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

["Ron Andruff" <randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Just moving with the discussions, as I understand them, Jeff.  Not trying to
exclude any viable proposals, but understood we had moved, post Brussels, to
the position I described.

 

RA

 

Ronald N. Andruff

RNA Partners, Inc.

 

 

  _____  

From: Jeff Eckhaus [mailto:eckhaus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 1:51 PM
To: Ron Andruff; 'Michael D. Palage'; Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Our Initial VI WG Report - an Outline

 

Ron -the discussions in Brussels were not the full discussions of this
Working Group. They were discussions that were directed by the co-chairs as
they went forward on their atom/molecule path. That is why there were two
"main" proposals 

 

To say that since the other proposals like CAM and Free Trade were not the
"main" topic of discussion so we should exclude them is unfair to many group
members and the discussions.

 

 

 

 

 

From: Ron Andruff [mailto:randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 10:47 AM
To: Jeff Eckhaus; 'Michael D. Palage'; Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Our Initial VI WG Report - an Outline

 

Jeff E,

 

We came out of our face-to-face meetings in Brussels, particularly the last
one, with these two proposals, and Mikey submitted a document after those
meetings detailing "the two proposals" that we came from Brussels with.
Adding back things that have been resolved is not constructive, in my view.

 

RA

 

Ronald N. Andruff

President

 

RNA Partners, Inc.

220 Fifth Avenue

New York, New York 10001

+ 1 212 481 2820 ext. 11

 

  _____  

From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Jeff Eckhaus
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 1:32 PM
To: Michael D. Palage; Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Our Initial VI WG Report - an Outline

 

Agree with Palage on this. There were multiple proposals , not just RACK and
JN2 and we need to include all of these 

 

 

Jeff Eckhaus 

 

 

 

From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Michael D. Palage
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 10:26 AM
To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Our Initial VI WG Report - an Outline

 

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.

 

 

 

  _____  

Please NOTE: This electronic message, including any attachments, may include
privileged, confidential and/or inside information owned by Demand Media,
Inc. Any distribution or use of this communication by anyone other than the
intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are
not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by replying to this
message and then delete it from your system. Thank you.

 

  _____  

Please NOTE: This electronic message, including any attachments, may include
privileged, confidential and/or inside information owned by Demand Media,
Inc. Any distribution or use of this communication by anyone other than the
intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are
not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by replying to this
message and then delete it from your system. Thank you.