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

[Holly Raiche <h.raiche@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think we are up to 3+

But I do share Stratton's concern that the discussion becomes bogged  
down in a way forward - I had hoped that the discussion would centre  
on the issues we spent time on. Maybe have a slide at the end - so we  
can get through the issues identified - and then talk about away forward
Holly
On 17/06/2010, at 6:29 AM, Rosette, Kristina wrote:

> +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
> > _______________
Kind regards

Holly Raiche
Executive Director,
Internet Society of Australia (ISOC-AU)
ed@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Mob: 0412 688 544
Ph: (02) 9436 2149

The Internet is For Everyone