RE: TAC membership

Dear Richard, dear all,

I respect Mike's view on not supporting a common PSO reply to the last E&R
committee report, but my view coincides with the one of Richard: the PSO is
an ICANN Supporting Organization and therefore should support all ICANN
activities. All along the Reform process, the PSO has been officially
invited to give comments as much as the other two Supporting Organizations
and therefore I consider that the PSO is entitled to do so.

Thanks Richard for taking care of the ETSI/ITU-T statement and ensuring
that it reaches the E&R Committee and Stuart Lynn.

Kind regards,
Azucena




richard.hill@itu.int con fecha 08/10/2002 17:18:59

Destinatarios: mstjohns@mindspring.com, brian@BWMC.DEMON.CO.UK
CC:       Azucena Hernandez Perez/INFR/TESA@Telefonica, pso-pc@w3.org
Asunto:   RE: TAC membership



> -----Original Message-----
> From: mstjohns@mindspring.com [mailto:mstjohns@mindspring.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, 08 October 2002 16:35
> To: Brian Moore
> Cc: richard.hill@itu.int; azucena.hernandezperez@telefonica.es;
> pso-pc@w3.org
> Subject: Re: TAC membership
>
>
> Folks -
>
> I'd really prefer it if the PSO made no further (or attempted
> no further)
> comments as a body on the report.  I don't have any problems with the
> individual organizations making comments, or with two or more
> organizations
> submitting joint comments

OK, unless I hear otherwise, I will post the comment tomorrow as a joint
ETSI/ITU-T comment.

> - but please remember that the PSO
> was chartered to
> provide TECHNICAL input.  Your comments have slid over into
> policy and are
> more appropriate coming from your parent organizations
> directly to the ERC
> than from the PSO.

Actually, the ICANN Board (and the ERC) specifically asked PSO to comment
on
the various reform proposals.  So the PSO can, if it wishes, respond to
that
request.

Best,
Richard

>
> Mike
>
>
> On Mon, 7 Oct 2002 13:35:21 +0100 Brian Moore
> <brian@BWMC.DEMON.CO.UK> wrote:
>
> >
> > Richard,
> > Looks good to me (and thanks to Azucena for her
> > comment).
> > Brian.
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From:
> > To: ;
> > Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 1:26 PM
> > Subject: RE: TAC membership
> >
> >
> >
> > I would propose the following wording for a
> > common statement.
> >
> > Best,
> > Richard
> >
> > ******************
> > The PSO thanks the ERC for its final report and
> > notes with satisfaction that
> > its comments have been taken into account.
> >
> > However, there is one point on which the PSO
> > suggests a drafting change.
> > The PSO proposes the following language:
> >
> > "The TAC shall consist of 8 members with direct
> > experience with technical
> > standards issues relating to ICANN activities.
> > Two members will be appointed
> > by each of the following organizations: ETSI,
> > IAB, ITU and W3C."
> >
> > ******************
> >
> >
> > -----------------------------------------
> > Richard Hill
> > Counsellor, ITU-T SG2
> > International Telecommunication Union
> > Place des Nations
> > CH-1211 Geneva 20
> > Switzerland
> > tel: +41 22 730 5887
> > FAX: +41 22 730 5853
> > Email: richard.hill@itu.int
> > Study Group 2 email: tsbsg2@itu.int
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: azucena.hernandezperez@telefonica.es
> > > [mailto:azucena.hernandezperez@telefonica.es]
> > > Sent: Monday, 07 October 2002 14:08
> > > To: pso-pc@w3.org
> > > Subject: Re: TAC membership
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Dear Richard, dear PSO PC colleagues,
> > >
> > > Having now had the time to read carefully the
> > Final Report
> > > from the E&R
> > > Committee, I see with satisfaction that the
> > previous proposal
> > > of having TAC
> > > members elected by the Nominating Committee
> > has been removed
> > > but the text
> > > "selection by the ICANN Board of 8
> > individuals out of
> > > nominations from the
> > > 4 bodies already in the PSO" could lead to
> > misunderstandings.
> > > I agree with
> > > Richard and Brian on not finding which kind
> > of reason could
> > > the ICANN Board
> > > have to reject a candidate proposed by our
> > organizations as the most
> > > appropriate for TAC and therefore this
> > selection should
> > > simply be a formal
> > > endorsement of the members proposed by the
> > organizations . In
> > > the other
> > > hand I wonder whether this proposal could
> > deal to the
> > > undesired extreme
> > > situation of having a TAC with 8 members from
> > one of the 4
> > > organizations if
> > > that organization sends 8 nominations that
> > the ICANN Board
> > > likes more than
> > > those presented by the other organizations.
> > >
> > > I would prefer to have a common reply from
> > the 4 organizations simply
> > > proposing the following text for bullet c) of
> > TAC:
> > >
> > > "The TAC shall consist of 8 members with
> > direct experience
> > > with technical
> > > standards issues relating to ICANN
> > activities. They will be
> > > appointed by
> > > the ICANN Board based on 2 nominations from
> > each of the following
> > > organizations: ETSI, IAB, ITU and W3C"
> > >
> > > Kind regards,
> > > Azucena
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > richard.hill@itu.int@w3.org con fecha
> > 04/10/2002 21:44:13
> > >
> > > Enviado por:   pso-pc-request@w3.org
> > >
> > >
> > > Destinatarios: pso-pc@w3.org
> > > CC:
> > > Asunto:   TAC membership
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I guess you've all had a chance to look at
> > the new ICANN
> > > bylaws and the
> > > part
> > > on TAC.
> > >
> > > The only thing that bothers me is the fact
> > that the TAC members are
> > > nominated by the Board on the recommendation
> > of the organizations
> > > comprising
> > > TAC.  Personally, I don't see why the Board
> > should be able to veto or
> > > refuse
> > > the nomination of a particular person from an
> > organization.
> > >
> > > Does anybody else share my view?  If yes, we
> > could again send
> > > individual
> > > comments (or a joint one).
> > >
> > > Thanks and best,
> > > Richard
> > >
> > > -----------------------------------------
> > > Richard Hill
> > > Counsellor, ITU-T SG2
> > > International Telecommunication Union
> > > Place des Nations
> > > CH-1211 Geneva 20
> > > Switzerland
> > > tel: +41 22 730 5887
> > > FAX: +41 22 730 5853
> > > Email: richard.hill@itu.int
> > > Study Group 2 email: tsbsg2@itu.int
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > > _____________
> > >
> > > Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su
> > destinatario y
> > > puede contener
> > > información privilegiada o confidencial. Si
> > no es vd. el destinatario
> > > indicado, queda notificado de que la
> > utilización, divulgación
> > > y/o copia sin
> > > autorización está prohibida en virtud de la
> > legislación vigente. Si ha
> > > recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos
> > que nos lo comunique
> > > inmediatamente por esta misma vía y proceda a
> > su destrucción.
> > >
> > >
> > > This message is intended exclusively for its
> > addressee and may contain
> > > information that is CONFIDENTIAL and
> > protected by
> > > professional privilege.
> > > If you are not the intended recipient you are
> > hereby notified that any
> > > dissemination, copy or disclosure of this
> > communication is strictly
> > > prohibited by law. If this message has been
> > received in error, please
> > > immediately notify us via e-mail and delete
> > it.
> > >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > > _____________
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>




___________________________________________________________________________

Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario y puede contener
información privilegiada o confidencial. Si no es vd. el destinatario
indicado, queda notificado de que la utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin
autorización está prohibida en virtud de la legislación vigente. Si ha
recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique
inmediatamente por esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción.


This message is intended exclusively for its addressee and may contain
information that is CONFIDENTIAL and protected by professional privilege.
If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, copy or disclosure of this communication is strictly
prohibited by law. If this message has been received in error, please
immediately notify us via e-mail and delete it.
___________________________________________________________________________

Received on Wednesday, 9 October 2002 04:57:01 UTC