Dear Alan, Just a suggestion for minor edits. This is particularly when rendering advice to the Board, where we use language like "perhaps" can communicate "indecision" or "ambiguity" and we need to use firm and clear language because we are advising them. Also the summary is good but if you footnote it or create some kind of appendage, it gives the Board the option to read about the rationale behind it since we won't be there etc. You are absolutely right, given that the Board will no have hundreds of pages to go through in terms of meeting brief, we would want to give them something succint and concise. At the same time to enable them to read the rationale behind the analysis, you can also create the appendage of footnotes etc. Otherwise, excellent document. Again, thank you for an excellent job! Best Regards, Sala On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>wrote:

Olivier, attached is a re-worked version of the Whois report recommendations. I have made some adjustments based on ALAC feedback - specifically that the statements be made clearer regarding whether GNSO action is required prior to the Board initiating action. I have also added a short preamble making the overall assessment clear - of the 16 recommendations, 12 do not require GNSO action, 3 may at a later stage, and only one requires new policy before the Board can take substantive action.

Note that the Board workshop begins on Wednesday, so presuming that this document is satisfactory, it should be transmitted to the Board today.

Alan _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac

At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)

-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851