Re: [gnso-ppsc-wg] Your feedback requested: Section 2.1.4.1 Introductions

["S. Subbiah" <subbiah@xxxxxxxxx>]

For now I think we should postpone the question - "Will there be secret 
meetings at all " to the con call.
However if we had a secret meeting , i guess it could involve security 
and DNS etc as one of the candidates...the requirment should be a very 
high threshold of WG members - 90% say. Of course I assume the Board of 
Directors of ICANN can push down a secret meeting and authorise but I do 
not think we should have the CO (in this case GNSO etc) have the right 
to independently force a secret meeting without either top Board 
approval or a high threshold bottom-led (from WG) request that gets 
endorsed by the top Board. Bascially all secret meetings should be 
approved by Top Board. It can be requested by bottom-led majority. 
That's my take. And in such cases - presumably a case-by-case - rare 
basis, the WG guidleine should include a requirement that the WG will 
ONLY begin its work after the top Board sets clear rules specifically 
for the particular WG of when and what can be publicly 
posted/communicated during and after the WG does its work.
Again my two cents.

Subbiah

Marika Konings wrote:

> *From the GNSO Working Group Guidelines
>
> 2.1.4.1      *Introductions
>
> For team-building purposes, to understand its resources and 
> capabilities and, potentially, to help with prospective assignments, 
> members of the Working Group should be provided with the opportunity, 
> at the start of the first meeting, to share information regarding 
> interests, background, skills, experience, especially as related to 
> any requirements in the Charter,
> Members of the Working Group should be informed that all GNSO Working 
> Groups are expected to operate under the principles of transparency 
> and openness, which means, /inter alia/, that mailing lists are 
> publicly archived, meetings are normally recorded and/or transcribed, 
> and SOIs are required from Working Group participants which will be 
> publicly posted.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> /Comment
>
> GD: Section 2.1.4.1 establishes instructions for the initial meeting 
> of the working group, and emphasizes the ICANN principles of 
> transparency and openness with regard to working group meetings, 
> deliberations, and documents.  However, does the PPSC WG-WT envision 
> any exceptional scenarios in which the working group would desire 
> confidentiality?  There may be value in this, especially if the 
> subject matter involves DNS security and stability vulnerabilities. 
>  Should the PPSC WG-WT consider an exception to the transparency 
> requirement, it should set a high threshold for making such a request, 
> and establish a clear process for disclosing the final output of any 
> closed deliberations./