Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] OUR WG TABLE - For Final Inputs!

["Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>]

i wonder if Texas has ever considered their own country code.  it looks like 
it's available...  Berry?  you're in Texas right now with a lot of time on your 
hands.  you want to get that organized?

mikey


On May 14, 2010, at 4:39 PM, Tim Ruiz wrote:

> 
> Why is Kathy giving us all Texas knicknames - Texas Tim, Texas Eric,
> Texas Jeff? 
> 
> Wait, what....? Oh, ok.
> 
> Never mind.
> 
> 
> Tim 
> 
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] OUR WG TABLE - For Final Inputs!
> From: "Kathy Kleiman" <kKleiman@xxxxxxx>
> Date: Fri, May 14, 2010 4:17 pm
> To: "Jeff Eckhaus" <eckhaus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
> 
> 
> Tx Jeff!
> 
> Kathy Kleiman
> Director of Policy
> .ORG The Public Interest Registry
> Direct: +1 703 889-5756  Mobile: +1 703 371-6846
> 
> Visit us online!
> Check out events & blogs at .ORG Buzz!
> Find us on Facebook | dotorg
> See the .ORG Buzz! Photo Gallery on Flickr
> See our video library on YouTube
> 
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE:
> Proprietary and confidential to .ORG, The Public Interest Registry.  If
> received in error, please inform sender and then delete.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jeff Eckhaus
> Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 4:57 PM
> To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] OUR WG TABLE - For Final Inputs!
> 
> 
> All,
> 
> I have attempted to update the spreadsheet with the points from the
> original DM proposal, but wanted to add that this was a proposal, not
> the current standing on all points and issues. I think this is an
> important point people need to understand. The original idea was to put
> together the proposals in a spreadsheet, not what everyone's current
> outlook is and what they would agree to.
> 
> 
> I also wanted to point out that the cell that asked for the "emphasis"
> point was something that we did not specifically propose but feel needs
> to be emphasized since it is a critical factor in open competition in
> the TLD space.
> I will use the words from the JN2 proposal since it captures the idea
> best "Registry Operator or its Affiliate can co-own an ICANN-Accredited
> Registrar in a TLD other than the TLD for which Registry Operator or its
> Affiliate serves as the Registry"
> 
> 
> Jeff Eckhaus
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz
> Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 9:31 AM
> To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] OUR WG TABLE - For Final Inputs!
> 
> Attached is updated for Go Daddy's proposal.
> 
> Tim 
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] OUR WG TABLE - For Final Inputs!
> From: berrycobb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Fri, May 14, 2010 9:26 am
> To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> 
> 
> VIWG,
> 
> I took the liberty to make some formatting and spell check changes to
> the matrix. Hopefully this will make it a bit easier to read.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Berry Cobb
> Infinity Portals LLC
> berrycobb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.infinityportals.com
> 866.921.8891
> 
> 
> 
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kathy Kleiman
> Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 6:13 AM
> To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] OUR WG TABLE - For Final Inputs!
> 
> All,
> This is it, the moment you have been waiting for - the New VI WG Table.
> 
> It needs your help! I reviewed and revised a few table categories with
> those who had suggestions on our last call (special tx to Jon N).
> Now, it is your turn. If you/your company/your constituency submitted a
> proposal, **please review the table and update it with your ideas, your
> conclusions, your words.** Updates should go to the whole group, or to
> me and Mikey (both,
> please) by ** Sunday morning**.
> 
> There are new categories for clearer understanding of Equal Access and
> Ry/Rr structure proposed in the exceptions.
> Added/Revised:
> Column G: Ry must accept (1) all IA Rrs (gTLD model) OR (2) may select
> among IA Rrs based on special, objective criteria (sponsored TLD model)
> Column H: Non-Discrimination Among Rrs (Technology, Customer Support,
> Etc)
> Column L: Under threshold: (1) Ry may distribute directly (subject to
> RAA-type obligations) OR (2) Ry may co-own a Rr > 15% to distribute TLD
> Column M: Equal Access Required Below Threshold?
> 
> Otherwise, it?s the same. Tx for filling it in (you don?t want to rely
> on me ? I wrote one of the proposals!) Best,
> 
> Kathy Kleiman
> Director of Policy
> 
> .ORG The Public Interest Registry
> 1775 Wiehle Avenue, Suite 200
> Reston, Virginia 20190 USA
> 
> Main: +1 703 889-5778 | Direct: +1 703 889-5756
> Mobile: +1 703 371-6846 | Fax: +1 703.889.5779
> E: kkleiman@xxxxxxx | W: www.pir.org
> 
> Visit us online!
> Check out events & blogs at .ORG Buzz!
> Find us on Facebook | dotorg
> See the .ORG Buzz! Photo Gallery on Flickr See our video library on
> YouTube
> 
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE:
> Proprietary and confidential to .ORG, The Public Interest Registry. 
> If received in error, please inform sender and then delete.
> 

- - - - - - - - -
phone   651-647-6109  
fax             866-280-2356  
web     www.haven2.com
handle  OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)