Hello Chuck,

Thanks Bruce. This isn't essential in my opinion but it seems like it would be helpful to have a brief status report of the PRO-WG.

Thanks for the suggestion. I am expecting that to happen during the GNSO Public Forum immediately preceding the Council meeting. I will publish a draft agenda for the Public Forum shortly. I am assuming that there will not be actions for the Council, but we could certainly get an update on timeline etc. Regards, Bruce Tonkin

I have fixed the date of the meeting in the agenda below. Regards, Bruce Hello All, Below is a draft agenda for the Council meeting next week. Note the change of time as much of the Northern Hemisphere has moved into daylight savings time, and the Southern Hemisphere is heading into winter. The agenda item regarding the election results has been requested by the chair of the election process: Philip Sheppard. Regards, Bruce Tonkin Coordinated Universal Time UTC 12:00 (5:00 LA, 8:00 Washington DC, 13:00 London, 14:00 Brussels, 22:00 Melbourne, 00:00 Auckland Draft Agenda for Council meeting - Thursday 12 April 2007 Item 0: Roll call of Council members present physically or available via teleconference Item 1: Update any statements of interest Item 2: Approval of minutes - minutes for 28 March 2007 not yet available Item 3: Ratify election results for ICANN Board seat #13 Item 4: Ratify WHOIS working group statement of work and appoint an interim chair Item 5: Protection of IGO Names and Abbreviations in line with WIPO 2 - consider recommendation from the intellectual property constituency Item 6: Revision of Transfers Policy - consider staff recommendations Item 7: any other business

Philip, I certainly think that additional analysis could be helpful but I don't think that restarting the review of the transfer policy needs to be delayed while that happens. In fact, the review process could include such analysis as appropriate. As can be seen in the third document that was attached, the group that was formed identified several areas of the policy for which improvements might be useful. That would seem like a good place to start. Additional input could then be solicited from the community to expand or modify the areas and analysis and recommendations could follow. In my opinion, the best thing we can do is to restart the group with a well defined SoW and clear time constraints. Chuck Gomes "This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission."

-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 3:54 AM To: 'GNSO Council' Subject: [council] Council meeting - Thursday 12 April 2007 - Transfers

With regard to the three documents on considering the transfers process, is it just me, or is there a lack of quantified data here with respect to the questions raised. I fail to see how we can take a decision to proceed on any of the "whether" recommendations without such an analysis. Does this work exist? Philip