Absolutely right Jeff, thanks for making that clarification. Stéphane Le 31 oct. 2011 à 16:23, Neuman, Jeff a écrit :

With respect to the Resolution 7, just as a correction, it is not a “possible PDP”, but this is the required prelude to the required PDP. We the Council must initiate a PDP as soon as the final issue report is presented to the Council.

There is no discretion for the Council here to refuse to initiate the PDP. It is automatic according to the Bylaws.

Jeffrey J. Neuman Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy

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 us immediately and delete the original message.

From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder Sent: Monday, October 31, 2011 10:46 AM To: GNSO Council Subject: [council] GNSO related Board resolutions out of the Dakar meeting

Councillors,

Please see the Board resolutions from the Dakar meeting: http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-28oct11-en.htm

Resolution 1.5 addresses the PEDNR recommendations which the Board adopted.

Resolution 1.12 thanks the departing Councillors.

Resolution 2 addresses the JAS work and requests that Staff look at implementation of that work.

Resolution 7 addresses the RAA. The is a request for an issue report, as a prelude to a possible PDP.

Resolution 8 initiates a comment period on the recommendations of the PDP WT.

Stéphane