The GAC final letter to the Board regarding geographic names at the
second level was posted a short while ago: http://www.icann.org/correspondence/karklins-to-twomey-26may09-en.pdf
.
I am confused about a key statement that says, "the GAC understands
that our proposal in relation to geographic names at the second
level . . is acceptable to the GNSO . . . " What am I missing
here? What in our letter led to this conclusion? We didn't even
address geographic names at the second level let along say that the
GAC proposal was acceptable.
Do we need to clarify this?
Chuck