Re: [council] NCtelecon 19 October 2000, start time

["Ken Stubbs" <kstubbs@revenue.com>]

frankly i really dont care what time we have the call... i am trying to
accomodate all here. i will wait until  17:00 eastern time this afternoon
for all comments to come in on the time. at this time i am pre-disposed to
09:00 eastern time (6am pacific time)  . i will announce the time shortly
after 17:00 tonight.

i await any further comments from the members

best wishes to you all
    ken stubbs

----- Original Message -----
From: "Theresa Swinehart" <Theresa.Swinehart@wcom.com>
To: "'aus der Muhlen, Axel'" <Axel_ausderMuhlen@mpaa.org>; "'Ken Stubbs'"
<kstubbs@revenue.com>; <council@dnso.org>
Cc: "'Elisabeth PORTENEUVE'" <Elisabeth.PORTENEUVE@cetp.ipsl.fr>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2000 3:41 AM
Subject: RE: [council] NCtelecon 19 October 2000, agenda


> I have to agree, 5:00 am Pacific time isn't reasonable. Nor is incredibly
> late in Asia Pacific region. If 6:00 am Pacific stays within a reasonable
> time for Asia Pacific (those of you calling in from there, please speak
up),
> then let's go with 6:00 am.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-council@dnso.org
> > [mailto:owner-council@dnso.org]On Behalf Of
> > aus der Muhlen, Axel
> > Sent: Monday, October 16, 2000 1:55 AM
> > To: 'Ken Stubbs'; council@dnso.org
> > Cc: Elisabeth PORTENEUVE
> > Subject: RE: [council] NCtelecon 19 October 2000, agenda
> > Importance: High
> >
> >
> >
> > I don't think that the suggested time slot for the Oct. 19 NC telecon
> > constitutes a fair compromise -- 5:00 a.m. USA Pacific Time
> > is not the best
> > time to start your day and unreasonably early.
> >
> > If we no longer want to rotate time slots, I suggest that we
> > adopt Philip's
> > suggestion made in his email of Sept. 20  and start our calls
> > at 15:00 Paris
> > time (which corresponds to 6:00 a.m. USA Pacific Time).  His
> > email is pasted
> > below.
> >
> >
> > Before we go "crazy" in rotating times we may need to think
> > through the
> > implications and recognise there may be optimal times to choose.
> >
> > According to Elisabeth,
> > "Axel is in LA.
> > The majority of the NC is US East Coast or Europe CET or between.
> > Africans are in UTC, Latin Americans like US East Coast.
> > Hotta-san is in Tokyo.
> > Erica Roberts in Melbourne."
> >
> > According to the World Time Server which adjusts for summer time,
> > http://www.worldtimeserver.com/
> > LA is - 9 hours from Paris time and Melbourne is +8 hours.
> > So, the best compromise in summer is a 15.00 Paris time,
> > being 06.00 LA ,
> > 22.00 Tokyo and 23.00 Melbourne. Any other time means someone
> > is expected to
> > take a call unreasonably early or unreasonably late.
> >
> > Philip
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ken Stubbs [mailto:kstubbs@revenue.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2000 7:54 AM
> > To: council@dnso.org
> > Cc: Elisabeth PORTENEUVE
> > Subject: Re: [council] NCtelecon 19 October 2000, agenda
> >
> >
> > my feeling is that it should be at the same time slot we have
> > used before as
> > it appears to best suit the global nature of the participants
> >
> > timeslot shall be as follows
> >
> > 08:00 usa eastern time
> > 14:00 european CET
> > 22:00 melbourne time (i believe)
> > 21:00 tokyo time
> >
> > if i am wrong here on the times.. please correct me
> >
> > ken stubbs
> >
> > p.s. as a result of the current elections i am taking thte
> > liberty of adding
> > an additional agenda item to get an update on how the council
> > & related
> > constituancies (i.e. nii's & katoh's) will be dealing with
> > the transition of
> > these two new esteemed members of the board.
> >
> > i would appreciate some sort of " written report" (see caroline.. i am
> > taking your suggestions)  to the council from the involved
> > constituancies
> > for our review prior to the meeting
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "aus der Muhlen, Axel" <Axel_ausderMuhlen@mpaa.org>
> > To: "'Elisabeth Porteneuve'" <Elisabeth.Porteneuve@cetp.ipsl.fr>;
> > <council@dnso.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2000 3:24 AM
> > Subject: RE: [council] NCtelecon 19 October 2000, agenda
> >
> >
> >
> > What time?
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Elisabeth Porteneuve [mailto:Elisabeth.Porteneuve@cetp.ipsl.fr]
> > Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 12:58 PM
> > To: council@dnso.org
> > Subject: [council] NCtelecon 19 October 2000, agenda
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [ from http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20001019.NCtelecon-agenda.html ]
> >
> > ICANN/DNSO
> >
> >        DNSO Names Council Teleconference on 19 October 2000 - agenda
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > ----------
> >
> > 9 October 2000.
> >
> > This agenda was established according to the agenda
> > procedures Version 4,
> > August 2000 proposed by the NC Intake Committee, and adopted
> > by the NC for 3
> > months.
> >
> > Date, time, phones and webcast
> >
> >   1. The Names Council teleconference will be held on 19
> > October, time TBD,
> >      2 hours.
> >
> >   2. The teleconference bridge will be provided by TBD.
> >
> >   3. The NC will not be webcast due to budget constraints.
> > The phone number
> >      will be provided later.
> >
> > Agenda and related documents
> >
> > Ken Stubbs will be chairing the NC teleconference.
> >
> >   1. Approval of the agenda (Ken Stubbs) - 2 min
> >
> >   2. Approval of the summary of the meeting 21 September (Ken
> > Stubbs) - 3
> >      min
> >
> >   3. Matters arising (not forming part of this agenda) (Ken
> > Stubbs) - 5 min
> >
> >   4. NC proxy proposal (Paul Kane) REQUIRES NC DECISION - 10 min
> >
> >
> > http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20001019.NCproxy-vote.v1.html, Version
> >      1, TO BE PROVIDED
> >
> >   5. Preparation for LA physical meeting Tuesday 14 November,
> > Marina del
> >      Rey, California: administrative (Paul Kane), agenda (NC
> > business plan
> >      2001) (Ken Stubbs/Intake Committee) - 15 min
> >
> >   6. Proposed dates for next meetings: REQUIRES NC DECISION
> > (Ken Stubbs) - 5
> >      min)
> >
> >           Teleconference, Thursday 14 December (tentative)
> >           Teleconference, Thursday 25 January (tentative)
> >
> >   7. Submission of Meetings Conduct Report from Intake Committee
> >      (P.Sheppard) REQUIRES NC DECISION - 15 min
> >
> >   8. Review Committee status report:
> >
> >      Version 2.0 sent on 29 September to the NC and NC-Review
> >      http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-review/Arc00/msg00053.html,
> >      sent to Constituencies and GA (Theresa Swinehart) - 10 min
> >
> >   9. Proposal for an NC report on TLDs and intellectual
> > property (Roger
> >      Cochetti) - 5 min
> >
> >  10. Budget Committee - status report (Roger Cochetti) - 5 min
> >
> >  11. Independent Review Panel nomination committee proposals
> > - status report
> > (K.Stubbs/C.Chicoine) - 5 min
> >
> >  12. Update on new TLDs (ICANN staff) - 15 min
> >
> >  13. Openess with respect to teleconferences - Ken Stubbs
> >
> >  14. Taping & making available by Internet access the Names
> > Council meetings
> >      (this would eliminate the need for real-time listen-in
> > ports, which are
> >      not provided with some bridges) - Ken Stubbs
> >
> >  15. Any New Business (ANB)
> >
> >  16. Report from the ccTLD's, current status with the Names Council
> >
> >  17. AOB
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > ----------
> >
> >                  Information from:  © DNSO Names Council
> >
>
>
>