RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Our Initial VI WG Report - an Outline

["Michael D. Palage" <michael@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Kathy,

 

Any reason why you would object to the CAM proposal from being incorporated
into this Initial Report ?

 

In fact based upon the recent exemption discussion, I think the CAM proposal
would be particularly constructive on this subject matter.

 

I would encourage people to read the most recently proposal CAM proposal
posted on the VI WG wiki, 

 

Summary - https://st.icann.org/vert-integration-pdp/index.cgi?camv3_summary

Proposal - https://st.icann.org/vert-integration-pdp/index.cgi?camv3 

 

Best regards,

 

Michael 

 

From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Kathy Kleiman
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 12:51 PM
To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx; Mike O'Connor; Roberto Gaetano
Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] Our Initial VI WG Report - an Outline

 

Dear Mikey and Roberto,

I checked the schedule Mikey published a few weeks ago, and realize we have
a hard deadline of today for receiving the Initial Report, Thursday for
reviewing the Initial Report, and Friday for publishing our Initial Report.
Thus, I think we have reached the end of our discussion - and come to the
point where we must put our ideas out for the community to review and
comment. 

 

As I don't see an Initial Report before us, I would suggest that our work to
date provides all the documents we need - and the compilation could be done
quickly, as soon as possible.  

 

I suggest that our Initial Report should include:

1)      The Two Main Proposals on which we Converged before Brussels:  the
JN2 proposal, and the RACK+ proposal. Since there is concern about the
Brussels process, and especially those who could not join us in the
discussions, I propose that each proposal's initial team decide (very
quickly, today) which version of their proposal they would like to include.
These proposals should be listed side-by-side.

2)      The Exceptions Piece, the most recent version, which I believe is
the piece posted by Avri today. 

3)      The Compliance Piece, the most recent version, which I believe is
the piece circulated by Ken or Brian late last week.

 

These are the elements of our work, the framework of our agreement. I think
it would be full and fair to compile these materials and publish them as it
is now time to let others ponder and comment on our work to date. 

 

All the 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:   <mailto:clee@xxxxxxx> kkleiman@xxxxxxx       |  W:
<http://www.pir.org/> www.pir.org

 

Visit us online!

Check out events & blogs at  <http://www.pir.org/orgbuzz> .ORG Buzz!

Find us on Facebook |
<http://www.facebook.com/pages/dotorg/203294399456?v=wall>  dotorg

See the .ORG Buzz! Photo Gallery on  <http://flickr.com/orgbuzz> Flickr

See our video library on  <http://youtube.com/orgbuzz> YouTube

 

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE:

Proprietary and confidential to .ORG, The Public Interest Registry.  If
received in error, please inform sender and then delete.