My vote would go to offering to drop back from 4 to 3 BC members. We currently have 30% of the WG. If we want to evolve WG's into true "working" groups, a balanced combination of constituencies is the first place to start, in my view. RA Ronald N. Andruff RNA Partners, Inc. -----Original Message----- From: owner-bc-gnso@icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@icann.org] On Behalf Of Marilyn Cade Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 11:08 AM To: Bc GNSO list Subject: [bc-gnso] UPDATE: FW: [council] Joint DNS security and stability analysisworking group Sorry to be doing this on group list: ideally we would try to solve this but there may be implications for future Cross WGs, so probably helpful BC members are aware. FOR INFORMING BC: What we will be doing: Steve and I will be discussing a response. I have reached out to the Constituency chairs on this topic, and Sarah and I will also communicate to the CSG. My initial response would be to propose that the 12 remain for this WG, and a discussion about what considerations would be reasonable for the SG to propose on limits to membership of WGs. For future WGs. The addition of only two additional participants over ideal of 10 seems small enough to accept. However, I do support that a committment to active participation is appropriate to require for this WG, given its nature. That could lead to a voluntary withdrawal if someone were to find the work demands impossible. Feedback from members about this proposal to ask the present voluinteers to reassess their time availability and to suggest that 12 be accepted, if all can make that confirmation? I will be speaking with Steve asap on this, and w Sarah re the CSG leadership views. Can the three volunteers (Adam, Mikey, and Zahid) communicate to the excomm@bizconst.org that you can commit to the work demands? Scott is the officially appointed BC rep, and has already made that commitment to the Excomm in writing. Sorry to ask again but since we may be going to bat re the number within the CSG and perhaps with other constituencies in NCSG. If anything has changed in availability re significant devotion of time, that is important to know. Have the councilors heard anything else? I am here with Chris Disspain and I will talk to him privately about his flexibility. But I suspect it is fear of being overwhelmed by any particular SO in numbers. I did also get a question about availability to attend a heavy work schedule based on historical participation in Wgs. We will not overwhelm list with details but will keep in close touch as ExComm and the additional volunteers most affected by outcome. Best Marilyn Cade BC Chair Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T -----Original Message----- From: Zahid Jamil <zahid@dndrc.com> Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 15:01:52 To: <bc-GNSO@icann.org> Subject: [bc-gnso] FW: [council] Joint DNS security and stability analysis working group FYI. 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 35680760 / 35685276 / 35655025 Fax: +92 21 35655026 <http://www.jamilandjamil.com/> www.jamilandjamil.com <http://www.jamilandjamil.com> Notice / Disclaimer This message contains confidential information and its contents are being communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this message by mistake and delete it from your system. The contents above may contain/are the intellectual property of DNDRC, and constitute privileged information protected by attorney client privilege. The reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification of any kind whatsoever of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing it in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently or incidentally or some other use of this communication) without prior written permission and consent of DNDRC is prohibited. From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder Sent: 23 February 2011 03:53 To: council@gnso.icann.org Council Subject: [council] Joint DNS security and stability analysis working group Councillors, We have an item on our agenda for Thursday's meeting on the DSSA WG (http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-council-24feb11-en.htm). I have been informed by the ccNSO that they are requesting we limit the number of volunteers from the GNSO to 10 for this WG. At the moment, we have 12 volunteers: Zahid Jamil (CBUC) Scott McCormick (CBUC) Mikey O'Connor (CBUC) George Asare-Sakyi (NCSG) Rafik Dammak (NCSG) Matt Serlin - (MarkMonitor, RrSG)) Rick Wilhelm (Networksolutions RrSG) Greg Aaron (Afilias, RySG) Keith Drazek (Verisign, RySG) Don Blumenthal (PIR, RySG) Mike Rodenbaugh (IPC) Adam Palmer (CBUC) We will need to discuss how to limit our numbers on Thursday. In order to get that discussion going now, I would like to start by asking any of those who have volunteered if they would be willing to step aside in order to help us get down to the 10-volunteer maximum. Stéphane