RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Work-planning

["Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree with Richard that we may be able to get there by Brussels if no 
dramatic changes are recommended to the existing policies, but disagree with 
the implication that we do not have to comply with the PDP process.  We must 
follow the PDP process that is set forth in the Bylaws as part of this Working 
Group.  Yes it is true that in the past we have extended deadlines because the 
PDP timelines in those cases seemed too short.  However, we have never skipped 
steps and we cannot begin to do so now.

Although some hopeful registry applicants may want to do skip steps here 
because their sole interest is going as fast as possible to get this PDP done 
and incorporated in the new gTLD process, I would ask that each one of them 
take a step back and think about the bad precedent we would be setting in the 
long term in skipping vital elements of the PDP.  Contracted parties agree with 
ICANN that for topics within the picket fence, we allow for unilateral 
amendments by the community provided it goes through the PDP process.  If we 
apply shortcuts here, what's to stop someone from using this precedent to 
establish short cuts in the future when you all are contracted parties and have 
to abide by the results of the PDPs.  We cannot short cut the process here and 
set that awful precedent just because of the new gTLD process.

This is what I have communicated to the leadership of this group and I am glad 
that they have listened and reflected that in their plan.

Jeffrey J. Neuman
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy

________________________________
The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use 
of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged 
information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this 
e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying 
of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message.


From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Richard Tindal
Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2010 12:11 PM
To: Mike O'Connor; Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Work-planning

Mikey

Thanks for the hard work.  This sort of process and structure will help get us 
there.

As a general observation, I don't think we should be too daunted by the scope 
and timeline of the PDP.  At its essence, the question we're asked is simple:

            In what circumstances might consumers be harmed by a registry 
owning (or in some other way controlling) a retail supplier of its names?

I dont think it's that difficult a question.  I believe we'll get there before 
Brussels

RT


On Mar 27, 2010, at 11:50 AM, Mike O'Connor wrote:


hi all,

i wanted to share a little document that i've been chipping away at over the 
last few days.  i'm *most* appreciative of the dialog on the list and would 
like to stimulate a little more before our meeting next Monday.  advance alert, 
i have no editorial pride and am actively looking for thoughts.

this deck is mostly about the way that we might approach our work.  i've laid 
out a series of approaches, a little analysis of the pros and cons of each.  of 
course, picking an approach to the work will also define the scope and thus the 
content and impact of the work as well.  so picking an approach is more than 
just an exercise in project management.

there have been lots and lots of very helpful posts about this and we've been 
reading them closely and discussing the implications amongst the leadership 
group.  i'm thinking that this draft is in good enough shape to put in front of 
the rest of you for comments/improvements.

apologies in advance for the slide-deck, bullet-point format.  i know it can 
drive people crazy. it's just the tool i use to think about things like this.  
please give this a read and comment back on this thread.  we'll be reading 
closely and i will work your thoughts into the next draft for discussion during 
the call on Monday.

thanks!

mikey

<VI Project v4.pdf>
- - - - - - - - -
phone 651-647-6109
fax                   866-280-2356
web     www.haven2.com<http://www.haven2.com>
handle OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)