NCSG-DISCUSS Archives

NCSG-Discuss

NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
William Drake <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
William Drake <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 18 Dec 2008 22:26:58 +0100
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (2558 bytes) , text/html (6 kB)
Hi,

Very quick report as I need to pack for a trip in some hours.  Mary  
and Carlos will probably amplify to taste when they have time.

*RAA: There were two motions (available online).  ALAC asked for more  
time to consult, so they were tabled to the next meeting Jan. 8.    A  
priori I'd tend to favor the motion calling for a further  
consultative process but it seems the majority would like to move along.

* Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery: A motion by Avri was passed  
unanimously to the effect that a decision on whether to initiate a  
PDP will be delayed until 29 Jan 2009 to allow staff time to clarify  
a number of points (see motion).

* Registration Abuse Policies: A motion by Avri was passed creating a  
drafting team to propose a charter for a working group to investigate  
the open issues documented in the issues report.   Mary just added in  
an email note that,  "it seems highly unlikely that there will be any  
support for an effort to stop some form of action on the issue. As  
such, at least one NCUC Councillor considered that a better way  
forward to convey NCUC's concerns on registration abuse is to  
contribute substantively to the new Working Group."  i agree we  
should do that but (mis?)understood from prior exchanges that there  
was opposition in principle to this from folks here and hence cast  
the sole no.  There was an abstention as well on the grounds more  
time and discussion are needed.

* gTLD Implementation: There are motions by registry and IPR people  
that need some collective scrutiny.  Both were tabled for now until  
the next meeting.

* Travel Policy: A motion was passed unanimously simplifying some of  
the language that's been cooking concerning the modalities of funding  
allocation.  Key bit, " Council calls upon ICANN staff to nominate by  
15 January 2009 a fixed sum for fiscal year 2009 that will be granted  
to each of the constituencies currently recognised  under the  ICANN  
by-laws of 29 May 2008. Such sum should exclude any budget to cover  
the costs of nom com delegates or GNSO chair travel."

It would be helpful to hear from people on these items, some of which  
are moving toward decisions in the next few weeks.

Must go,

Bill

***********************************************************
William J. Drake
Senior Associate
Centre for International Governance
Graduate Institute of International and
   Development Studies
Geneva, Switzerland
[log in to unmask]
New book: Governing Global Electronic Networks,
http://tinyurl.com/5mh9jj
***********************************************************



ATOM RSS1 RSS2