RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Notice: VI Call Thursday with the Economists Salop/Wright at 20:UTC

["Roberto Gaetano" <roberto@xxxxxxxxx>]

Maybe something I can add to the discussion would at least partially answer
the question.
I cannot say ""who decided, and when, to put one, or both, of "single
registrant" and "relaxation of the vertical separation" issues, on the
policy development agenda"", but having been the Board Vice-Chair at that
time I can tell you that these items have been included in discussions,
presentations, documentation before the Board way before mid-2008. The
discussion at the Board level was not triggered by the single document Eric
quotes, which does not diminuishes his right to ask for reference to it, but
surely makes it less relevant for the WG and most probably lower in the
prioritized list of items to be done by staff.
In summary, I would not endorse use of VI-WG staff time in doing this task,
although it would be a legitimate request to ICANN as a whole, as part of
the transparency policy, but this is not the right place where to address
this request.
Of course, if there is a consistent group of members dissenting with my
opinion, and endorsing this request, I might change my mind. Absent this, I
strongly believe that we have already so much to do, and to ask staff to do,
that we need to be extremely careful in creating additional burden.

<Disclaimer> I did not consult with the co-chair, I am ready to stand
corrected if he has a different opinion

Cheers,
Roberto



> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Liz Gasster
> Sent: Wednesday, 28 April 2010 23:10
> To: Eric Brunner-Williams; Margie Milam
> Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Notice: VI Call Thursday with 
> the Economists Salop/Wright at 20:UTC
> 
> 
> Mike, Roberto and all,
> 
> Does the group request that staff pursue the CRAI-related 
> information noted below?   If so we would be glad to look 
> into it further, but because staff resources are limited, I 
> want to make sure our efforts are focused on the top priority 
> tasks of the group.
> 
> Thanks, Liz
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Eric 
> Brunner-Williams
> Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 12:56 PM
> To: Margie Milam
> Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Notice: VI Call Thursday with 
> the Economists Salop/Wright at 20:UTC
> 
> 
> Margie,
> 
> A follow-up note.
> 
> Over in the High Security TLD Advisory Group Greg Rattray (ICANN
> Staff) has managed to locate the original letter that Paul 
> Twomey submitted to BITS (June/July 2009) which Michael 
> Palage requested as that letter, in his words (which I agree 
> with) "appears to be the original genesis of this group's 
> [the HSTLD-AG] work."
> 
> I request that the information provided to CRAI, the ICANN 
> provided scope statement to CRAI, which presumably is 
> reflected in the work product we know as the CRAI Report of 
> Q4 2008, and which I think appears to be the original genesis 
> of this group's [the GNSO-VI-Feb10 PDP] work, be dug up and 
> provided to me.
> 
> Others may have an interest in it as well, I don't know, I 
> simply know my own interests.
> 
> I suspect it is in correspondence. Some time mid-2008.
> 
> I want to know who decided, and when, to put one, or both, of 
> "single registrant" and "relaxation of the vertical 
> separation" issues, on the policy development agenda.
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> Eric