Re: [council] RE: GNSO Council Meeting with ICANN Board

[Thomas Rickert <rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I can speak to the issue of name collisions for geo TLDs and I am happy to 
embed this section (i.e. the three topics name collision, universal acceptance 
and data retention) into the overall question of evaluation the new gTLD 
program.

Thomas


Am 23.03.2014 um 09:58 schrieb Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:

> All,
> 
> 
> 
> Following up on below and our preparatory session yesterday, I have notes on
> the following questions / discussion points
> 
> I feel we could do with a little more substance / clarity here.
> 
> 
> 
> Please can you give your input / comments on list asap.  
> 
> 
> 
> -          Add to
> 
> -          Remove from
> 
> -          Modify
> 
> -          Volunteer / Commit to lead
> 
> 
> 
> We may get to discuss more at lunch.
> 
> 
> 
> Jonathan
> 
> 
> 
> ----
> 
> 
> 
> Overarching Issues / Challenges (Jonathan, A.N. Other?)
> 
> -          Volume of work and pace of change
> 
> -          Concerns over dominance of top-down / executive & board led
> initiatives 
> 
> -          Guarantee of the preservation of bottom-up and consensus based
> multi-stakeholder system
> 
> 
> 
> Specific Questions & Issues
> 
> -          IGO / INGO Issue (Thomas)
> 
> o   Board commitment to bottom-up processes (PDP)
> 
> o   Specific issues
> 
> -          Current view of board of the success (or not) of the new gTLD
> programme (Introduced by?)
> (Follow-on: How is the board planning to evaluate success?).  
> Examples:
> 
> o   Name collisions. GEO TLDs. Reservation list (Who?)
> 
> o   RAA. Data retention requirements (James +1)(Ching +1)
> 
> o   Universal acceptance? IOS 7 (Ching +1)
> 
> -          What is the decision making process leading to reconciling GAC
> advice / GNSO policy? (John)
> 
> -          A number of SSAC reports seem to be backlogged (Mikey)
> 
> o   What is the Board's approach to addressing SSR backlog? 
> 
> -          Strategy Panels (Maria / James)
> 
> o   N.B. Were these adequately covered yesterday with Fadi?
> 
> 
> 
> From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@xxxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: 21 March 2014 11:22
> To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: GNSO Council Meeting with ICANN Board
> 
> 
> 
> All,
> 
> 
> 
> I have spoken with Steve Crocker and out of that conversation, a proposed
> structure of our 90 minutes meeting with the board has emerged (see below).
> 
> 
> 
> Note that there is specific scope for raising key questions / issues with
> the board and the structure anticipates some of these.
> 
> 
> 
> I propose to deliver the GNSO Council update using a few slides if
> necessary.
> 
> 
> 
> Any thoughts or comments on fleshing this out are welcome, particularly on
> "specific questions" and "current challenges / issues".
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jonathan
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> 
> GNSO Council
> 
> *         GNSO Council update to ICANN Board (10 mins)
> 
> o   Brief description of GNSO Council and GNSO process improvements.  
> Focus on reality v. possible perception.  
> 
> o   Specific highlight of GAC / GNSO work on early GAC engagement in the
> policy process.
> 
> *         Specific questions the GNSO Council has for the ICANN Board, i.e.
> the GNSO Council's "asks" if not covered elsewhere on agenda (15 mins)
> 
> *         Highlight current challenges GNSO is currently dealing with. 
> This might include the pace of change, concerns about top-down vs bottom up,
> etc. (15 mins)
> 
> 
> 
> ICANN Board
> 
> *         ICANN Board update on how the Board is working, where our focus
> is, etc.  
> Division of labor and coordination with the CEO. (10 mins)
> 
> *         Clarification about the role, purpose and operation of the new
> Board Advisory Committees. (15 mins)
> 
> *         ICANN Board's view of ICANN Globalization, IANA Globalization and
> general Internet Governance. (20 mins)
> 
> <winmail.dat>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail