RE: [council] Domain Tasting - Follow up on possibility of fee application through interim or special budget process
Kristina, I don't know about the interim measures, but I believe that modifying the budget mid-year would still require the Staff to go back to registrars and allow them to vote again on how they want to pay - ICANN directly or ICANN through Registry invoicing. That would take additional time and could run up against the end of the FY anyway. Also, for the design team discussion, we should keep in mind the likely timing of any consensus policy that may come out of the Tasting PDP. I don't see how any such policy could be developed, recommended, commented on, and approved before the Paris meeting in June. Then allowing for implementation time I don't think it would become policy until sometime after the new budget goes into affect. Tim -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [council] Domain Tasting - Follow up on possibility of fee application through interim or special budget process From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Date: Thu, January 17, 2008 10:21 pm To: <council@gnso.icann.org> My understanding of what Denise said was that ICANN is proposing to levy the per-domain fee as part of the standard budget cycle which would put it in place starting July 2008. I heard nothing today about any interim measures. Alan At 17/01/2008 10:55 PM, Rosette, Kristina wrote: All, Our discussion today of application of the ICANN fee to names deleted during AGP focused on the regular ICANN budget cycle. I had understood from our 31 October meeting that it may be possible to pursue levying the fee through an interim or special budgeting process, and that we would receive from staff further information about that possibility and a potential timetable. I don't recall receiving any further information. Did we receive it? If so, would someone please point it out for me? If we didn't, I believe it would be helpful to have before Delhi. To the extent it can be provided quickly, it would be especially helpful for the design team to have before Delhi. Thanks. Kristina
Tim, I don't doubt that you're right about having to have registrars vote as to how to pay. That said, I'm not willing to accept that we have to have a built-in six-month delay. The interim/special budgeting process alternative was affirmatively raised by staff, and I'd like to know where it stands. If I missed the follow up, that's my fault and I ask that someone point me in the right direction. If a decision was made by staff that it couldn't or shouldn't be pursued, then I believe that conclusion should be formally stated and the reasoning be provided. If it fell off the radar screen, I've asked that it be put back on. Call me an optimist, but we'll have to agree to disagree that a policy recommendation can't be developed and voted on before June. Kristina -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 8:00 AM To: council@gnso.icann.org Subject: RE: [council] Domain Tasting - Follow up on possibility of fee application through interim or special budget process Kristina, I don't know about the interim measures, but I believe that modifying the budget mid-year would still require the Staff to go back to registrars and allow them to vote again on how they want to pay - ICANN directly or ICANN through Registry invoicing. That would take additional time and could run up against the end of the FY anyway. Also, for the design team discussion, we should keep in mind the likely timing of any consensus policy that may come out of the Tasting PDP. I don't see how any such policy could be developed, recommended, commented on, and approved before the Paris meeting in June. Then allowing for implementation time I don't think it would become policy until sometime after the new budget goes into affect. Tim -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [council] Domain Tasting - Follow up on possibility of fee application through interim or special budget process From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Date: Thu, January 17, 2008 10:21 pm To: <council@gnso.icann.org> My understanding of what Denise said was that ICANN is proposing to levy the per-domain fee as part of the standard budget cycle which would put it in place starting July 2008. I heard nothing today about any interim measures. Alan At 17/01/2008 10:55 PM, Rosette, Kristina wrote: All, Our discussion today of application of the ICANN fee to names deleted during AGP focused on the regular ICANN budget cycle. I had understood from our 31 October meeting that it may be possible to pursue levying the fee through an interim or special budgeting process, and that we would receive from staff further information about that possibility and a potential timetable. I don't recall receiving any further information. Did we receive it? If so, would someone please point it out for me? If we didn't, I believe it would be helpful to have before Delhi. To the extent it can be provided quickly, it would be especially helpful for the design team to have before Delhi. Thanks. Kristina
participants (2)
-
Rosette, Kristina -
Tim Ruiz