ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-policyimpl-wg]


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

[gnso-policyimpl-wg] Attendance and Recording Policy and Implementation WG meeting - 17 December 2014

  • To: "gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Attendance and Recording Policy and Implementation WG meeting - 17 December 2014
  • From: Terri Agnew <terri.agnew@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 22:56:15 +0000

Dear All,

 

The next Policy and Implementation Working Group teleconference is scheduled
next week on Wednesday 07 January 2015 at 20:00 UTC for 1 hour.

 

Please find the MP3 recording for the Policy and Implementation Working
group call held on Wednesday 17 December 2014 at 20:00 UTC at:

 

 <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-policy-implementation-20141217-en.mp3>
http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-policy-implementation-20141217-en.mp3

 

On page: 

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

 

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

Amr Elsadr - NCUC

Chuck Gomes - RySG

Greg Shatan - IPC

Alan Greenberg-ALAC

Tom Barrett - RrSG

Anne Aikman-Scalese - IPC

Olevie Kouami - NPOC

J.Scott Evans - BC

Michael Graham - IPC

 

Apologies: 

Avri Doria - NCSG

Stephanie Perrin - NCUC

Mary Wong - Staff

 

ICANN staff:

Marika Konings

Amy Bivins

Glen de Saint Gery

Steve Chan

Berry Cobb

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 17 December 2014  

 

  Marika Konings:Welcome to the Policy & Implementation Working Group
Meeting of 17 December 2014

  J. Scott:dialing in now

  Greg Shatan:I am in.

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:In terms of distinguishing the processes, the
"outcomes" Marika identified should be expressly mentioned in the chart and
in the draft manuals before the work is put out for public comment.  Thank
you.  Anne

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:I think the EPDP already mentions the outcome.
However, GIP process description is "use for non-binding input" from GNSO to
Board

  Marika Konings:@Anne - the idea is that the outcomes would be used as part
of the introduction / explanation to this section in the Initial Report.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr::-)

  Marika Konings:For the GIP, non-binding input could also be provided to
other groups (and looking at some of the cases we reviewed before, it would
probably mainly be used to provide input to other groups as part of a public
comment forum or request for input)

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:I will send you th image Alan

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:J Scott I am chairing the RFP-5  call at the top of the
hour so will be leaving a few (5+ moins beforehand) apologies in advance...

  Terri Agnew:Welcome Amr Elsadr

  Amr Elsadr:Thanks Terri. Apologies for being late.

  J. Scott:Thank Cheryl.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:Yes  Consistncy @Alan  same as other group  and there
is necessity  when the Board  does so...

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:Correct Alan   that is what Marik outline for us  

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:@Alan  YES  the ability to upscale from GGP => PDP
based on  GNSO Council input/ deliberation of course  is something I messed
saying  I agree with the degree of obligations  as is being outlined  by
@Marika now

Cheryl Langdon-Orr:Same model  wil help understanding nd predictability

  Amr Elsadr:I like Alan's suggestion that the GNSO is required to initiate
a process in repsonse to a board-initiated GGP, but could have the ability
to use a different process if it deems that appropriate. If I understood
Alan correctly.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:Ahhh I had not read thew twrm 'initiate' that way  I
was thinkin of the PDP  existing processes

  Chuck Gomes:Agree with Alan; Council should be able to decide the vehicle.

  Amr Elsadr:Also agree with Alan.

  Chuck Gomes:Including with the Board.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:Yes indeed @Anne  and ti assist in answering this with
getting Public Comment we might also need to explain/outline  what the
existing 'request fro PDP' opportunities that exist now  to help  make sure
we get input into  this question...

  Amr Elsadr:@J. Scott: +1

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:Yes were talking  GGPO and othr  vehcls  NIT  PDP
requests at thos point

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr: but ned to make this ckear in the language

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:I think we are all n the same page  

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:With the exception of the PDP  YES

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:  I disagree  to some extent Chuck

  Alan Greenberg:I am willing to accept what Chuck is saying but resereve
the right to object vehemently when I see the actual wording.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr: in as much as the responce can REQUIRE something  (of
whatever level) PDP => GGP=> Exbidited  etc., in the case of the Board

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:  So my vriation with your view @Chuck is partial

  Chuck Gomes:Consistency for the sake of consistency could result in
undesirable outcomes.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:Z(situation normal)

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:I think we should seek public comment from the
community on this aspect of these processes.  Especially whether GNSO can
say no to a request.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:True @Chuck  but an attempt to emullate where possible
and practical  IS

  Olevie:Hi ! Glad to meet you all here

  Michael R. Graham:Michael R. is in the House.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:I do think the point @Marika  makes on language for
"encouraging / requiring' dialogue in these things is essential as well

  Marika Konings:I think we probably need to point out in the Initial Report
as well that expedited does not mean it can get done in 2 months ;-)

  Terri Agnew:Welcome Michael Graham

  Marika Konings:as there are certain minimum steps that need to be followed

  Alan Greenberg:Marika Konings: I think we probably need to point out in
the Initial Report as well that expedited does not mean it can get done in 2
months ;-)

  Alan Greenberg:Correct, we want it in 1

  Marika Konings::-)

  Amr Elsadr:I think that as Marika notes, we shouldn't equate "expedited"
with "fast". It only means there are certain steps that exist within a PDP
that would be skipped because of the nature of the policy issue under
discussion.

  Chuck Gomes:Should we require simple majority for GGP?

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:Yes follow th same model for the GGP  IMO

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:AGREE  @ JScott

  Chuck Gomes:I am okay with the threshold as is.

  Olevie:+1 @Chuck. Go for simple mjority for GGP

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:NO disgree with change ti Simoe Majority for GGP
@Olevie

  Olevie:ok

  Olevie:CLO ;-)

  Chuck Gomes:A GGP cannot be used for consensus policy.

  Olevie:ok cHUCK

  Tom Barrett - EnCirca:KISS

 Alan Greenberg:@Anne, process is different, impact of outcome the same. 

  Alan Greenberg:@Chuck, Anne's quest excluded CP

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:  As I need to leave shortly before call cloe  feel
free to note at 1st run through  my reactions to Q 4 & 5  is  Agree in both
points  but we will I see deliberate in Jan meeting

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:Absolutly  @ JScott-

  Chuck Gomes:I also support 4 & 5.

  Alan Greenberg:@Amr - bad question to ask at end of meeting!!!!!!!

  Marika Konings:You mean if there would be two competing motions?

  Olevie:Sorry ! OK with point 4 and 5

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:My questions relate to questions I think public
commenters will ask and I agree with J. Scott we need to get our story
straight and have talking points and that the request for public comment
should be very very clear on these points as to when each process is used.

  Chuck Gomes:Amr asks a good question.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr:Sorry need ti leave now  Seasons Greeting to you all
and safe travels to those of you doing so...

  Chuck Gomes:Same to you Cheryl.

  Olevie:initing  GGp different from approving the GGP Finl Report

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:Happy HOlidays Cheryl!

  Terri Agnew:finding the line

  Chuck Gomes:Amr may be right.

  Amr Elsadr:Sorry Alan!! :D

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:I agree Amr's observation is correct.

  Olevie:Season greetings to all of you

  Chuck Gomes:Amr gave us a way to resolve it.

  Michael R. Graham:@Alan -- Good point.  And mine hurts as well . . . 

  Chuck Gomes:Is there anyone who opposes 4 or 5?

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:Should we look at the previous chart of items we
studied that were ad hoc?

  Amr Elsadr:Merry Christmas all, and happy new year.

  Marika Konings:@Anne - which chart are you referring to?

  Amr Elsadr:God jul. :)

  Olevie:thank you Amr

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:Good idea!

  Michael R. Graham:Happy Holidays, Everyone!

  Olevie:thnnk you Mike

  Anne Aikman-Scalese:Happy HOlidays to all who celebrate miracles at this
time!  Anne

  Amr Elsadr:Thanks Marika. I'll unwrap the initial report on Christmas day.
:)

  Marika Konings::-)

  Chuck Gomes:All: Please review draft Initial report before next call.

  Olevie:same to you

  Marika Konings:Happy holidays everyone!!

  Michael R. Graham:Will the Principles and Definitions be included as
appendices?

  Tom Barrett - EnCirca:happy holidays to all

  Olevie:ok Chuck

  Olevie:bye

    

 

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



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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy