Dear All, I recall offering to submit our tables recommendation after dinner, and no one showed interest or asked me to submit via email as well. So I tore the paper in front of you folks. The requirement for the need of this should have been requested before or while there, or when I asked. Please advise the contacts on my table, so that I can reconstruct the recommendations, as they were long. Sophie On 04/12/06, Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au> wrote:
Hello,
Just a reminder to submit your summaries of the discussions during the dinner with the ICANN Board to Glen so that she can send a summary.
Chuck Gomes kindly sent the following summary of the discussion on his table:
Here is a list of the discussion points that occurred at our table in the Board/Council dinner meeting last night.
1. Difficulty in dealing with registrations of Punycode-like ASCII registrations such as xn--verisign.com. 2. GAC does not want to have an operational role in the intro of new gTLDs. 3. Idea of a global UDRP like process to deal with string issues relating to public policy issues. 4. ICANN should proactively notify GAC about proposed strings as soon as the application process ends. 5. ICANN should also attempt to notify governments that are not active in the GAC. 6. The GAC should only be one communication channel regarding proposed new gTLD strings. 7. The UDRP like process could be fit well with concerns about national sovereignity.
Regards, Bruce Tonkin