ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[council] Topics for our discussions with the Board

  • To: GNSO Council List <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [council] Topics for our discussions with the Board
  • From: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 09:07:21 +0200
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Councillors,

Following on from our discussions today, please find below a refined list of 
topics.

Please come back with comments and proposed edits asap. As a reminder, our 
session with the Board is today from 17:30 to 19:00.

Thanks,

Stéphane


AoC

i) The AoC process & outputs to date, and the broader progress of transparency 
& accountability across the range of ICANN processes.

 

ii) The AoC's repeatedly stated requirement that ICANN act in the public 
interest.  While there've been some preliminary discussions on such matters, 
the AoC is now almost 2 years old. Are we able to have a more probing and 
structured discussion with the benefit of this experience?

 

 

CWG

The GNSO Council has spent a lot of time recently discussing Community Working 
Groups (CWGs), to the point that we have a drafting team looking at this topic. 
Recent experiences with a couple of CWGs that the GNSO is involved in have 
shown that it would be useful to have a better-defined process for them.

 

 

GNSO/Board interact.

At the Board's initiative, our interaction with the Board seems to be changing. 
The Council's always found our social interaction with the Board, more 
specifically the dinners we used to have with the Board, to be extremely useful.

 

 

Revolving door.

In light of the DNS becoming a function more visible to, and scrutinized by 
governments and business on a global basis, and the size of the market about to 
be created by the new gTLD program, has the Board begun to assess how this 
might require changes to ICANN ethics policies, e.g., the introduction of an 
anti revolving door policy?


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>