[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [ga] Preliminary report on the NC June 25th meeting
Thanks for this update. Three questions:
1. Is the reason for not allowing listeners on the NC teleconferences one of
cost? If so, perhaps we could come up with sponsors. Typically most of the
cost is borne by the person phoning in - as I understand it, the cost of
adding lines to the bridge is not heavy. If there is another reason, I
would like to understand the rationale.
2. You mention that it was "resolved to maintain the meeting on the
afternoon of August 26th to assess the decisions of the ICANN Board and to
plan for future action." Is this a meeting of the General Assembly, in
addition to the meeting on the afternoon of the 24th? Or is this a
different meeting? Could you clarify please.
3. Did the NC address the problem that people have had joining working
groups. I know at least three people who wanted to join WG-A, for instance,
and I told them to contact Jonathan Cohen, as per the discussions at the
June 11 NC meeting. Unfortunately, they received no reply or a reply very
late. With no disrespect to Jonathan Cohen, who I am convinced is a
fair-minded person and a sterling choice to head up this group, this
procedure is not working. So, I wonder if this logistical problem was
discussed and if there were any solutions put forward.
>From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com]On Behalf Of Javier
>Sent: Saturday, July 03, 1999 10:45 AM
>To: firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com
>Subject: [ga] Preliminary report on the NC June 25th meeting
>I am afraid I sent this out on the June 26th from the wrong e-mail address.
>It bounced and I did not notice.
>June 25th provisional Names Council (pNC) administrative meeting
>This is an unofficial preliminary report prepared to inform everybody of
>decisions made by the pNC as soon as possible.
>It is quite possible that this report -prepared without notes- might have
>left out some decisions of the pNC. It only includes the decisions of the
>pNC, not the discussion that led to them. Corrections are welcome, please
>send them to me. Minutes will be posted as soon as possible.
>On the General Assembly of the DNSO
>It was resolved that the General Assembly of the DNSO will be a permanent
>body in which, following the ICANN Bylaws, anybody may participate.
>It was resolved that firstname.lastname@example.org will be the official mean of communication
>for the General Assembly of the DNSO. The email@example.com list will be
>renamed as firstname.lastname@example.org
>The General Assembly of the DNSO may also meet physically, and will do so
>for the first time in Santiago on August 24th, 1999.
>On Working Group A
>It was reported that WG A was progressing very slowly. It was resolved that
>the WG Chairs will decide -on the date the report from WG A is due for the
>provisional Names Council (July 7th)- if an extension is necessary to
>finish their report.
>On Working Group C
>It was resolved to create WG C following a proposal from Javier Sola.
>Javier Sola will be in charge of creating the WG. The highlights of the
>a) That all applicantions received be accepted in the WG.
>b) That the WG mailing list(s) be publically archived in the www.dnso.org
>c) That the WG be divided into three groups that will study 1) New gTLDs
>(which, how many, deplyment speed, etc..) 2) Selection procedure for the
>new Registry 3) Operation procedures for the new Registry.
>d) That the calendar includes two public comments for the Names Council and
>one more for ICANN once the Names Council report has been sent to ICANN.
>The complete charter, calendar and member list are in the www.dnso.org
>On Working Group B
>It was resolved to also create WG B to review the treatment of Famous
>Trade-marks. WG B will operate under the same procedures as WG C. Johnathan
>Cohen is in charge of creating the Working Group.
>On Drafting Group to develop Working Group Procedures (F).
>It was resolved to create a Drafting Group (DG) for the development of WG
>procedures. The DG has three weeks to present a report to the
>As soon as the procedures are developed, all working groups and committees
>will operate under the rules developed, this will include committees on
>Internal procedures, business plan, outreach and global awarness, which
>might be created before the procedures are finished and approved by the
>provisional Names Council.
>On the Calendar
>It was resolved to hold a teleconference meeting of the provisional Names
>Council on Monday July 12th. The meeting will be webcasted and an e-mail
>address will be provided for those who want to send their opinions into the
>meeting. Comments received will be automatically posted in the website for
>all members of the provisional NC and anybody else to read.
>The date of a meeting of the provisional NC to finalise the final report on
>Dispute Resolution Policy will be decided on the 12th.
>It was resolved that a physical meeting of the General Assembly of the DNSO
>will take place in Santiago (Chile) on the afternoon of August 24th. It
>will be preceded by meetings of the constituencies during the morning of
>the same day.
>It was also resolved to maintain the meeting on the afternoon of August
>26th to assess the decisions of the ICANN Board and to plan for