- Bc-gnso - lists.icann.org

FW: ICANN documents which will be useful background documents for BC members
by Marilyn Cade March 9, 2011

March 9, 2011

Dear members The following links provide recent correspondence from Peter Dengate Thrush, Board Chair to Heather Dryden, GAC Chairwhich the Chair has asked that I call to your attention. The first link is the Board/staff response to the GAC on the scorecard and will be very important to members trying to trackthe status of discussions on the new gTLDs.The second link is a very recent letter from Board Chair to GAC Chair on the ATRT. Both are relevant to BC discussions during San Francisco meeting. http://www.icann.org/en/correspondence/dengate-thrush-to-dryden-05mar11-en.… http://www.icann.org/en/correspondence/dengate-thrush-to-dryden-08mar11-en.… I will try to keep down the extraordinary postings, but since these are documents that I was asked about by a couple of members,am posting them for your convenience. Stay tuned for a later posting with updates on the schedules for next week. I am promised news from ICANN during the day on the schedulereorganizations. We will have an informal BC gathering on Friday evening with informal drinks for members there already, Saturday morning and evening if needed [brief gatherings on Saturday]. and a more formalized updated schedule to be announced as noted, later today. Marilyn CadeBC Chair

2 1

Informational Updates for BC Members
by Benedetta Rossi March 8, 2011

March 8, 2011

Dear Members, The attached documents are provided for your convenience and to note the agenda for the Saturday and Sunday meetings of the GNSO Council and the GNSO. In addition, the GNSO Councilagenda for Wednesday is provided, and two supporting documents: a white paper prepared by Liz Gasster, ICANN policy staff, on the cross SO/AC Working Group's topic, and the ICANNStrategic Plan. Other links in the documents will take you to relevant documents. ICANN's schedule is not yet updated to reflect the changes in the schedule, and Chris and Marilyn ask that you stay tuned until tomorrow, when we hope to have updated details on when the Board and GAC will meet, and the reorganization of the CSG and BC scheduled sessions for next week. In the meantime, we hope that you find this information helpful for your planning. The Chair is considering several short sessions with members, and that is likely to startwith Friday late afternoon or Saturday early, in order to give the ExComm and Councilorsinput on some of the topics on the weekend discussions. We will have more information on Wednesday. For logistical planning, we will begin using meetings(a)bizconst.org once we arriveat San Francisco, so that the rest of the BC is not bothered with organizational gatherings. Kindest Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat

1 0

Re: [bc-gnso] ICANN-GAC Scorecard (1A's, 1B's and 2's)
by Marilyn Cade March 6, 2011

March 6, 2011

Thanks, Mike. Helps us in our efforts to tell BC which are ranked at what level. Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T -----Original Message----- From: "Michael D. Palage" <michael(a)palage.com> Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2011 15:35:37 To: <bc-gnso(a)icann.org> Subject: [bc-gnso] ICANN-GAC Scorecard (1A's, 1B's and 2's) Hello All, Here is a communication sent by the ICANN Board to the GAC with regard to the current scorecard standing, see http://www.icann.org/en/correspondence/dengate-thrush-to-dryden-05mar11-en.p df Best regards, Michael

1 0

ICANN-GAC Scorecard (1A's, 1B's and 2's)
by Michael D. Palage March 6, 2011

March 6, 2011

Hello All, Here is a communication sent by the ICANN Board to the GAC with regard to the current scorecard standing, see http://www.icann.org/en/correspondence/dengate-thrush-to-dryden-05mar11-en.p df Best regards, Michael

1 0

RE: [bc-gnso] Input needed from all members
by lynn＠goodsecurityconsulting.com March 5, 2011

March 5, 2011

3 2

Input needed from all members
by Marilyn Cade March 4, 2011

March 4, 2011

The Board and CSG interaction we are working toward and which is tentative for Tuesday for one hour allows the CSG to propose three topics. Your excomm needs input from BC membership. I have heard from some members: ideas are AoC I implications for business users New GTLDs Security, Stability and resiliency from Bs user perspective Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

3 2

Re: [bc-gnso] Input needed from all members
by Zahid Jamil March 3, 2011

March 3, 2011

I would support new gTLDs as the main topic AoC as a strong second But restrict it to these two. I understand that the other CSG members are currently looking at new gTLDs as the main topic and I too would support this notion. ------Original Message------ From: Marilyn S. Cade Sender: owner-bc-gnso(a)icann.org To: BC Secretariat Subject: [bc-gnso] Input needed from all members Sent: Mar 3, 2011 14:01 The Board and CSG interaction we are working toward and which is tentative for Tuesday for one hour allows the CSG to propose three topics. Your excomm needs input from BC membership. I have heard from some members: ideas are AoC I implications for business users New GTLDs Security, Stability and resiliency from Bs user perspective Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T Sincerely, Zahid Jamil Barrister-at-law Jamil & Jamil Barristers-at-law 219-221 Central Hotel Annexe Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan Cell: +923008238230 Tel: +92 21 5680760 / 5685276 / 5655025 Fax: +92 21 5655026 www.jamilandjamil.com *** This Message Has Been Sent Using BlackBerry Internet Service from Mobilink ***

7 6

Fwd: FW: [bc-gnso] Input needed from all members
by Mike Roberts March 3, 2011

March 3, 2011

From the standpoint of the ICANN NomCom, on which Chris Martin and I serve, this further complicates an already complicated situation. It is widely thought in ICANN circles that the workload on Board members is too high. Certainly it is far beyond the norm of private sector directors, and in some respects, it is those norms we are competing against in recruiting experienced people to serve on the Board. (The ATRT report, BTW, got this all wrong in its insistence on more Board time and effort than is currently committed.) So, it simply doesn't work to assume the Board adds a bunch more time for interactions with governments on top of what they are already doing. Something has to be subtracted from the list of direct interaction commitments. I think the BC, with its knowledge of how private sector organizations and their Boards get the job done, could usefully make some suggestions along this line. - Mike Roberts ---------------- From: Phil Corwin <psc(a)vlaw-dc.com> To: "bc-gnso(a)icann.org" <bc-gnso(a)icann.org> Subject: FW: [bc-gnso] Input needed from all members Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 17:06:19 +0000 ICA is fine with focusing primarily on new gTLDs, notwithstanding our differences with some of the BC rights protection positions. While not strictly on the AOC, and perhaps not a topic for extended discussion with the Board at this particular meeting, I think that all BC members should think about how ICANN meetings should best be structured to take into account the new reality of substantially increased GAC involvement in the policy process. The Board and the GAC now plan two days of meetings in San Francisco on new gTLDs (and also, presumably, .xxx) -- on Tuesday, Constituency Day, and on Thursday, which is usually devoted to a lengthy public forum. As there are so many hours in a day, the time the Board huddles with the GAC is time that they cannot interact with constituencies or with the community -- plus they will naturally be more focused mentally on the meetings with the GAC. While there are unlikely to be issues of the same intensity as new gTLDs in the immediate future, GAC members made it quite clear that they want to be involved in future policy issues from the beginning, and that the form o! f discussion with the Board taking place now is setting a precedent. So I think we should all assume that ICANN meetings in the future will either be longer, or differently structured, and have some internal discussion about what revised format would best serve business users.

1 0

FW: [bc-gnso] Input needed from all members
by Phil Corwin March 3, 2011

March 3, 2011

ICA is fine with focusing primarily on new gTLDs, notwithstanding our differences with some of the BC rights protection positions. While not strictly on the AOC, and perhaps not a topic for extended discussion with the Board at this particular meeting, I think that all BC members should think about how ICANN meetings should best be structured to take into account the new reality of substantially increased GAC involvement in the policy process. The Board and the GAC now plan two days of meetings in San Francisco on new gTLDs (and also, presumably, .xxx) -- on Tuesday, Constituency Day, and on Thursday, which is usually devoted to a lengthy public forum. As there are so many hours in a day, the time the Board huddles with the GAC is time that they cannot interact with constituencies or with the community -- plus they will naturally be more focused mentally on the meetings with the GAC. While there are unlikely to be issues of the same intensity as new gTLDs in the immediate future, GAC members made it quite clear that they want to be involved in future policy issues from the beginning, and that the form of discussion with the Board taking place now is setting a precedent. So I think we should all assume that ICANN meetings in the future will either be longer, or differently structured, and have some internal discussion about what revised format would best serve business users. Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey ________________________________________ From: owner-bc-gnso(a)icann.org [owner-bc-gnso(a)icann.org] on behalf of Philip Sheppard [philip.sheppard(a)aim.be] Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 10:42 AM To: bc-gnso(a)icann.org Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] Input needed from all members Support focusing on TLDs only. Philip .... ... who very nicely did NOT reply to all and thus saved 5 BC members from duplicate mails. Will the next BC member be as kind to me ?

1 0

organized transcript of GAC-Board meetings
by Steve DelBianco March 3, 2011

March 3, 2011

1 0