[Internal-cg] Possible

[Lynn St.Amour]

I also support Joe's suggested text.

Lynn 

On Oct 22, 2015, at 6:30 AM, "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek at verisign.com> wrote:

> I support Joe's proposed jurisdiction language below. It is factual and does not seek to predetermine the scope of discussion post-transition. 
> 
> Keith
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Internal-cg [mailto:internal-cg-bounces at ianacg.org] On Behalf Of joseph alhadeff
> Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 11:20 AM
> To: internal-cg at ianacg.org
> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Possible
> 
> Possible text on Jurisdiction:
> 
> A number of comments highlighted the issue of Jurisdiction as important.  A minority objected to any transition at all because they perceived that US was relinquishing jurisdiction.  Another minority point of view raised concerns that the jurisdiction was not international or outside of the US.  A number of comments also suggested that CCWG Workstream 2 might be a place to address some of the continued 
> concerns about jurisdiction.    The majority of comments did not find 
> jurisdiction as a limiting factor to the consideration proposal.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
> http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
> http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org