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

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

FYI

 

Chuck

 

From: Gomes, Chuck 
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 12:39 PM
To: 'Janis Karklins'; 'Marco Lorenzoni'; soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx; 'Rod 
Beckstrom'
Cc: 'Donna Austin'; 'Alice Jansen'; 'Olof Nordling'
Subject: RE: [soac-discussion] FW: Next selection

 

Janis,

 

Our endorsement process will start after the application period ends because we 
will decide who to endorse from the list of applications who list the GNSO as 
their group.

 

The timeline will be easier to deal with in future years than this year.

 

Chuck

 

From: Janis Karklins [mailto:janis.karklins@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 12:26 PM
To: Gomes, Chuck; 'Marco Lorenzoni'; soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx; 'Rod Beckstrom'
Cc: 'Donna Austin'; 'Alice Jansen'; 'Olof Nordling'
Subject: RE: [soac-discussion] FW: Next selection

 

Chuck,

It is not so simple. A&T RT experience shows that the team needs some lead time 
to the first meeting. In the case of A&T it was more than a month. 

This should be factored in your calculations.

I don’t see any reasons why SOs and ACs couldn’t start nomination/endorsement 
process immediately when we have informal agreement on the size and 
composition.  I hope to make a proposal once ALAC will provide me with its 
views on the subject.

Best regards

JK

 

From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: ceturtdiena, 2010. gada 27. maijā 18:18
To: Marco Lorenzoni; Janis Karklins; soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx; Rod Beckstrom
Cc: Donna Austin; Alice Jansen; Olof Nordling
Subject: RE: [soac-discussion] FW: Next selection

 

Thanks Marco.  I will forward this to our drafting team.  Our process will 
require time for SGs to endorse candidates and in some cases for the Council to 
take additional action after that; some SGs only meet every 3 weeks or longer 
and the Council meets every 3 weeks.  We will try to trim it down if possible.

 

Chuck

 

From: Marco Lorenzoni [mailto:marco.lorenzoni@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 4:57 AM
To: Gomes, Chuck; Janis Karklins; soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx; Rod Beckstrom
Cc: Donna Austin; Alice Jansen; Olof Nordling
Subject: RE: [soac-discussion] FW: Next selection

 

Chuck, thanks for the good news of the GNSO getting close to finalize this 
process.

45 days seems to me a too long period of time; let’s work backward based on 
this hypothesis.

October 1st – beginning activities RTs 2 and 4

September 20 – final list of candidates delivered to Selectors for selection of 
members

August 1st – closing of the application period

June 25 (end Bxl meeting) – launching of call for applicants.

This means that the application period will run only for one month in July, 
summer holiday in this part of the world… From my perspective this can have 
negative repercussions in terms of outreach.

Would it be feasible to squeeze the ‘internal’ period down from 45 to 2 weeks?

Best regards

Marco

 

Marco Lorenzoni

---------------------

ICANN

Director, Organizational Review

marco.lorenzoni@xxxxxxxxx

Phone: +32.2.234 78 69

Mobile: +32.475.72 47 47

Fax: +32 2 234 7848

Skype: marco_lorenzoni

---------------------

6, Rond Point Schuman
B-1040 Brussels, Belgium

 

 

From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Thursday, 27 May, 2010 01:47
To: Janis Karklins; soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx; Rod Beckstrom
Cc: Marco Lorenzoni; Donna Austin; Alice Jansen
Subject: RE: [soac-discussion] FW: Next selection

 

The GNSO is getting close to finalizing an ongoing process for endorsing 
candidates and to help us to that I have one question for the Selectors and 
staff supporting the process:  The GNSO SGs will need some time after the end 
of the candidate application period ends to endorse candidates and once they do 
that, the GNSO Council may also have to act.  Would 45 days be too much time 
after close of the application period? Is it reasonable to think that that much 
time could be built into the process or is that too much?

 

Chuck

 

 

From: owner-soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx] 
On Behalf Of Janis Karklins
Sent: Friday, April 23, 2010 1:11 AM
To: soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx; 'Rod Beckstrom'
Cc: 'Marco Lorenzoni'; 'Donna Austin'; 'Alice Jansen'
Subject: [soac-discussion] FW: Next selection

 

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