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