Re: [gnso-policyimpl-dt] Recap of meeting & items for review

["Shatan, Gregory S." <GShatan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think that this covers (at a minimum) the whole "generic" side of ICANN. 
Implicit in the P vs I issue is the division of labor, oversight, 
responsibilities, authority, etc. of the various "actors" on the generic front 
(GNSO, Board. Staff, GAC, ALAC, SSAC, etc.).

Greg Shatan
--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Device


From: Mike O'Connor [mailto:mike@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2013 05:39 PM Eastern Standard Time
To: gnso-policyimpl-dt@xxxxxxxxx <gnso-policyimpl-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [gnso-policyimpl-dt] Recap of meeting & items for review

hi Tim,

the reason i threw that question about GNSO-only is because some of the issues 
that are being raised, for which "policy vs implementation" decisions need to 
be made, are coming from outside the GNSO.  a couple examples come to mind -- 
SAC45 from the SSAC and the GAC Advice from Beijing.  i would think both of 
those would in a perfect world get run through the policy vs. implementation 
decision making process.  i'm fine developing a charter for a GNSO working 
group, but maybe we at least ought to write into the charter a recommendation 
that the WG make a concentrated effort to recruit reps from the other AC/SOs 
for their work.

good catch on my "problems to be solved" wording.  let me clarify.  i mean 
those as the puzzles that the WG has to solve, not us.  i'm hoping to see a 
list that looks something like that in the Mission part of the charter.

thanks,

mikey


On Jun 15, 2013, at 4:21 PM, Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>> 
wrote:

We are a GNSO DT, not a cross SO DT (thank God), so we should consider that 
what we do applies only to the GNSO WG that follows.

Regarding your problems to be solved, are those problems that you feel we need 
to solve or that the WG that follows needs to solve? We are only tasked with 
drafting the charter.

Tim


On Jun 15, 2013, at 12:20 PM, "Mike O'Connor" 
<mike@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:mike@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

hi all,

great discussion so far.  here's my contribution.

i took the liberty of redrawing Marika's diagram.  no, this is *not* going in 
the charter, it's just a thought exercise to help me frame my charter 
questions, but i thought it might be useful for the discussion we're having.  
what follows are some ideas and questions for our charter that fell out of that 
exercise.  i've left a lot of them out because Jordyn and Chuck got off the 
mark a little quicker than i did and covered much of what i was thinking about.

Mission

Problems to be solved:

- Define the mechanism by which "policy vs implementation" questions are 
identified
- during implementation efforts
- prior to implementation
- Define the criteria used to determine the difference between policy and 
implementation issues
- Define the options available for policy and implementation efforts and 
criteria for determining which should be used
- Define who makes those determinations and how
- Define who reviews and approves those decisions and how
- Describe the process by which this identification, analysis, review and 
approval work is done


Scope

- The work of this group
Choice a) only applies to the GNSO?
Choice b) applies to all ICANN AC/SOs?

- If the choice is "all AC/SOs" does this fall into the cross-constituency WG 
arena?  do different chartering/operating rules apply to the WG?


mikey



<Policy vs Implementation v2.pdf>


PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: 
www.haven2.com<http://www.haven2.com/>, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, 
Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)

On Jun 11, 2013, at 4:00 AM, Marika Konings 
<marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

Dear All,

Thank you very much for joining the first meeting of the Policy & 
Implementation Drafting Team. As a short recap of the meeting and follow up on 
action items:

  *   For those of you that were not able to attend the first meeting, please 
feel free to share a few words of introduction with the mailing list.
  *   Holly Raiche has volunteered to serve as a the Chair for this Drafting 
Team and has received the support of those that were on the call. If there are 
any other candidates that would like to be considered for this post, or any 
statements of support / objections, please share those with the mailing list 
ahead of the next meeting.
  *   As discussed, please find attached a first draft of the charter template, 
following the model of other charters as well as the information contained in 
the call for volunteers. You are encouraged to share your comments and/or edits 
with the mailing list ahead of the next meeting.
  *   For those interested to review some other recent GNSO charters, please 
see: 'thick' Whois PDP WG Charter (https://community.icann.org/x/vIg3Ag),  
IGO/INGO PDP WG Charter (https://community.icann.org/x/I4NEAg), Whois Survey 
Working Group (https://community.icann.org/x/xwS5AQ). Do note that the first 
two are Policy Development Process (PDP) Working Groups which means that the 
charter may include elements that are specific to PDP Working Groups.
  *   Attached you will the notes I took during the policy & implementation 
session in Beijing. To review the full transcript or recording, please see 
http://beijing46.icann.org/node/37133.

The next meeting has been scheduled for Monday 17 June at 19.00 UTC for 90 
minutes.

With best regards,

Marika
<Policy & Implementation WG - Charter Template - 11 June 2013.doc><Policy and 
Implementation Panel Beijing 10 April 2013 - Notes.doc>


PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: 
www.haven2.com<http://www.haven2.com/>, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, 
Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)



PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: 
www.haven2.com<http://www.haven2.com>, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, 
Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)




* * *

This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may 
well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice 
of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete 
this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any 
purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your 
cooperation.

* * *

To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you that, 
unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in 
this communication  (including any attachments) is not intended or written to 
be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under 
the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state and local provisions or (2) 
promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters 
addressed herein.

Disclaimer Version RS.US.20.10.00