[soac-newgtldapsup-wg] RE: key points from JAS WG/Board/GAC Meeting - please review asap
Dear Rafik, Carlton: Please see attached the formatted key points with few edits I took the liberty to add. Please review before sending. My understanding is that one of you will forward this to the Board GAC, ALAC and GNSO chairs. Please let me know what else you need from me in relation to this. Kind regards, Karla Valente Director, gTLD Registry Programs Mobile: +1 310 936 4639 From: Rafik Dammak [mailto:rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2011 10:17 AM To: Karla Valente Cc: Carlton Samuels; SOAC-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: key points from JAS WG/Board/GAC Meeting - please review asap Hello, that looks for my side, I think that some of our WG members are travelling but we should also send that asap, as the Board-GAC will have meeting tomorrow. can you please format that, Best, Rafik 2011/6/17 Karla Valente <karla.valente@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:karla.valente@xxxxxxxxx>> Dear Rafik Carlton: Please see below the key points summary from the JASWG/Board/GAC meeting last Tuesday. Please let me know if you are in agreement. Once I have your feedback, I can format it in word if you want or you can send it directly to the Board and others. SO/AC new gTLD Applicant Support Working Group (JAS WG), Board, GAC Meeting Tuesday 07 June 2011 at 13:00 UTC. For full transcript and recording: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#<http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/> Key points • Singapore – should have as much interaction as possible • When can the Jas WG finalize the work? • What kind of help does the JAS WG need to finalize the work? • JAS WG needs feedback on the report to validate foundation and direction before it goes into implementation details. • How will we reconcile the JAS WG proposal, the Board discussion about a potential fund and the GAC issues raised? • JAS WG proposal is not only about money support, but a more comprehensive approach • JAS WG does not want needy applicants to be competing one against another. • Should panel, process, structure be distanced from ICANN? • Would the notion of another structure getting seed funding be a way to kick start the process, and make sure that the resources are ramping up with the actual needs fast enough so that there is no competition between the different potential requesters? • There will be a need for some sort of evaluation panel. How could such an evaluation panel be formed in a way that would be sufficiently neutral and trustworthy? • How can we put in place a structure that is efficient and timely? • Demand for the Applicant Support. It is difficult to predict without the details about how this program will work, what it will offer, etc. There are too many variables. ICANN itself cannot predict applicants. More important than guessing demand, is to focus on “How much of an outreach do we as ICANN want to make to make sure that we have treated this issue fairly in developing economies?” • What are the needs in the developing countries and how does having a top-level domain fit into meeting those needs? And that would be the basis for trying to organize a broader level of support, whether it’s funding or whether it’s expertise or whether it’s assistance in working through procedures or whatever. Karla Valente Director, gTLD Registry Programs Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct: + 1 310 301 3878 Mobile: +1 310 936 4639 Skype: kdlvalente Attachment:
JASWG_Board_GAC_Meeting_Key_Points.docx
|