RE: [gnso-rap-dt] Updated Registration Abuse Policies workshop programme

["Rosette, Kristina" <krosette@xxxxxxx>]

Fine with me.


________________________________

        From: owner-gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Marika Konings
        Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 2:07 AM
        To: gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx
        Subject: Re: [gnso-rap-dt] Updated Registration Abuse Policies
workshop programme
        
        
        Dear All,
        
        It occurred to me after our call that we did not consider SSAC
participation in the workshop, despite their activities in this area and
their request for collaboration. It might be appropriate to invite them
to participate in the last panel discussion on 'what role for ICANN'
like the group has done with the other constituencies and ALAC. If there
are no objections, I would propose I contact Steve Crocker to discuss
whether he or another SSAC representative would be available and
interested to participate.
        
        With best regards,
        
        Marika
        
        
        On 2/18/09 10:17 PM, "Marika Konings" <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
        
        

                Dear All,
                
                Following our call today, please find attached the
updated programme for the Registration Abuse Policies workshop. For
those of you that were not able to participate, please note that the
only changes that were made relate to speakers and time allocated to the
first topic. We would like to post the background information and topics
as soon as possible on the Mexico City website, so if there are any
concerns in relation to the content, please share this with the list as
soon as possible. 
                
                As you will have noted, Mike Rodenbaugh has shared the
draft programme (without names of speakers) with the Council to inform
them before their call tomorrow about the programme. On the call
tomorrow, Mike will use the opportunity to reach out to the ISP, NCUC
and ALAC constituencies to put forward a representative to participate
in the workshop. ICANN staff will follow up on this invitation. In
addition, some small edits were made to the questions raised by Chuck
(see below). If there are any concerns about these edits, please share
your views with the list.
                
                Those of you presenting are invited to share any slides
or speaking notes for this workshop beforehand with the group to avoid
duplication and ensure all important issues are addressed. I will work
with Glen to see if we can identify a 15-30 minutes slot on Sunday 1
March (possibly during one of the break) to sit down and quickly run
through the programme.
                
                Thanks,
                
                Marika
                
                

                1.      Is the additional research supposed to be done
before the WG finishes its work? This will be for the WG to determine as
it depends of the scope and size of the research that needs to be
undertaken. 
                2.      Is the WG supposed to finish its work in 90 days
after Mexico City or simply report on progress then? If the WG is not
finished by then, it is the expectation that the WG would present its
progress together with the expected end date of its work. 
                        

                3. Is the WG supposed to attempt to make a
recommendation to the Council on whether to initiate a PDP or not? More
specifically, the WG is expected to make a recommendation about which
registration abuse policy issues, if any, are appropriate for a PDP.