ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-policyimpl-wg]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[gnso-policyimpl-wg] Attendance and Recording Policy and Implementation WG meeting - 26 November 2014

  • To: "gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Attendance and Recording Policy and Implementation WG meeting - 26 November 2014
  • From: Terri Agnew <terri.agnew@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 00:00:58 +0000

Dear All,

 

The next Policy and Implementation Working Group teleconference is scheduled
next week on Wednesday 03 December at 20:00 UTC for 1 hour.

 

Please find the MP3 recording for the Policy and Implementation Working
group call held on Wednesday 26 November 2014 at 20:00 UTC at:

 

 <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-policy-implementation-20141126-en.mp3>
http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-policy-implementation-20141126-en.mp3

 

On page: 

 <http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#nov>
http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#nov

 

The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master
Calendar page:

 <http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/> http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/

 

Attendees:

Cheryl Langdon-Orr - At-Large

Anne Aikman-Scalese - IPC

J.Scott Evans - BC

Michael Graham - IPC

Tom Barrett - RrSG

Amr Elsadr - NCUC

Chuck Gomes - RySG

Alan Greenberg-ALAC 

Greg Shatan - IPC

Stephanie Perrin - NCUC

 

Apologies: 

None

 

ICANN staff:

Mary Wong

Marika Konings

Amy Bivins

Karen Lentz

Berry Cobb

Steve Chan

Terri Agnew

 

** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list **

 

 

 Wiki page:  <https://community.icann.org/x/y1V-Ag>
https://community.icann.org/x/y1V-Ag 

 

Thank you.

Kind regards,

Terri Agnew

 

Adobe Chat Transcript for Wednesday 26 November 2014  

   

  Marika Konings:Welcome to the Policy & Implementation Working Group
Meeting of 26 November 2014

  Amr Elsadr:Hi all.

  J. Scott Evans:dialing in now.

  Greg Shatan:Dialing in and listening to that smooooth jazz.

  Greg Shatan:I'm in!

  Mary Wong:For those not on the call last week, Agenda Item #2 deals with
the discussion we had on Section V. You can scroll through the document to
see that when we reach that discussion item.

  Greg Shatan:Tag team!

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:I think it is important that whilst we focus on
Expertise, we have seats at the tab.e' 

  Terri Agnew:Michael Graham has joined

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:.... should read table, that allows for wide represe t

  Marika Konings:I think that is covered in IC

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:representation

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:  and yes I think it is covered 

  Amr Elsadr:@Alan: When you say IRT's MUST include the required expertise,
are you saying that if there is a delay in recruiting this expertise that
implementation of a policy should be postponed?

  Amr Elsadr:Until the necessary recruitment is done?

  Greg Shatan:"Volunteered Slavery" is allowed, however.  

  Alan Greenberg:Sorry for speaking without doing homework - to many things
on my calendar recently..

  Greg Shatan:(See also Rahsaan Roland Kirk, Volunteered Slavery, Atlantic
Records, 1969(

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:agree @JScott

  Greg Shatan:Amr and I are also spending a little time on IANA Transition.
:-)

  Alan Greenberg:We really need to be careful about back-loading work that
will discourrage people from daring to volunteer.

  Amr Elsadr:Would it be OK for staff to carry this role out?

  Mary Wong:Please note that IRTs work somewhat differently (and have
different objectives/outcomes) than a policy-based WG.

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:I agree with Amr that an IRT should have a chair who
works with the GDD staff member.

  J. Scott Evans:I think having a GDD run the meeting is merely
administrative

  Amr Elsadr:@Greg: just a little. ;-)

  Amr Elsadr:@J. Scott: Adminitrative role in running a meeting is fine,
except if a potential policy issue comes up. A volunteer may be required at
that point.

  J. Scott Evans:Policy issues would need to go back to the council

  Mary Wong:All, note that a policy staff member is usually part of the IRT
too. GDD runs the team but we are there to help coordinate and spot issues.

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:Can we just say that the GNSO liaison should be
appointed and say how he/she makes the decision to bring an issue to the
attention of GNSO?

  Marika Konings:@Anne - that is in VE 

  Marika Konings:although the process still needs to be defined

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:@Markia,

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:@Marika - is that the provision J. Scott rewrote or
was going to rewrite?

  Marika Konings:some updates have been made (see in blue on the second
page)

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:I thought after last meeting we were going to replace
this word "escalate" and J. Scott asked me to send him a note on that.

  Mary Wong:@Anne, if you can send us the new proposal we will add it

  J. Scott Evans:@Anne.  I think I dropped the ball on that one.  Sorry.

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:J. Scott said he was going to write it.  My suggestion
is change "wheter to escalate" to "whether to bring the issue before GNSO
Council"

  Amr Elsadr:@Greg: +1

  Terri Agnew:Stephanie Perrin has joined

  Alan Greenberg:It is a bit arrogant to presume that what we are doing here
will be the perfect  balance and solution for all time forward. We need to
do what seems reasonable and then re-work in the future if we need to.

  Mary Wong:@Anne, how about replacing "escalate" to "raise"?

  Marika Konings:@Tom, please see I-A

  Marika Konings:I-E

  Amr Elsadr:@Mary: Agree to "raise" instead of "ecalate". I think it better
represents the action that will be taken.

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:@Mary - okay by me but then it is likely "raise the
issue WITH GNSO Council for consideration"

  Karen Lentz:Agreed on Tom's point - there are cases where it's very
difficult to move forward without participation from a particular group 

  Mary Wong:@Anne, the revised draft currently says "escalate the issue to
the GNSO Council for consideration", which is why I suggested replacing the
word "escalate" with "raise".

  Amr Elsadr:For the record, I'm not too opposed to the council liaison
carrying out the role described in VE, but just a little concerned about a
council rep being involved in a call like that. It seems to me that a
regular IRT volunteer would be better suited.

  Berry Cobb:The use of GDD PM is that they own that task.  It can be
assigned to others as need be.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:ahh thanks @marika

  Stephanie Perrin:It is good to name someone as being responsible; the
project manager can always delegate.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:the heading here is PRINCIPLES

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:exactly @marika

  Alan Greenberg:As I understand it, GDD owns this process, so they are
responsible. But ultimately, I don't think that including the assignment or
not matters (to a person or dept).

  Amr Elsadr:Don't understand this provision at all. If someone would
clarify, I'd appreciate it.

  Mary Wong:The Rule was suggested during the call last week, and as Marika
noted, the WG members present were aware this would mean divergence from the
current WG Guidelines.

  Amr Elsadr:Are there implementation issues that need to be confidential?

  Greg Shatan:Like "invoction" better.

  Marika Konings:I think this only has been used in the context of sharing
information that is sensitive - not sure if chatham house rules applies to
that.

  J. Scott Evans:@Amr.  I think you can never know, but you need to be
prepared for the unexpected

  Amr Elsadr:@J. Scott: Thanks. How would a determination about the need for
confidentiality be made?

  Greg Shatan:"is encouraged" seems a little softer to me.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:DSSA

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:exactly @marika

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:we even had a neutral 3rd party to act as voice for
confidential matters 

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:in DSSA

  Amr Elsadr:@J. Scott @Marika: Thanks again. Seeing the sense in this. As
long as this is strictly applied to implementation, and not any policy
issues, this seems to be alright to me.

  Marika Konings:could we add 'and if necessary, aditional rules and
procedures may be developed by the IRT in co-ordination with staff'?

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:that works @alan / JScott

  Greg Shatan:Extraordinary is extraordinary enough for me.

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:The rule simply states:  The Chatham House Rule reads
as follows:    "When a meeting, or part thereof, is held under the Chatham
House Rule, participants are free to use the information received, but
neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s), nor that of any
other participant, may be revealed".

  Stephanie Perrin:I like the additional rules may be developed.   It would
at least stress the need 

  Greg Shatan:I think we are getting in the weeds here.

  Amr Elsadr:@Anne: Thanks. :)

  Amr Elsadr:@Anne: It was unknown to me.

  Alan Greenberg:Does anyone have an instance where PDP or IRT needed to
invoke confidentiality. I know that SSAC does, but I cannot recall a GNSO
instance.

  Marika Konings:but in certain cases the information itself cannot be
shared publicly, even unattributed.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:exactly@JScott

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:happy with the new edit

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:@Amr - I had to go check cause it has been a while.

  Amr Elsadr:@Anne: Appreciate it. :)

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:You are welcome.  I just wanted to verify we were not
incorporating a bunch of other rules.

  Terri Agnew:@ J Scott , you have disconnected from audio

  Greg Shatan:Co-chair Power!

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:raise the issue and "such review by GNSO" not "such
escalation"

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:or "such consideration by GNSO Council" not "such
esclation"

  J. Scott Evans:I have been talking to dead line for 2  minutes

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:@J. Scott - I am sure Chuck will recognize you
immediately after AMR

  Stephanie Perrin:Need to select a "tie-breaker" or mediator in advance

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:Agree with Amr and Stephanie

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:agre /marika it IS the role of the Liaison in this.
case

  Amr Elsadr:Like I said, I'm not die-hard against this. Personally, I would
be more comfortable with someone else selected by the IRT members.

  Stephanie Perrin:how about making the liaison the fall back if the
tiebreaker fails or has to admit non-neutrality.  As a backstop

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:Thanks for changing the text to "raise" and changing
"escalation" to "consideration".  Probably needs to say "raise...with" not
"raise...to"

  Amr Elsadr:@Alan: +1

  J. Scott Evans:This is how it works in the WG guidelines

  J. Scott Evans:I think staying consistent is important

  Amr Elsadr:@Alan: +1 again.

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:okay to say "in consultation with" other IRT members

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:that works @alan

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:THAT I agfee with

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:Is it policy or is it implementation? - the $64,000
question

  Alan Greenberg:We are at end of time and I need to leave very soon.

  Alan Greenberg:In a worst case, most people on an IRT will have SOMEONE on
the GNSO Council to raise a concern if the Liaison does not (at worst, the
GNSO Chair, who is also Chair of the GNSO and not just the Council).

  Karen Lentz:thank you

  Amr Elsadr:Happy Thanksgiving to all those State-side.

  Tom Barrett - EnCirca:thank you

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:thanks JScott...  Thanks every one... Bye for now :-)
:-) :-) 

  Greg Shatan:Happy Thanksgiving!  (Unless you're a turkey.

  Amr Elsadr:Thanks all. Bye.

  Marika Konings:Happy Thanksgivinig all

 

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy