[gnso-arr-dt] FW: [soac-discussion] FW: Next selection

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Please note the latest exchange between Janis and I.
 
It would really help us if we can finish the DT work as early as possible in 
May.
 
Chuck

________________________________

From: Gomes, Chuck 
Sent: Friday, April 23, 2010 1:54 PM
To: 'Janis Karklins'; 'Louis Lee'
Cc: soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx; 'Rod Beckstrom'; 'Marco Lorenzoni'; 'Donna 
Austin'; 'Alice Jansen'
Subject: RE: [soac-discussion] FW: Next selection


Janis,
 
I don't think it should be any problem at all finalizing GNSO endorsements at 
least a month before the next two RT start.  And I think it would be possible 
to call for volunteers before we totally finalize our procedures, but let me 
bounce this off some others in the GNSO before commiting.
 
Chuck


________________________________

        From: Janis Karklins [mailto:janis.karklins@xxxxxxxxx] 
        Sent: Friday, April 23, 2010 11:58 AM
        To: Gomes, Chuck; 'Louis Lee'
        Cc: soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx; 'Rod Beckstrom'; 'Marco Lorenzoni'; 
'Donna Austin'; 'Alice Jansen'
        Subject: RE: [soac-discussion] FW: Next selection
        
        

        Chuck

        Thanks for your reply. This is exactly our intention to avoid stepping 
on the same rake. 

        What would be your suggested timeline? 

        Can we put requirement of prior endorsement by the SO/AC in the call 
for volunteers? It would allow to launch a call while the GNSO is still 
finalizing the internal procedure. Or that wouldn’t work?

        We need to give the team at least one months before the start of the 
process to work thru organizational issues.

        Best regards

        JK

         

        From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
        Sent: piektdiena, 2010. gada 23. aprīlī 16:57
        To: Louis Lee; Janis Karklins
        Cc: soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx; Rod Beckstrom; Marco Lorenzoni; Donna 
Austin; Alice Jansen
        Subject: RE: [soac-discussion] FW: Next selection

         

        Janis,

         

        I would like to strongly endorse Louie's recommendation and also 
suggest the following: The request for applicants should refer applicants 
seeking endorsement from an SO or AC to the applicable SO or AC.  The GNSO is 
currently developing a long term process for endorsing candidates for AoC RTs 
and plans to finish that not later than June 2010.  That means that it may not 
be possible to endorse candidates by June.  I think it would be preferrable if 
the GNSO process was finalized before applicants seeking GNSO endorsement 
applied for such endorsement.

         

        So the time line below does not work well for the GNSO and we really 
would like to handle the next two RT endorsement much better than the first.

         

        Chuck

                 

________________________________

                From: owner-soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:owner-soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Louis Lee
                Sent: Friday, April 23, 2010 10:35 AM
                To: Janis Karklins
                Cc: soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx; Rod Beckstrom; Marco Lorenzoni; 
Donna Austin; Alice Jansen
                Subject: Re: [soac-discussion] FW: Next selection

                Thanks, Janis. I will forward the message on.

                 

                One recommendation is that you open the application window 
again to allow more applicants from the ASO side only.  The AoC recommends that 
a review team member serves on no more than one team. While I was the only one 
to have applied, I have a couple colleagues interested in serving on the other 
team that calls for an ASO-endorsed member. (I would not feel disadvantaged in 
any way if this happened.) 
                
                Louie 

                --  

                 

                Please forgive the brevity of this message as it was sent from 
my mobile device.

                
                On Apr 22, 2010, at 10:19 PM, "Janis Karklins" 
<janis.karklins@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

                        Dear colleagues

                        Two Affirmation-mandated reviews are to start on 
October 1st, namely the ‘Whois policy’; and ‘Security, Stability and Resiliency 
of the DNS’.
                        The lesson we learned from the ‘Accountability and 
Transparency’ experience is that the process leading to the establishment of a 
Review Team can be quite time-consuming. Hence my suggestion would be to start 
the preliminary activities for these upcoming reviews quite soon. 

                        Based on our experience I would like to suggest the 
following sequence:

                        ·         Chairs consult their respective AC/SO on the 
size and composition of the both RTs – next 3 weeks.

                        ·         After agreement among Chairs on the issue 
above, the call for nominations is renewed and each AC/SO would endorse 2-3 
time more candidates that agreed above – mid May – 20 June.

                        ·         Selectors make selection and announce 
composition of the both RTs at the end of the Brussels meeting.

                        Would this sequence be acceptable? Pls provide your 
comments at your earliest convenience.

                        Best regards

                        JK

                        PS. The proposal has not been agreed yet by both 
Selectors. These are just my personal ideas. JK

                         

                        Click here 
<https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/liM09!KwlirTndxI!oX7Ujam5VJmC8gUNMjh1yhDCHk2YeXT4eNg6ffnrh97zEADlJAxlYjbj3RTEf5tQBqpNg==>
  to report this email as spam.