ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [gnso-trans-wg] Some thoughts on approach regarding the transfer issues

  • To: "Thomas Keller" <tom@xxxxxxxx>, "Olof Nordling" <olof.nordling@xxxxxxxxx>, <gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [gnso-trans-wg] Some thoughts on approach regarding the transfer issues
  • From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 18:29:25 -0500

Thanks Tom for the good work.  Using what you did, for most of the individual 
recommendations I inserted some questions, comments and suggestions for 
consideration.  They are highlighted in the attached file.

I am supportive of pursuing Tom's suggested grouping of the recommendations and 
then refining it as we look at the individual recommendations.  I suspect that 
we might be able to eliminate some recommendations but that is a decision for 
us to make together.

My comments are quite detailed and might be hard to discuss via email although 
my general approach could probably be discussed by email.  Would it be useful 
for us to have a conference call?


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Thomas Keller
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 10:25 AM
To: 'Olof Nordling'; gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: AW: [gnso-trans-wg] Some thoughts on approach regarding the transfer 


I basically followed Olofs suggestion with the exception that I only created 
three groups and not five. Please have a look at the attached document for my 
first shot. As you will see I left the prioritization of the former TF as they 
are and just arranged the issues in groups following the ranking.



-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: owner-gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx] Im 
Auftrag von Olof Nordling
Gesendet: Montag, 21. Januar 2008 17:45
An: gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Betreff: [gnso-trans-wg] Some thoughts on approach regarding the transfer issues

Dear all,
Having re-read the document from Ross' prioritization committee (at 
http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/irdx-policy-priorities-20dec07.pdf ) I just wanted 
to share some thoughts with you:

1. According to a statement at the end of the paper "those issues scoring 8 or 
higher enjoy the broadest support from the committee". That would imply that 
issues 1 - 5 are in that group.

2. We could consider this top group in the listed order and see if any issue 
therein could usefully be grouped with any other issue with lower priority with 
a view to a PDP. Perhaps, for example, that issue 1 could be grouped with issue 

3. Then such "PDP embryos" could be further considered from the perspectives 
of, for example, a) potential importance to the registrants, b) likelihood of 
reaching consensus, c) cost/ease of implementation of a possible outcome etc - 
and, low and behold, a proposed PDP running order would emerge like magic (?).

Just my three Euro-cents to start our discussions...

Best regards


Attachment: transfer-grouping_draftv1 with Gomes comments 23 Jan.doc
Description: transfer-grouping_draftv1 with Gomes comments 23 Jan.doc

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy