[gnso-ppsc-pdp] Action items for Monday's PDP-WT meeting

[Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear All,

As discussed on today's call, especially for those that cannot attend Monday's 
meeting (starting at 13.30 UTC), please share your comments / edits / 
suggestions on the issues outlined below, or any other items in the report, 
with the mailing list. With regard to recommendation #4, please review the 
following two alternatives and indicate your preference:

Option A:  The PDP-WT recommends that a ‘request for an Issue Report’ template 
should be developed including items such as definition of issue, identification 
and quantification of problems, to the extend feasible, supporting evidence, 
economic impact(s), effect(s) on competition and consumer trust, and rationale 
for policy development. The use of such a template should be strongly 
encouraged and is included in the PDP Manual.

Option B:  The PDP-WT recommends that a ‘request for an Issue Report’ template 
should be developed including items such as definition of issue, identification 
and quantification of problems, to the extend feasible, supporting evidence, 
economic impact(s), effect(s) on competition and consumer trust, and rationale 
for policy development. Any request for an Issue Report, either by completing 
the template included in the PDP Manual or in another form, should include at a 
minimum: the name of the requestor; definition of the issue, and; 
identification and quantification of problems, to the extend feasible. The 
submission of any additional information, as outlined for example in the 
template, is strongly encouraged.

With best regards,

Marika

From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 01:24:34 -0700
To: "Gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:Gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx>" 
<gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: [gnso-ppsc-pdp] For your review - draft PDP-WT Final Report posted on 
wiki

Dear All,

Please find posted on the wiki 
(https://community.icann.org/display/gnsoppsc/Next+Meeting) a first draft of 
the Final Report. This version incorporates the agreed upon changes following 
the WT's review of the public comments, as well as discussion on some of the 
outstanding issues. In addition, it includes some minor edits and 
clarifications. I would like to especially draw your attention to the following 
items that need WT consideration:

 *   Recommendation #4 – Request for an Issue Report Template: Based on public 
comments received, WT to review template (see page 49) and determine which 
elements of the template should be required and how sufficient flexibility can 
be guaranteed.
 *   Recommendation #13 – Impact Analysis (deleted): Following further review 
of the WT deliberations on the comments in relation to recommendation #13, the 
WT agreed that an ‘impact assessment’ at the time of the initiation of a PDP 
did not make sense and noted that a ‘scope assessment’ is already carried out 
as part of the Issue Report. The WT is therefore considering deleting 
recommendation #13. (James to review text in relation to content of Issue 
Report to determine whether it sufficiently addresses consideration of 'scope'. 
If not, James to provide alternative language for consideration).
 *   Recommendation #31 – Implementation, Impact and Feasibility & section 
5.10: WT to review edits proposed by Avri
 *   Council Recommendation Report (5.13): Staff wonders whether the current 
language as proposed will work in practice: the GNSO Council approves the 
report and designates someone to write the recommendation report, but the 
report needs to be submitted within 21 days. Elsewhere, in the proposed bylaws 
- the recommendation report is to be approved by the GNSO Council. We are not 
sure how this can be done in 21 days. To address this we would propose changing 
'approved by' to 'written at the direction of' the GNSO Council in section 7.
 *   PDP Flow Chart – I still need to update the chart to reflect any changes / 
updates based on the latest version of the report. Some commenters also 
suggested that it would be helpful to include the chart and/or broken down in 
different sub-sections in the PDP Manual. I agree that it would be helpful, but 
would maybe suggest to develop those once the overall PDP has been approved to 
avoid duplication of work (and maybe at that stage a 'professional' graphics 
designer could do a better job at translating the process in graphics than I 
can with my improvised graphic designer skills ;-).
 *   Board Vote / Transition – I've requested input from ICANN Legal on 
suggested language for these items to convey the WT's view. I hope to receive 
their suggestions shortly.
 *   Public comment review tool – You'll also find the latest version of the 
public comment review tool posted on the wiki. This document will be included 
in either the annex or as a link in the Final Report. Please review this 
document to make sure it captures the WT's views and comments accurately.

On the wiki you will also find a pdf version that includes line numbers. Please 
feel free to submit your comments and/or proposed edits either by marking up 
the Word document or to send comments/edits + line numbers to the mailing list.

With best regards,

Marika