Thanks very much Donna, perhaps if we agree in our next meeting on that approach, we can include it....I will prepare a revised draft. cheers Stephanie On 2015-11-10 13:34, Austin, Donna wrote:
Hi Stephanie
The RySG has sent a letter to Steve Crocker today responding to the GAC communique’s advice on two characters. A copy of the letter is attached.
I’m not sure this is relevant for the GNSO Council exercise, but felt it was worth sharing with the Council.
Thanks
Donna
*Donna Austin**:****Neustar, Inc.** *Policy and Industry Affairs Manager
*Cell:***+1.310.890.9655 *Email: *donna.austin@neustar.biz <mailto:donna.austin@neustar.biz>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify me immediately and delete the original message.
*Follow Neustar:*cid:image001.png@01CC3CD3.5F595DC0Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/neustarinc>cid:image002.png@01CC3CD3.5F595DC0LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/company/5349>cid:image003.png@01CC3CD3.5F595DC0Twitter <http://www.twitter.com/neustar>
P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
*From:*owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Stephanie Perrin *Sent:* Monday, 9 November 2015 3:46 PM *To:* gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org; Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>; 'Volker Greimann' <vgreimann@key-Systems.net>; David (dave@difference.com.au) (dave@difference.com.au) <dave@difference.com.au>; council@gnso.icann.org *Subject:* [council] Re: GNSO Review of the Dublin GAC Communique Template
Colleagues, attached is a draft review of the Dublin GAC communique. I would appreciate your input and discussion on a couple of the items, where our proposed response seems to me rather unclear. A proposed motion folllows. Thanks to Marika for her help on this task. Stephanie Perrin
*Adoption of the GNSO Review of GAC Communiqué for submission to the ICANN Board*
Whereas,
1.The Governmental Advisory Committee advises the ICANN Board on issues of public policy, and especially where there may be an interaction between ICANN's activities or policies and national laws or international agreements. It usually does so as part of a Communiqué, which is published towards the end of every ICANN meeting.
2.The GNSO is responsible for developing and recommending to the ICANN Board substantive policies relating to generic top-level domains.
3.The GNSO has expressed a desire to provide feedback to the ICANN Board on issues in the GAC Communiqué as these relate to generic top-level domains to inform the ICANN Board as well as the broader community of past, present or future gTLD policy activities that may directly or indirectly relate to advice provided by the GAC.
4.The GNSO Council developed a template to facilitate this process, which was completed following the publication of the Dublin GAC Communiqué by a volunteer and shared with the GNSO Council for its review
5.The GNSO hopes that the input provided through its review of the GAC Communiqué will further enhance the co-ordination and promote the sharing of information on gTLD related policy activities between the GAC, Board and the GNSO.
Resolved,
1.The GNSO Council adopts the GNSO Review of the Dublin GAC Communiqué and requests that the GNSO Council Chair communicate the GNSO Review of the Dublin GAC Communiqué to the ICANN Board.
2.Following the communication to the ICANN Board, the GNSO Council requests that the GNSO Council Chair informs the GAC Chair as well as the GAC-GNSO Consultation Group of the communication between the GNSO Council and the ICANN Board.
