At its meeting today, the GNSO approved a new charter for the JAS group. This charter differs significantly from the one that was originally proposed to the GNSO and later approved by the ALAC at its November 2010 meeting. I have formatted both charters for a left-right comparison and it is attached. The ALAC must now decide which path to follow: 1. Adjust its charter to match the new GNSO one; or 2. Keep the existing charter or modify it somewhat. This would mean that the WG is working to two different charters simultaneously. I am not a fan of the new charter. I find it far too controlling and eliminates actions which the WG felt were important when the revised charter was first drafted. The vote for this charter was preceded by much discussion and a vote on the original charter as well as an amendment which would have significantly augmented the final version, both of which failed. The charter does include a specific item on IDN, an option that the WG had considered but later decided not to include. The final vote was very close, and nearly failed. A failure would have left the WG unchartered (un-re-chartered?) by the GNSO, a situation that would also have been difficult to handle. But for whatever reasons, we now have the two charters as shown in the attachment. Obviously (to me in any case), the ALAC should seek the thoughts of the WG members regarding how it should proceed. I also note that after the Cartagena meeting (where the GNSO had not approved the draft charter), there was a strong feeling within the WG that: - it had an expanded charter from the ALAC; - the original charter from the GNSO was thought be some to allow further work, even if not specified in detail; - work should proceed without delay. For reasons that I do not fully understand, that has not happened, and I do not believe that the group has met at all this year. Alan