<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[gnso-ff-pdp-may08] Update - new members, work-planning, upcoming call, WG scope
- To: "Fast Flux Workgroup" <gnso-ff-pdp-May08@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [gnso-ff-pdp-may08] Update - new members, work-planning, upcoming call, WG scope
- From: "Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2008 08:32:48 -0500
<html>
<body>
Hello all,<br><br>
I've been puttering around the web pages and wanted to alert you to a few
things as I've been thinking them through.<br><br>
<b>New members<br><br>
</b>Let me welcome a few new members of the working group. Ihab
Shraim (from Mark Monitor), Wendy Seltzer (ALAC) and Steve Crocker (SSAC)
have agreed to help out. Many thanks! <br><br>
<b>Preliminary/Draft/Tentative work-plan and schedule<br><br>
</b>I've taken a stab at breaking up our work into a series of milestones
and deliverables (and drew a little picture to boot). I've updated
our public wiki
(<a href="https://st.icann.org/pdp-wg-ff/"; eudora="autourl">
https://st.icann.org/pdp-wg-ff/</a>) with a summary, backed up with
detailed work steps behind the "Tasks" links for each
milestone. I'd greatly appreciate a review by those of you who are
"process people" -- I've looked at these a little too long and
need some fresh eyes on this stuff. <br><br>
<b>Upcoming call<br><br>
</b>Our first teleconference is coming up this Friday. Given
the way the work has laid out, I would guess that the first 3 calls are
going to cover a lot of ground and lay out the framework of what we
conclude in our reports. From there we will spend our efforts
refining, editing, incorporating comments and filling in
gaps. Here's a tentative agenda for the call;<br><br>
<ul>
<li>Welcome, introductions - 15 minutes
<li>Review the work-plan and work-structure - 15 minutes
<li>Review and approve Round-1 Constituency Statement Template - 10
minutes
<li>Brainstorming session - the first of 3 - starting through The
Questions - 1 hour, 15 minutes
<li>Provide feedback on how the meeting went, areas for improvement - 5
minutes
</ul><br>
<b>Round-1 Constituency Statement Template<br><br>
</b>Our first deliverable/milestone is coming up. We need to review
and approve the templates we're going to use for the Round-1 Constituency
Statements. My thought on this first round is that this be a fairly
unstructured informal (almost "brainstorming") round in which
we collect ideas from Constituencies, followed by a more traditional
formal round of statements (Round-2) once we've completed an initial
draft report. <br><br>
<br>
With that in mind, I've drafted a very open-ended template for this first
round and provided a pretty brisk 2-week schedule (the more formal
Round-2 is set at 30 days right now). Please take a look at it and
share your improvements with us between now and Friday's call. I'll
fold your suggestions into the draft and hopefully we can approve it
during the call. The template is here;<br><br>
<a
href="https://st.icann.org/pdp-wg-ff/index.cgi?first_round_constituency_input_template";
eudora="autourl">
https://st.icann.org/pdp-wg-ff/index.cgi?first_round_constituency_input_template</a>
<br><br>
<b>Working-group Scope<br><br>
</b>I'm going to respond to Marc Perkel's note about the scope of our
efforts. Having just emerged from laying out the tasks in front of
us, I'm going to propose the following. Let's limit the scope of
this effort to the charge that we were given by the GNSO. I'm
pretty sure that the "let no good deed go unpunished" rule will
kick in when we do a great job, and we will then have the opportunity to
do more. I really want us to be nimble in our work, so
that this can be used as a model for other "fast breaking"
policy efforts in the future and limiting the scope is a great way to
stay nimble (and on schedule).<br><br>
That said, I see no reason why we can't brainstorm up lots of additional
connections between our work and the topics you raise, Marc.
:-) We can include some in the body of the report, some in an
Appendix. Another thing I'd like us all to focus on are areas
of immediate opportunity -- sometimes known as "low hanging
fruit" -- that we can pass along to the community as non-binding
suggestions in our report. Are you ok with that approach,
Marc?<br><br>
<br><br>
That concludes my report...<br><br>
Talk to you on Friday,<br><br>
m<br><br>
<br>
<x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<br>
<b>voice: </b>651-647-6109<br>
<b>fax: </b>866-280-2356<br><br>
<b>web:
</b><a href="http://www.haven2.com/"; eudora="autourl">www.haven2.com</a>
<br><br>
<br><br>
</body>
</html>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|