RE: [gtld-council] Draft Agenda for meetings in Wellington on Saturday 25 March and Sunday 26 March

["Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks, Bruce, for the draft agenda. However, I see a couple of possible
changes needed. 

First, we probably need to have 30 minutes preparation for our meeting with
the GAC Working Group, and another hour for preparation for our working
dinner with the Board. 

Finally, I had hoped that we would spend at least 30 min to an hour on our
second PDP. Perhaps we can make sufficient progress tomorrow on general work
programming that won't still be needed, but it seems to me that we need to
develop a work plan jointly, with the support and involvement of the staff,
on both PDPs. 


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 6:39 PM
To: gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gtld-council] Draft Agenda for meetings in Wellington on Saturday
25 March and Sunday 26 March

Hello All,

As discussed in our last call, the aim for Saturday and Sunday is to
progress the work on new gTLDs.

In our meeting in Washington, we covered the issue of whether to have
new gTLDs, and we had a brainstorming session where each member of the
committee identified the selection criteria.   The aim for the meeting
in Wellington will be to attempt to converge on a set of agreed
selection criteria, and begin the discussion on allocation methods.


Saturday 25 March 2006
======================

(1) 9:00 - 9:30 am
- Review ICANN mission and core values

[From ICANN bylaws: Any ICANN body making a recommendation or decision
shall exercise its judgment to determine which core values are most
relevant and how they apply to the specific circumstances of the case at
hand, and to determine, if necessary, an appropriate and defensible
balance among competing values.]

The intent is to set the scene for the subsequent discussions.


(2) 10:00 am - 10:30am 
- Review list of selection criteria proposed by Committee members in
Washington

(3) 10:30am to 12:30pm
- rank the selection criteria based on level of support for each
criteria from the whole committee, and the degree to which the criteria
is consistent with the ICANN mission and core values

(4) 12:30pm - 1:30pm  lunchbreak

(5) 1:30pm - 3:30pm - Discuss criteria in more detail that have the
support of at least 3 constituencies, in order of those that have the
most support

(6) 3:30pm to 4:00pm - Afternoon tea break

(7) 4pm to 6pm  - Discuss any criteria that don't yet have broad support
- this is a further opportunity to convince the rest of the Committee
that a particular criteria is needed and 
consensus support from the GNSO constituencies


Sunday 26 March 2006
====================

(1) 9am to 10:30am   Allocation methods
- review constituency statements with respect to allocation methods, and
with respect to the ICANN mission and core values
- review information from submitted papers plus public comments relevant
to this question
- identify possible allocation methods

(2) 10:30am - 11am  Break


(3) 11am to 1pm - Meeting between the GNSO Committee on new gTLDs and
the GAC working group on gTLDs  (I assume this is over lunch)
- GNSO Committee to review progress to date, and identify progress with
respect to the PDP process
- GAC working group to discuss progress to date on public policy
principles that may apply to the issue of new gTLDs - bearing in mind
ICANN's mission and core values

(4) 1pm to 1:30pm - break

(5) 1:30pm to 2:30pm - 
- rank the allocation methods based on level of support for each method
from the whole committee, and the degree to which the method is
consistent with the ICANN mission and core values

(6) 2:30pm to 3:30pm
- Discuss methods in more detail that have the support of at least 3
constituencies, in order of those that have the most support.

(7) 3:30pm to 4pm - break

(8) 4pm to 6pm  - Discuss any methods that don't yet have broad support
- this is a further opportunity to convince the rest of the Committee
that a particular method is needed and 
consensus support from the GNSO constituencies

(Alternative 8) - if we are able to cover allocation methods in less
time than allocated above, we can start the discussion on contractual
conditions at this point.

Regards,
Bruce Tonkin