[ga] Corrections and Additions to my Post

[Kendall Dawson <kendall@obs-us.com>]

My apologies.. I provided an incorrect link in my last post.

I meant to point to this URL when I stated that
"Louis Touton contradicts the statement and admits that there is another 
alternative"

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/scripts/rammaker.asp?s=cyber&dir=icann&file=icann-031101b&start=04-00-45

His exact quote was:

"Not to negate that there might be other things in the world that could be 
adjusted in making one thing plus and one thing minus that better suits 
both parties as often happens in a negotiation"

In the post that I sent... Louis continues to argue that there are no other 
alternatives and when he says "there are no alternative but 'A' or 'B' " .. 
a bunch of people in the audience all blurt out at once.... "Why? Why 
not?"... pretty indicative of the overall feeling in the room.

Also...the real-time scribe's notes from Erica Roberts:

Roberts: Share Fockler's concern re demonstrating commitment to bottom-up 
process. Verisign negotiated a short-term extension on their cooperative 
agreement with the DoC (Amendment 11). Then government-NSI negotiation came 
to include ICANN also (leading to Amendment 19). Proposed resolution was 
posted in September 1999, agreed to by Board in November 1999. Clock has 
been ticking ever since then. Have had discussions with Verisign since last 
fall re how Verisign would satisfy obligations of contract. Staff never 
purported to reopen policy aspects of this matter, and do not purport to do 
so now. Short, high-intensity dialogue began in January, leading to this 
document, which was posted on March 1, as soon as respective legal teams 
gave the go-ahead. So this was not a policy process, and is not an 
abrogation of ICANN's general bottom-up process.

Regards,

Kendall


--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html