Re: [council] Prague - please read!
- To: GNSO Council List <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [council] Prague - please read!
- From: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 12:53:07 +0200
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- References: <D5DB8EBA-1D07-408B-94EC-A7C3F0E657D6@indom.com> <email@example.com>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thanks to Thomas for picking up the discussion and to others for pursuing it.
These proposals are great. I have summarized them in the list below.
How could ICANN's communication be improved in the light of Fridays, URS and
the TAS Glitch?
What else is the Board considering - whether in relation to changing formats or
duration of ICANN meetings, or in holding different types of meetings (per the
budget) - that the GNSO can provide input on?
Regarding the newly-estabilshed New gTLD Committee and how does it function.
How can GNSO help / liaise with this committee and collaborate?
In what areas might the GAC wish to co-operate with the GNSO so we can prepare
/ plan resources?
How can the Council and the GAC can help manage expectations of both the public
bodies (especially LEA) and industry when it comes to fighting abuse?
Discuss the GAC views on the IGO issue, especially as the IOC has just
submitted a Request for Reconsideration of the Board's recent decision not to
change the AGB.
How can the GAC and GNSO can improve their joint working relationship? Are our
processes for joint engagement on areas of mutual interest adequate - can
they be improved? A particular focus on efficiency and speed would be useful.
For example, would an informal joint standing committee of some kind
Pick up the discussion what effects the huge number of registries might have on
our work and structure now that we know we should expect something in the range
of 2k new TLDs.
Discussion on how we can engage around areas of mutual interest such as
emerging issues in the development of policies for law enforcement requests.
Others, please help continue to build this list, especially with regards to our
interaction with the ccNSO.
All, please also provide suggestions on what weekend sessions you'd like to see.
I suggest we let the above lists build up a little more and then move into a
discussion of which topics we actually all feel comfortable with and want to
forward to the respective groups.
Stéphane Van Gelder
Directeur Général / General manager
INDOM Group NBT France
Head of Domain Operations
Le 12 mai 2012 à 05:03, Joy Liddicoat a écrit :
> Thanks for the request Stephane,
> Suggested topic for discussion with the GAC:
> how the GAC and GNSO can improve their joint working relationship? Are our
> processes for joint engagement on areas of mutual interest adequate - can
> they be improved? A particular focus on efficiency and speed would be
> useful. For example, would an informal joint standing committee of some kind
> be helpful? Such an informal group could be a useful forum for initial
> discussion of the kinds of questions Thomas raised, providing some support
> for more formal joint discussions - rather than being issue or subject
> dependent. This could also be a topic for our own working session.
> For the ccNSO - discussion on how we can engage around areas of mutual
> interest such as emerging issues in the development of policies for law
> enforcement requests
> these are my own thoughts, and I have also passed the request on to NSCG
> members asking for a prompt response.
> Kind regards
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
> Sent: Friday, 11 May 2012 8:06 p.m.
> To: GNSO Council List
> Subject: [council] Prague - please read!
> I would like to strongly request your help in coming up with two things in
> preparation for our Prague week:
> 1. Topics for our interactions with the Board/GAC and ccNSO and 2. Ideas for
> sessions for our work weekend.
> As added context, I should say that the Council leadership is under greater
> pressure than usual to provide this earlier than usual (Staff have been put
> under pressure due to the delay in publishing the CR agenda that people
> complained about there).
> I should also add that I have asked Jeff, who has kindly volunteered (or was
> kindly volunteered by me, whichever way you want to see it ;) ) to look
> after our Prague agenda, to ensure that we cut down on pure working lunch
> sessions. I find these sessions are an organizational nightmare as people
> need time to have their lunch, which cost down on the time afforded to the
> topic we are scheduled to work on.
> So in short, please make a greater effort than usual to provide ideas for 1
> and 2 above. These sessions, both our interactions with other groups and our
> own working sessions, should be the result of Council-wide deliberations so
> that they are truly effective and have greater meaning for the Council as a
> Thanks for your help in this endeavor.
> Stéphane Van Gelder
> Directeur Général / General manager
> INDOM Group NBT France
> Head of Domain Operations
> Group NBT