RE: [gnso-trans-pdp] RE: [council] Summary of Public Comments - IRTP PDP on Clarification of DenialReasons

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

Helpful clarification Tim & Barbara.

Chuck Gomes 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-trans-pdp@xxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-gnso-trans-pdp@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Steele, Barbara
> Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 1:23 PM
> To: Tim Ruiz; Olof Nordling
> Cc: gnso-trans-pdp@xxxxxxxxx; Council GNSO
> Subject: RE: [gnso-trans-pdp] RE: [council] Summary of Public 
> Comments - IRTP PDP on Clarification of DenialReasons
> 
> 
> That is my understanding as well, Tim. 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Barbara Steele
> Compliance Officer
> VeriSign Information Services
> bsteele@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Direct: 703.948.3343
> Mobile: 703.622.1071
> Fax:  703.421.4873
> 21345 Ridgetop Circle
> Dulles, VA  20166
> 
> 
> Notice to Recipient:  This e-mail contains confidential, 
> proprietary and/or Registry Sensitive information intended 
> solely for the recipient and, thus may not be retransmitted, 
> reproduced or disclosed without the prior written consent of 
> VeriSign Naming and Directory Services.  If you have received 
> this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender 
> immediately by telephone or reply e-mail and destroy the 
> original message without making a copy.  Thank you.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-trans-pdp@xxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-gnso-trans-pdp@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz
> Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 11:44 AM
> To: Olof Nordling
> Cc: gnso-trans-pdp@xxxxxxxxx; Council GNSO
> Subject: [gnso-trans-pdp] RE: [council] Summary of Public 
> Comments - IRTP PDP on Clarification of DenialReasons
> 
> 
> I'd like to explain what I believe to be the group's 
> reasoning for not accepting the IPC's proposal. I want to 
> assure Steve and the IPC that we did not gloss over their 
> proposal. It was carefully considered.
> 
> While the group's work was part of a PDP, the Council created 
> it as a "drafting team charged with producing a 
> recommendation for Council deliberation that includes precise 
> wording for the 4 provisions for reason for denial of 
> Inter-Registrar transfers." 
> 
> As a result, we understood our task to be "clarification" of 
> the existing reasons based on the previous and extensive work 
> already done under this PDP to determine the original intent 
> of each reason, and not one of recommending changes to the 
> policy. The IPC proposed wording, while well reasoned, we 
> believed constituted a change and/or addition to the original 
> intent of those reasons, and therefore a change in the policy. 
> 
> We used the same approach when addressing the other two 
> reasons. While the previous work done under the PDP seemed 
> clear that the majority of stakeholders were in agreement as 
> to the original intent of reasons #8 and #9, that was not so 
> clear regarding reasons #5 and #7. As a result, we felt they 
> would be best considered during one of the upcoming Transfer PDPs.
> 
> Disclaimer: This is my recollection. Others on the drafting 
> team may recall things differently.
> 
>  
> Tim 
> 
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [council] Summary of Public Comments - IRTP PDP on 
> Clarification of DenialReasons
> From: Olof Nordling <olof.nordling@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Wed, July 23, 2008 9:36 am
> To: Council GNSO <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: "gnso-trans-pdp@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-trans-pdp@xxxxxxxxx>
> 
> 
> Dear Council Members,                (cc: drafting group list)
> Attached please find a summary of the public comments outcome 
> of the recent posting for this PDP, for your information and 
> consideration of further steps to take.
> Very best regards
> Olof 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>