We agreed to the moratorium?
This its very very wrong. I thought it had been clear that we defected that!

This its a real mistake.

"Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> 
>Hi friends
> 
>I was the only one from the NCUC/NCSG who participated in tonights
>conference call of the Drafting Team on IOC/RC.  
>
>The final outcome can be seen in the revised text of the draft
>recommendation. There will be some minor changes (in particular to the
>"maybe" of the temporary measures/ 3b). However there was a "rough
>consensus" to move forward on the basis of the text towards a comment
>period and the plan to initiative a PDP. 
> 
>Among the questions discussed was the issue whether there should be one
>or two PDPs and whether IOC and RC should be seperated. I summarized
>our discussions in the NCUC/NCSG and supported the idea of ONE PDP and
>expressed also our position that within the one PDP process there
>should be a seperate treatement of Red Cross, IOC, IGOs and IOs.
>Another issue was timing. People understand, that then lurcome of the
>PDP, if we get one, woöö be mainly for a second round, so some
>"temporary measures" has to be taken for round 1. 
> 
>The constellation is a little bit complex because we address this both
>to the GAC and the GNSO Council. There will be a special meeting
>between the GAC and ther DT in Toronto before the GNSO Council meeting.
>With other words we have to be very careful not to come with an
>inconsistent position to the GAC meeting or to pre-decide what only the
>GNSO Council can decide. 
> 
>As said above there was a rough consensus, however some constituencies
>had minor reservations which will be documented.
> 
>If we have serious reservations to the attached text, please let me
>know as soon as possible so that we can attach it to the final package.
>
> 
>Best wishes
> 
>wolfgang

Avri Doria