RE: [council] FW: [soac-discussion] FW: Communication with ACSO on the next RTs

["Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I'm not too concerned about having only two seats on the Security RT,
but strongly oppose accepting only two seats on the Whois. 

It is perfectly reasonable to allow one seat each to the SSAC, GAC, and
ASO. But I think it's totally implausible to assume a well represented
RT with only two for the GNSO and one each for the ccNSO and the ALAC. I
believe we make a very strong statement insisting that each of those are
doubled - four for the GNSO (one for each SG, no less), two each for the
ccNSO and the ALAC due to the size of their memberships. That would make
the RT 14 members, and that is certainly workable and more realistic.

I realize the ALAC and ccNSO can defend themselves, but given the
selectors concerns over the team size I think we should respond with a
total picture of what we think the RT should look like and why.

Tim

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [council] FW: [soac-discussion] FW: Communication with ACSO on
the next RTs
From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, June 04, 2010 1:44 pm
To: <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Please note what the AoC Selectors have proposed for the next two RTs. 
Please provide any comments you have on this list.  Time permitting, we
will also briefly discuss this in meeting on 10 June.
 
Chuck
 
From: owner-soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Janis Karklins
Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 1:50 PM
To: soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: 'Rod Beckstrom'; 'Donna Austin'; 'Olof Nordling'
Subject: [soac-discussion] FW: Communication with ACSO on the next RTs


 
Dear colleagues
 
On behalf of Selectors I would like to propose that the size and
composition of the two next review teams would be as follows:
 
                                                    Security            
  WHOIS
GAC, including the Chair           2                              1
GNSO                                                2                   
         2
ccNSO                                               2                   
        1
ALAC                                                 2                  
          1
SSAC                                                  1                 
           1
RSSAC                                               1
ASO                                                    1                
             1
Independent expert                 1-2                          2 (law
enforcement/privacy experts)
CEO                                                     1               
             1
                                                          13-14         
               10

I understand that your initial suggestions/requests were not fully
accommodated, but for the sake of efficiency, credibility of the
process, budgetary limitations Selectors have developed this proposal.
If we would take into account all wishes, the RT size would be over 20
which in Selectors’ view is not credible option.
 
I hope that proposal will be equally unacceptable for everybody. I would
appreciate your comments or expression of non-objection in coming week.
Only after assessment of the violence of your opposition the Selectors
will make their proposal (in present form or modified) public.
 
Best regards
JK