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

["Ron Andruff" <randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I, too, agree with Kathy and Cheryl.  The term 'SRMU' should not appear in
this interim report.  It had no traction from any quarter in the brief
discussions that took place around it.

 

RA

 

Ronald N. Andruff

RNA Partners, Inc.

 

  _____  

From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Cheryl Langdon-Orr
Sent: Friday, July 16, 2010 10:53 AM
To: gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Revised SRSU draft text

 

I agree with you on this matter Kathy
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
(CLO)




On 17 July 2010 00:23, Kathy Kleiman <kKleiman@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Kristina,

I really appreciate your drafting this material, and additional details for
our reviews. I am concerned that a number of new elements are being added to
this material - SRSU now including SRMU. That's new for this section, and
merits review and consideration.

Best,

 

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  <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.

 

 

 

From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Rosette, Kristina
Sent: Friday, July 16, 2010 1:08 AM
To: gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] Revised SRSU draft text

 

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>>