RE: [gnso-raa-b] Scheduling RAA Subteam BG Session in Brussels

["Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Margie,

I prefer (ii) with one correction. The GAC did not say they *endorsed*
the LEA amendments. They said, "The GAC expects that these proposals
will be thoroughly examined and taken into consideration." See VI of the
GAC Communique from Nairobi:
http://gac.icann.org/system/files/Nairobi_Communique_0.pdf

Tim

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [gnso-raa-b] Scheduling RAA Subteam BG Session in Brussels
From: Margie Milam <Margie.Milam@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, April 15, 2010 4:49 pm
To: "'gnso-raa-b@xxxxxxxxx'" <gnso-raa-b@xxxxxxxxx>

Hi-

Following up on issues raised on today’s call, the drafting team
discussed two different approaches for addressing the RAA Amendments 
topics in Brussels.

The drafting team is considering either (i) a standard GNSO type
workshop, where the Initial Report would be reviewed with those
interested in the topic, or (ii) a large cross-supporting organization
session, where the SO/ACs can participate and share their perspective,
including as one of the topics, inviting law enforcement and GAC
representatives to explain their support for the LEA amendment topics,
and having Registrars explain their concerns with some of the LEA
proposals.

If this sub-team supports the approach in (ii), we would attempt to
schedule this on Monday of the ICANN meeting to gather maximum
cross-SO/AC participation.

Adopting (ii) would be intended to serve as a forum to respond to the
GAC’s endorsement of the LEA amendments, as well as the significant 
press that has been focused on the LEA related requests.
 
The participants on today’s call supported (ii) but wanted to get
broader input  from those unable to participate on today’s call.

If you have a preference on this issue, please respond to the list.
 
Thanks,
Margie
 
___________
 
Margie Milam
Senior Policy Counselor
ICANN
___________