<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [council] FW: Request to post - GAC/GNSO joint meeting
Please do NOT post Glen. I need to get feedback from Janis before it is
finalized.
Chuck
________________________________
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Glen de Saint Géry
Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2010 9:53 AM
To: Council GNSO
Subject: [council] FW: Request to post - GAC/GNSO joint meeting
Forwarded From: Rosemary To: Gomes, Chuck; William Drake; Glen de Saint
Géry; Stéphane Van Gelder; KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx; Glen de Saint Géry; Cavalli, Olga
Subject: Request to post - GAC/GNSO joint meeting
Glen
I think I have made the right changes - 2am here - would youpost this
doc for me pls?
Cheers
Rosemary
-----Original Message-----
From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thu 2/18/2010 1:16 AM
To: Gomes, Chuck; William Drake; Glen de Saint Géry; Rosemary Sinclair;
Stéphane Van Gelder; KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx; Glen de Saint Géry; Cavalli, Olga
Subject: RE: Drafting team to prepare for the GAC/GNSO joint meeting
Here's the redline version I sent earlier in the week. If no one
objects, let's post a clean version of this and send it to the Council ASAP.
Glen - Can you do that? If someone want to make changes, please do so.
I am about to head to the airport so will not be able to do much for a few
hours. Don't wait for me.
Chuck
________________________________
From: Gomes, Chuck
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 8:23 AM
To: William Drake; Glen de Saint Géry; Rosemary Sinclair;
Stéphane Van Gelder; KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx; Glen de Saint Géry; Cavalli, Olga
Subject: RE: Drafting team to prepare for the GAC/GNSO joint
meeting
I proposed a final version and was waiting for feedback from
others on this list. If you are okay with what I did, please distribute it
Bill in Rosemary's absence (she is not available until Thursday her time). If
not, make any changes and send it.
I am traveling today and will have limited email access.
Chuck
________________________________
From: William Drake
[mailto:william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 6:58 AM
To: Gomes, Chuck; Glen de Saint Géry; Rosemary
Sinclair; Stéphane Van Gelder; KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx; Glen de Saint Géry; Cavalli,
Olga
Subject: Re: Drafting team to prepare for the GAC/GNSO
joint meeting
This is on the agenda for tomorrow's call, shouldn't we
send it to the Council to see prior?
1. New gTLD Implementation &EOI
Discussion of any specific and
actionable recommendations on, for example:
*any remaining concerns with
respect to geographic & property protections
*the utility of the studies
proposed by the GAC, and the foreseen negative effects if they are not
completed pre-launch
*how categorization could
work[Gomes, Chuck] I know there are some in the GAC, in particular Bertrand,
who still are pushing this, but I don't think it has much of chance to be
considered so I think it would be a poor use of time and could take a lot of
time as well. If they bring it up, we cannot avoid that but I would not
recommend we bring it up.
*desirable fee structures
*desired timeline for the roll
out of new gTLDs
I was listing topics GAC has raised as
indicators of the pool from which we could draw. Obviously there won't be able
to discuss all of these irrespective of whether there are two topics or three.
In that context, I didn't think it was up to us to judge which we considered
meritorious or likely to go anywhere, as some government might object to us
pruning. But if people think doing so is ok in terms of sensitivities and
optics, fine by me.
2. Affirmation of Commitments
Discussion of perspectives on:
*the meaning of public interest
in relation to ICANN's identity and mission
*the operationalization of
public interest standards in relation to the work programs of ICANN's various
bodies
*specific accountability and
transparency considerations with respect to GNSO's policy dev process
3. ICANN in the Wider
International Environment
Discussion of the relationship
to ICANN in general and to GAC policies and principles in particular of:
*the ongoing intergovernmental
discussions (e.g. in the ITU and CSTD[Gomes, Chuck] what is CSTD )
The UN Commission on Science and Technology for
Development http://www.unctad.org/Templates/Page.asp?intItemID=2696
concerning Enhanced Cooperation
on Globally Applicable Public Policy Principles
*the various other proposals
that have been advanced in the ITU and could be taken up by its October 2010
Plenipotentiary Conference concerning, e.g. the provision of registry services,
the harmonization and coordination of ccTLD policies, internationalized domain
names, the interface between international laws and treaties and Internet
governance, security and stability, dispute resolution, and so on
I cut nondiscrimination, that's more about
traffic than ICANN
Shall we send this to council and get some
feedback?
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|