Re: [council] GAC /ICANN Board cooperation

["Sophia B" <sophiabekele@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Bruce,

Thanks for sharing the communique.

While it is good news that GAC has identified the priority areas as GNSO
would see, it, I am quite confused as to the role 'GNSO' would have in its
policy advise capacity.  On this note I agree on the points raised by Avri
and *kindly request for clarification* on two of the following items:

1-Where is GNSO's role at the GAC level.
2-Concurrently, looking at the slides of Tina Dam PAC presentation to
BOARD/Public forum regarding IDNs, it suggests the formation of the working
group, and the three ccNSOs to join GNSO PDP.

I would *highly suggest* that GNSO has a larger involvement than proposed by
the statement below, recognizing that public policy principles are also a
mandate we need to be concerned with.


> "Beyond this it was agreed that the working group should as a longer term
> issue focus on the role of the GAC vis-à-vis ICANN and the ICANN Board and
> it should lead to the creation of a better environment that facilitates the
> development and application of *public policy principles."*
>

Kind regards,
Sophia



On 03/04/06, Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I also think this is important.
>
> 2 of the things I think we need understand as a council.
>
> - In the Communique they use the term 'enhanced cooperation'.
>
> > In order to achieve the objectives of enhanced cooperation within the
> > ICANN context
>
> These are key words from the WSIS Tunis Agenda. Specifically:
>
> 69. We further recognize the need for enhanced cooperation in the
> future, to enable
> governments, on an equal footing, to carry out their roles and
> responsibilities, in international
> public policy issues pertaining to the Internet, but not in the day-
> to-day technical and
> operational matters, that do not impact on international public
> policy issues.
>
> I am curious whether the words are being used in that context.  I
> tend to expect so.
>
> - In the light of that, I go back to the word 'counterpart' used by
> the GAC GSNO WG chair at the beginning of the joint meetings between
> the council and GAC GNSO WG in referring to the relationship between
> the GAC GSNO WG and the GNSO Council. I am curious to what this word
> signifies and on to what extent parity as a 'counterpart' on GNSO
> policy issues is expected.
>
> This concerns me somewhat and I hope that the council will have
> visibility, perhaps even a liaison relationship, into the discussions
> of the joint board/GACC WG.
>
> thanks
> a.
>
>
>
> On 4 apr 2006, at 04.13, Marilyn Cade wrote:
>
> > I thought this was quite helpful for us as Council to discuss how
> > we will
> > organize the ongoing interaction and dialogue with the GAC.
> >
> > Marilyn
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-
> > council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> > Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin
> > Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 8:55 PM
> > To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [council] GAC /ICANN Board cooperation
> >
> > Hello All,
> >
> > Below is an extract from the GAC Communique regarding cooperation
> > between
> > GAC and ICANN Board, and the priority issues.  Note that new gTLDs,
> > IDNs,
> > and WHOIS are all listed as priority issues.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Bruce Tonkin
> >
> >
> >> From the GAC Communiqué:
> > http://gac.icann.org/web/communiques/gac24com.pdf
> >
> >
> > - GAC-ICANN Board cooperation
> >
> > The GAC welcomed the inaugural meeting of the Joint Working Group
> > of the GAC and the ICANN Board. The Joint Working Group will be led
> > by Alejandro Pisanty on behalf of the ICANN Board and Janis Karklins
> > (Latvia) on behalf of the GAC. It was acknowledged that in the
> > immediate term (from Wellington to Marrakesh), it would be
> > important to
> > improve the timeliness and efficiency of communications between the
> > GAC and the ICANN Board.
> >
> > In order to achieve the objectives of enhanced cooperation within the
> > ICANN context, the GAC acknowledges that there is a need for the GAC
> > to consider changes in its working methods to enable it to interact
> > more
> > routinely with the ICANN Board and the community.
> >
> > Beyond this it was agreed that the working group should as a longer
> > term
> > issue focus on the role of the GAC vis-à-vis ICANN and the ICANN
> > Board and it should lead to the creation of a better environment that
> > facilitates the development and application of public policy
> > principles.
> >
> > In particular, the GAC has identified the following issues as key
> > priority
> > areas for early engagement, namely:
> >
> > a) ccTLDs,
> >
> > b) IDNs,
> >
> > c) IPv6 and IP addressing resource allocation,
> >
> > d) Development and creation of policies on gTLDs, and
> >
> > e) WhoIS.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>