Yes I agree. It is best to concentrate on activities/changes over the last year. Brian. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Androuchko, Vladimir" <vladimir.androuchko@itu.int> To: "pso-pc, ITU (MLIST)" <pso-pc@ties.itu.int> Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 10:36 AM Subject: FW: Draft of the PSO-PC Status Report to the ICANN > Dear Protocol Council Members, > Please find below the message of Azucena concerning the draft PSO-PC status > report. > Best regards, > Vlad > > -----Original Message----- > From: azucena.hernandezperez@telefonica.es > [mailto:azucena.hernandezperez@telefonica.es] > Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 11:11 AM > To: Androuchko, Vladimir > Subject: Re: Draft of the PSO-PC Status Report to the ICANN > > > Dear Vlad, dear PSO PC colleagues, > > Thanks a lot for preparing the PSO PC status report for year 2001. I have > no objections to it even though I do not know whether is necessary to > repeat again the Purpose and Scope of the PSO and the duties of the PSO PC > in this report as we did it one year ago. After another year of "life" it > is maybe not necessary to include those points again. > > Kind regards, > Azucena > > > > > "Androuchko, Vladimir" <vladimir.androuchko@ITU.INT>@pso.icann.org con > fecha 31/10/2001 16:43:47 > > Por favor, responda a "Androuchko, Vladimir" <vladimir.androuchko@ITU.INT> > > Enviado por: owner-pso-pc@pso.icann.org > > > Destinatarios: "pso-pc, ITU (MLIST)" <pso-pc@ties.itu.int> > CC: > Asunto: Draft of the PSO-PC Status Report to the ICANN > > > Dear Protocol Council Members, > Please find attached the draft of the PSO-PC Status Report to the ICANN for > your consideration. > Kind regards, > Vlad > > <<PSOREPORT.doc>> > > (See attached file: PSOREPORT.doc) > > >