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

["Greg Aaron" <gaaron@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Fine with me as well.

All best,

--Greg

 

  _____  

From: Rosette, Kristina [mailto:krosette@xxxxxxx] 
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 10:15 AM
To: gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-rap-dt] Updated Registration Abuse Policies workshop
programme

 

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.