[council] Informal conversation

[Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>]

All,

As we discussed during today's wrap-up, I had an informal conversation with the 
GAC.

I passed along the message that there was disappointment at the GAC's apparent 
lack of desire for a common effort on the IOC and RC names. The answer was that 
the GAC remains extremely challenged when it comes to participating in joint 
efforts of this kind. There are workload issues first and foremost for 
government reps, but also because of the unique nature of the GAC it is 
difficult for any GAC member to participate effectively.

The point was also made to me that we tend to assume that when we put something 
out, either on our mailing list or our website, that is enough for the GAC to 
be aware of it. I was told that it is not so, and that there is no substitute 
for direct communication. So in that regard, it sounds like our discussions in 
today's wrap-up about being seen to be more constructive and more proactive are 
spot on.

With that in mind, I would suggest that we perhaps want to send the draft 
letter on the IOC and RC names anyway. The idea being to show that we have done 
some thinking about this issue as well (someone made that point during the 
wrap-up, I forget who so apologies).

Also, I was told that unless we write to the GAC to tell them about the 
announcement made by ICANN and the registrars and published on the GNSO mailing 
list, they don't know about it. As this is a registrar specific issue, it is 
perhaps not for the GNSO as a whole to mention. But it is perhaps worth 
thinking about.

The main takeaway I got from the conversation is that we should look to improve 
the way we communicate with the outside world (this is not something I was 
told, it is my own conclusion).

Hope this is helpful.

Get home safe everyone. Enjoyed working with you this week.

Stéphane