Re: [council] Trans -SO/AC meeting in Cairo

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

Perhaps.  Though if it is just cross-SO that might be more appropriate  
for the bilateral meeting between the two SOs.
a.

On 5 Sep 2008, at 19:06, Gomes, Chuck wrote:

> One new topic that would be good to start discussing is the concept  
> of a cross-SO PDP.  This has come up in the fast flux WG.
> Chuck
>
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> ] On Behalf Of Mike Rodenbaugh
> Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 11:07 AM
> To: 'Council GNSO'
> Subject: RE: [council] Trans -SO/AC meeting in Cairo
>
> I agree this is a great concept if scheduling can work, and we  
> should have a specific agenda rather than a broad amorphous topic  
> like “PSC Consultation.”  I do not see the benefit of discussing  
> that in this broad group, and would greatly prefer to focus on  
> policy matters – such as updates from the various SOs/ACs about  
> their policy initiatives, and cross discussion about each other’s  
> initiatives.  Ideally these bodies can someday coordinate their  
> policy development efforts, or at least routinely keep each other  
> informed and with the ability to comment, because many policy  
> efforts really ought to cut across multiple of these organizations  
> but this silo’d ICANN system doesn’t easily allow for cross-efforts.
> Thanks,
> Mike
>
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> ] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
> Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 7:29 AM
> To: Avri Doria; Council GNSO
> Subject: RE: [council] Trans -SO/AC meeting in Cairo
>
> I support this idea if it can be scheduled to avoid conflicts.  I do  
> have two comments though regarding the proposed agenda items for  
> Cairo: 1) if there is going to be a workshop on new gTLDs, it would  
> be very helpful if that workshop preceded the Trans-SO/AC session on  
> Monday; 2) if there is going to be a general workshop during the  
> week on the topic of 'improving institutional confidence' then I am  
> not sure that we need to discuss it in the Trans-SO/AC session  
> except maybe in the follow-up session if we have one.
> Chuck
>
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> ] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 2:41 AM
> To: Council GNSO
> Subject: [council] Trans -SO/AC meeting in Cairo
> Importance: High
> Hi,
>
> One of the topics on yesterday's agenda was a proposal for a joint  
> SO/AC meeting on various topics in Cairo.  Chris Disspain shared the  
> message he was going to send to the ccNSO and I have decided that he  
> says it all and have borrowed it (with permission):
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>
>
> “At the suggestion of Bertrand de La Chapelle, the Chairs of the  
> ALAC, gNSO and ccNSO together with GAC representatives Bertrand and  
> Manal Ismail and Bruce Tonkin on behalf of the Board, had a  
> teleconference earlier this week.
> The purpose was to explore how the ICANN Cairo meeting schedule  
> could expand on the progress already made in Paris in terms of  
> bringing the different SOs and ACs together on the major issues. The  
> goal would be to develop trans-SO/AC communications and also  
> facilitate general awareness within the community about the status  
> of different issues and increase the visibility of them. Trans-SO/AC  
> communications would not necessarily mean stopping the bilateral  
> sessions, but may have the effect of making them shorter, more  
> focused and less repetitive.
> As a result of the call it is suggested that on the Monday in Cairo  
> the ccNSO, gNSO, ALAC and GAC organise a half day joint session  
> (open to members as well as councillors) to a) discuss progress,  
> issues and future steps regarding new gTLDs (including IDNs) and IDN  
> ccTLDs and b) to be briefed on the President’s Strategy Committee  
> consultations on improving institutional confidence. It is also  
> suggested that a further session on the Thursday might be  
> appropriate to follow up and report on the individual SO/AC  
> discussions on the topics following the Monday session.
> Obviously, the logistics of all of this have yet to be organised but  
> ICANN has agreed the principle and we need to confirm, by 12  
> September, that we want to do this so that the initial agenda can be  
> published. I’d appreciate comment, questions and input from  
> councillors on the suggestion as soon as possible.”
> Please use the list to indicate your opinions on this and whether  
> this is something the council should support.
> thanks
> a.