Re: [gnso-raa-dt] Re: Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA) Drafting Team (DT) call on TUESDAY, June 09 at 1300 UTC.

[Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>]

Avri,

> So this group is the one that will figure out  - from at least the
> GNSO perspective - though I hope from the GNSO/ALAC perspective -
> how  the work will be done.   The work consists of, at least,
> 
> - further, if any, RAA amendments
> - documenting registrants rights

> So this is to be the first meeting in which we try to figure out how
> we are going to proceed.  My view of the agenda:
> 
> - figure out who is going to coordinate this team, i will start out as
> interim on it until replaced.
> - figure out how many groups we need
> - figure out how the GNSO and ALAc are going to work together on this
> - get volunteers to start working on charters and motions.


So it seems to me that a structure not unlike the one we have used for the
restructure SCs (the OSC and the PPSC) could be used. What I mean is that we
have one group, an SC, coordinating the whole effort and maybe delegating to
WGs, like we do in these restructure SCs. In this case, I would suggest that
2 WGs are needed, one on each topic. In this scenario, I would take Monday's
meeting to be the first for the SC. This is where we decide to set up the
two WGs and what their charters might be. Once they are created and manned,
the WGs might opt to create subgroups to look at specific areas. For
example, the RAA amendments WG would look at if any further amendments are
needed. If they decide that is the case, they might ask a few people to go
away and draw up a list of possibles, while others look at how they could be
implemented...

Thanks,

Stéphane