Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Objective 5

[Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Brian.

Stéphane

Le 25 févr. 2010 à 16:36, Brian Cute a écrit :

> Stephane,
> 
> Collecting comments as we speak.  Should be able to offer a reaction
> shortly.  Apologies for missing the deadline.
> 
> Regards,
> Brian
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stéphane Van Gelder [mailto:stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 10:32 AM
> To: Avri Doria
> Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Objective 5
> 
> 
> Yes, we seem to have a deadlock situation right now with the NCSG and the
> RrSG supporting the Milton/Avri Obj 5 and the BC and the IPC supporting the
> Kristina Obj 5.
> 
> This could be resolved by the RySG coming out in support of one version or
> the other, but it's now past deadline and there hasn't been a reaction from
> the registries.
> 
> Brian, could you let us know which version the registries support please?
> 
> I would then suggest we move ahead as we had planned to: the majority takes
> it. I would also suggest, as this is pretty evenly split up, that a not be
> included in the charter explaining which version of obj 5 was supported by
> whom. This could then be sent back to Council as-is, and for them to make a
> final determination.
> 
> Margie, were you able to act on Avri's earlier proposal to bring the
> proposed agenda inline with recent developments? Do you have a definitive
> version of the charter that I can take back to the Council?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Stéphane
> 
> Le 25 févr. 2010 à 15:48, Avri Doria a écrit :
> 
>> 
>> 
>> Hi
>> 
>> so how do we resolve this split in the consensus?
>> 
>> does the council vote on the version of Objective 5 they like best?
>> or does the charter linger in the DT until we reach a consensus?
>> 
>> if the later, who can suggest a compromise wording?
>> 
>> a.
>> 
> 
> 
>