ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [gnso-travel-dt] RE: Seoul meeting

  • To: Anthony Harris <harris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Doug Brent <doug.brent@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [gnso-travel-dt] RE: Seoul meeting
  • From: Kevin Wilson <kevin.wilson@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 04:48:37 -0700

Dear Tony,

I wanted you to know that I received your email below.   I believe this has 
been answered by the follow on comment from Olga and Stéphane as well.   Let me 
know if I missed any important detail.


From: Anthony Harris [mailto:harris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 7:56 AM
To: Kevin Wilson; Olga Cavalli; Doug Brent
Cc: gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-travel-dt] RE: Seoul meeting

Dear Kevin,

I have consulted with the ISPCP, Business
and IPC Constituencies. Three people who
are stepping down from Council, but remain
engaged in the various restructuring groups,
would need travel funding assistance to be
able to attend the ICANN Seoul meeting:

Philip Shephard
Tony Harris
Tony Holmes (since will be on NomCom may only
                          need some hotel/per diem assistance?)

Kind regards

Tony Harris
----- Original Message -----
From: Kevin Wilson<mailto:kevin.wilson@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Olga Cavalli<mailto:olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> ; Doug 
Cc: gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 9:07 PM
Subject: [gnso-travel-dt] RE: Seoul meeting

Dear Olga and GNSO Travel Drafting Team,
I am aware that there may be more requests to accommodate the extra needs 
arising from the GNSO restructuring for travel support funding than was 
provided in the Travel Support Guidelines.  
http://www.icann.org/en/topics/travel-support/  Although we have in the past 
made midyear adjustments to the travel support under Board guidance (e.g., 
limited GAC travel funding in FY09), in general we are constrained by the 
Guidelines.   I suggest that, if the GNSO decides to request additional 
support, you submit the request and if the budget impact is small, we might be 
able to adjust support.  If the budget impact is significant, we would need to 
consider what process and approvals need to be pursued.

Best regards


From: olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Olga 
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 1:53 PM
To: Kevin Wilson; Doug Brent
Cc: gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Seoul meeting

Dear Kevin,
Perhaps you have been able to see the exchange of emails in this list.
One question that has arised is that if it would be possible to allow some of 
the retiring GNSO Council members to participating in the Seoul meeting.
We have not reached an agreement yet among the working team but I would like to 
ask you if, from the travel funds perspective, this is something somehow 
possible or not.
I will appreciate your comments on this regard.
Best regards and thanks
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: 2009/8/18
Subject: Re: [gnso-travel-dt] RE: Travel drafting team - some ideas after the 
conference call
To: Anthony Harris <harris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:harris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Cc: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>, 
gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx>, Avri Doria 
<avri@xxxxxxx<mailto:avri@xxxxxxx>>, Robert Hoggarth 

Thanks Tony.
Could it be a good idea for our team to informally contact Kevin and / or Doug 
and ask if there is any chance of having any extra funds for Seoul? Or we do 
already know that there are some?
2009/8/18 Anthony Harris <harris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:harris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>

I agree that Olga has made a good suggestion.

The magnitude of the GNSO overhaul activities and
discussions, might appear to justify the initiative to
fund some few retiring council members (yes, I am
one of them), and as I recall it has always been
the custom in ICANN for councillors to step down
at the end of the Council face-to-face meeting in
an ICANN event., not before.

Tony Harris
----- Original Message -----
From: Gomes, Chuck<mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Olga Cavalli<mailto:olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> ; 
Cc: Avri Doria<mailto:avri@xxxxxxx> ; Robert 
Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2009 10:54 AM
Subject: [gnso-travel-dt] RE: Travel drafting team - some ideas after the 
conference call

Thanks Olga.  Regarding your suggestion "One idea could be to ask each 
constituency / stakeholder group about this", the RyC has started to work on 


From: olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx>] On Behalf Of Olga 
Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2009 3:44 PM
To: gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Avri Doria; Gomes, Chuck; Robert Hoggarth
Subject: Travel drafting team - some ideas after the conference call
I hope you are doing well, I just finished listening to the conference call 
recording. As per Avri´s request I am sending some initial notes and ideas to 
share with you and see how to move forward.

First let me summarize some comments made during the conference call:

1- Reasons for allocating additional funding for former councilors:

 *   As this is a particular meeting with changes in structure, continuity is 
pertinent for a small number of retiring councilors.
 *   Could be good helping incoming councillors with the assistance of former 
 *   It is very helpful having more than one representative of a constituency 
in a face to face ICANN meeting.

2- Other ideas

 *   New councilors could participate in conference calls prior to Seoul, if we 
know who they are.
 *   Could be good to have a clear understanding of how many would need this 
 *   There should be balance between limited funds and the need for 
 *   Constituencies usually deal with changes at the end of the year and these 
changes should not be a problem.

3- Reasons for not  allocating additional funds on former councilors attending 

 *   This is not a special situation for spending money on coordination.

I also used Rob´s document as a basis for a preliminary analysis of how many 
former councilors would need funding for Seoul.

In reviewing the list I found 10 possible councilors that may not be present in 
the next meeting,( I excluded Noncom Appointees as their participation follows 
the normal noncom appointing rules, please tell me if this is a right 

 *   Commercial Stakeholder group: 6 six
 *   Registries: 1 one
 *   Registrars: 2 two
 *   NCUC: 1 one

I am attaching the file I drafted for reference.

Some ideas on how to move forward:

It could be convenient to determine how many former councilors should need 
funding for Seoul.

One idea could be to ask each constituency / stakeholder group about this, 
specially taking in consideration that

 "constituencies usually deal with changes at the end of the year and these 
changes should not be a problem"

Once we have a clearer idea of how many people should need extra funding ,then 
we can ask ICANN Staff if this funding is feasible.

Looking forward to receiving your comments.

Best regards, have a nice weekend.


Olga Cavalli, Dr. Ing.

Olga Cavalli, Dr. Ing.

Olga Cavalli, Dr. Ing.

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy