Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Revised SRSU draft text

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

Mikey - how long do we have to comment on Kristina's text. I believe the text 
is way too detailed for what this group should put out in an initial report and 
purports to show endorsement of the IPC implementation of not only SRSU, but 
also SRMU, which was hardly the case.

I will be providing me edits as quickly as I can, but we cannot rush this. I 
find it amazing that new things were added to the report as a whole in less 
than 24 hours before submission.

As previously stated, let's define SRSU as a concept in the body of the report, 
but the specific implementation (like eligibility requirements, etc.) needs to 
be pushed back to an appendix under the IPC proposal. Just because 1 proponent 
of the SRSU had a requirement that the SRSU could not be from a party whose 
primary business is that of a registry, registrar, reseller, etc. Does NOT mean 
this was endorsed in any way by the group.
Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq.
Vice President, Law & Policy
NeuStar, Inc.
Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx


________________________________
From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx <owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Rosette, Kristina <krosette@xxxxxxx>
Cc: gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx <gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Fri Jul 16 01:38:33 2010
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Revised SRSU draft text

Woohoo!

way to go Kristina.  your timing is perfect.  i was just looking wistfully at 
that section of the report and hoping to find a new draft when i opened email.

thanks!

mikey


On Jul 16, 2010, at 12:08 AM, Rosette, Kristina wrote:


All,

Here's revised SRSU draft text.  In the interests of time, I am sending this to 
the list even though Milton and Avri have not had a chance to review it.  It's 
subject to any changes they may have.

I've also included, for completeness, reference to the SRMU exception that the 
IPC proposed.

One section I have not included is the level of support.  Milton and I both 
believe that there may be consensus support for the SRSU exception among the 
non-contracted party house members of the WG.  If we could determine that on 
the list (as opposed to on the call), I can add the relevant text.

K

<<07162010 SR Initial Report text.DOC>>

<07162010 SR Initial Report text.DOC>

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