to
Patrick's in the report.
 
Chuck Gomes
 
"This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any
unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If
you have received this message in error, please notify sender
immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission." 
 


________________________________

        From: owner-gnso-rn-wg@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-rn-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Patrick Jones
        Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 12:42 PM
        To: 'Shatan, Gregory S.'; 'GNSO RN WG'
        Subject: RE: [gnso-rn-wg] Report for Other Names at the 2nd
Level
        
        

        Greg,

         

        To clarify your reference to .travel below, on the March 8 (if
not earlier) I mentioned that the Travel Partnership Corporation has
been running a comment period within their sponsored community on a
potential premium name auction. Information about the announcement and
comment period is available at http://www.ttpc.org/announce.htm. This
has not yet been proposed to ICANN, but it at least demonstrates that
Tralliance has plans to potentially allocate these names.

         

        Patrick

         

        
________________________________


        From: owner-gnso-rn-wg@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-rn-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Shatan, Gregory S.
        Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 9:28 AM
        To: Gomes, Chuck; GNSO RN WG
        Subject: RE: [gnso-rn-wg] Report for Other Names at the 2nd
Level

         

        As discussed on yesterday's call, please consider the following
friendly amendment to the this report, as follows, to be placed at the
beginning of section C.1:

         

        These names differ from ICANN reserved names in that the names
are actually intended to be allocated by the Registries. Therefore, the
names arguably fall outside the remit of this particular Working Group.
However, allocation plans for these Registries are, in many cases,
uncertain and have no timing requirements. At least one registry
(.travel) has indicated it has no current plans to allocate these names.
Thus, it is quite possible that these names could remain unallocated for
extremely long periods of time, and become de facto reserved names.  In
order to avoid this result, registries should be encouraged to have
clear allocation plans with regard to these names, including plans with
regard to timing, with a goal to allocating these names within a
reasonable period of time.  It may also be preferable if these names
were set forth in an Appendix and considered during the approval process
for the for the TLD.  

         

        Greg Shatan

         

         

        Gregory S. Shatan 
        Partner 
        ReedSmithLLP 
        599 Lexington Avenue 
        New York, NY 10022 
        212.549.0275 (Phone) 
        917.816.6428 (Mobile) 
        212.521.5450 (Fax) 
        gshatan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
        www.reedsmith.com 

        This e-mail is confidential and may well be legally privileged.
If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status.
Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this
message from your system.  Please do not copy it or use it for any
purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person.  To do so could
violate state and Federal privacy laws.  Thank you for your cooperation.

         

         

        
________________________________


        From: owner-gnso-rn-wg@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-rn-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
        Sent: Monday, March 12, 2007 11:08 AM
        To: GNSO RN WG
        Subject: [gnso-rn-wg] Report for Other Names at the 2nd Level

        Assuming that no later version of this report is sent to the
list before our meeting today, we will use this version to discuss
recommendations today.  Note that it appears that the full subgroup may
not have reached consensus on the recommendations but they will have
opportunity to participate in the discussion in our WG meeting.  Also,
note that the highlighted comments under the recommendations for each of
the three subcategories are my comments for discussion in our call
today.

         

        Chuck Gomes

         

        "This message is intended for the use of the individual or
entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is
privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable
law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify
sender immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission."