Versions Compared


  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.


•  With the JAS report complete, that group will be winding down but it will be necessary for At-Large to monitor its acceptance and implementation (to the extent that it is accepted and implemented)
First thoughts:  As we are still waiting for the Board's first words on implementation plan does this go into the background.  Also, I understand that the JAS group is still waiting for the response and may wish to respond.  It occurs to me that as long as the JAS group remains active, another reason why this activity should be in the background. 
Or are there specifically At-large concerns that should be worked out here?
 Avri (11.11.11)


Thank you Avri, I do appreciate your efforts.

As for the support program for needy applicants, I'm wondering if we need to contact the ICANN staff and ask for help to define the objective criteria for financial need that we put in the final report. Especially because we are running out of time, I think we should try to find the right expertise with the help of the staff.

Tijani BEN JEMAA (12.11.11)



Thanks Tijani.

Is this something this group takes on, or is it something that the JAS WG does.  I am also wondering whether it is important to see what the Board does with the JAS report before taking another step - that is, would the staff be able to do anything before the Board made its decision?

Also I must admit I am not clear on where the JAS WG mandate ends and this groups's begins on the support issues.

Avri (12.11.11)


Hi again Avri,

This WG is an At-Large one that deals with the new gTLDs, and one of our concern as At-Large is the implementation of the JAS final report. If the JAS WG is still working on it, that's fine(and we are all members of the WG), but also as gTLD WG, we need to push things especially because of the time constraint.

Have a nice week-end.

Tijani BEN JEMAA (12.11.11)


Draft CMR 20120412