Dear Stéphane,
Kurt forwarded me your kind reply to his mail below, and I would like to follow-up with some updates and a specific question. As you may have noted, the first upcoming sessions on URS are a webinar on 3 October (seehttp://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-6-24sep12-en.htm ) and a session in Toronto on 18 October (
see http://toronto45.icann.org/node/34325)
, where we will further discuss the solution suggestions brought up by the community in Prague and pursue the objectives stated in Kurt’s mail. The ambition is to find an agreed way to analyze each suggestion in detail and reach balanced conclusions, for example by establishing a suitably balanced drafting team for that purpose.
Now to my question, as you mention that the Council may follow-up on Kurt’s message in a near future: Could we count on a presentation or statement at the URS session in Toronto to provide GNSO Council guidance on the best way forward for the continued URS work?
I hope this is possible and look forward to your response.
On another note: I also intend to contact the GNSO SGs/Constituencies individually as their contributions to the discussions in substance are essential. In addition, your help in spreading the word to them would be much appreciated. Proposals for the Toronto session as to speakers and topics are warmly welcome, as well as written input.
Very best regards
Olof
Thanks Kurt. I am copying the Council for their information.
The Council will no doubt follow-up on this in the near future.
Stéphane Van Gelder
Directeur Général / General manager
INDOM NetNames France
----------------
Registry Relations and Strategy Director
T: +33 (0)1 48 01 83 51
F: +33 (0)1 48 01 83 61
Le 18 sept. 2012 à 22:09, Kurt Pritz a écrit :
I am writing to let you know that we are planning a set of discussions on Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) implementation in the near future and seek the input of GNSO leadership. As you know, a meeting in Prague we indicated that URS, as currently designed, did not appear to meet cost requirements. In Prague, contributors in the meeting described briefly several potential solutions. In the next set of meetings, we want to flesh out some of those models for possible implementation.We want to have one meeting in about two weeks (probably a webinar type of format with a possibility for some face-to-face interaction), and then we have a meeting in Toronto is scheduled. The first meeting will be announced shortly.
I am writing you because some of the proposed solutions, while feasible, do not match up with the specific conclusions of the STI team when it did its work. We recognize the role of the GNSO in those discussions. While the meetings we are having are open to all, we understand that the GNSO leadership might want to conduct the URS discussions in a certain way. Having the twin goals of developing a solution in time for use by new gTLDs and ensuring that all those interested can participate in the discussion, we can work in whichever way the GNSO wishes to proceed. (Of course, we also seek to meet the cost and timeliness goals for which the the URS was designed and also seek to ensure that registrants enjoy the protections written into the current model by the IRT and STI.)The output of the next meetings can inform GNSO discussion or we can carry on in a way acceptable to the GNSO.
I am also copying Olivier as ALAC members participated in the STI.
I hope you find this helpful. Contact me anytime with questions.