[gnso-policyimpl-wg] Notes from today's meeting
Dear All, Please find below the notes from today¹s meetings. If you have any additional comments, please feel free to share these on the mailing list. Best regards, Marika Notes 29/10: * Should IRT be mandatory? What is the typical make-up of IRTs - initial focus has been on original PDP WG members but in certain cases additional expertise may be needed / desirable. Provide option for opt-out if there is no need, but if choice is mandatory or not, it probably should be mandatory. Voluntary participation - that may also show whether there is a real community interest or need to have one. Processes associated with Implementation Review Team should be flexible. Consider modifying existing language in PDP manual - mandatory but may be minimally/sufficiently populated (from volunteer side) - could for example be one person in a liaison function. More complex IRTs may need a different level of expertise than more straight forward policy recommendations. Assumed that there will be an IRT that will solicit volunteers, unless there are exceptional circumstances and Council decides there is no need for an IRT (e.g. in certain cases there may not be an implementation or another IRT may already be in place to deal with the implementation of policy recommendations). Reaching out to PDP WG with option to be able to reach out to obtain additional expertise. * How is the IRT expected to operate? Flexibility is critical as IRT is very different from a PDP, and each IRT is different from the isues. May not be able to be precise on how each IRT functions, but general guidelines might be helpful e.g. multistakeholder even in implementation. How to deal with disagreement in an IRT? What can be provided that is useful? Outline the types of consideration and concerns that IRTs may cover without providing specifics on how they may do that to allow for flexibility. Could a Council liaison to the IRT serve in a role that could step up if/when needed and issues need to be escalated to the Council? Basis for resolving issues could be along lines of GNSO WG Guidelines. Guidance process could potentially be used by IRT - could ask GNSO Council to invoke process if deemed needed. * What additional mechanisms, if any, should be foreseen for implementation related discussions (beyond those that take place with the IRT)? Flexibility is important, but some guidance may need to be provided. Currently public comment forum is used at end of the process to obtain input from broader community. IRT may need a mechanism to obtain input from SG/C as part of their process. Attachment:
smime.p7s
|