Your input requested - List of topics & individuals/organizations
Dear All, In relation to action item #1, please find at the following link a table to which the CCWG can start adding possible topics for future briefings as well as individuals/organizations that the CCWG may want to consult at some point in time: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QtwFa9nCIMq8JYCtBHxAyQraWQ6M-iNNP4Kyq6q9.... Ideally the CCWG will be in a position to match the individuals/organizations with the topics that are identified for which further information and/or briefings are needed. This may of course also include CCWG members and/or participants that may have relevant knowledge and expertise (note, a draft survey to assess CCWG skills and expertise is forthcoming shortly). At this stage, the list only includes some recommendations from staff. At the end of the document you will find the suggestions that have been made on the mailing list to date. Those that made those suggestions are encouraged to add the relevant details to the tables. Of course, any other suggestions are also welcome. Best regards, Marika P.S. you will also find the Word version attached for those that are unfamiliar or do not have access to Google Docs. From: <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Date: Thursday, January 26, 2017 at 10:14 AM To: "ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> Subject: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes and action items from today's new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG Dear All, Please find below the notes and action items from today’s meeting. The next meeting will be scheduled for Thursday 9 February at 15.00 UTC for 90 minutes. Best regards, Marika Notes - 26 January 2017 CCWG Auction Proceeds These high-level notes are designed to help PDP WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the transcript and/or recording. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately and are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/x/D7HDAw[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_D7HDAw&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=vItA34uTu0FtkgcQCuJc8AmJn77jDHI3siyI64lNySY&s=MGLfLooJIjOM7z93zv9aa2z6zNaMM26J_gYlwPV9_vk&e=>. 1. Roll Call · Attendance will be taken from Adobe Connect · This WG has members, participants and observers. Only members and participants are invited to calls. The call details are circulated on a non-archived mailing list (ntyf). Please do not circulate these details. Should you want to change your status from observer to participant, please contact gnso-secs@icann.org. · Please remember to mute your microphone when not speaking. 2. Welcome & Introductions · Get to know each other via participation or possible an in person meeting at a future ICANN meeting. Feel free to reach out to staff or raising your hands if you have any questions. · If you want to speak, please use the raising hand feature in Adobe Connect. · Staff support for this effort will be provided by Marika Konings (GNSO), Joke Braeken (ccNSO) and Nathalie Peregrine (SO/AC Support Team). · Two Board liaisons have been appointed to this effort (Asha Hemrajani and Becky Burr) as the Board has fiduciary responsibilities. Expected to be a go between the CCWG and Board to highlight any concerns or questions the CCWG and/or Board may have. · Samantha Eisner (deputy legal Counsel, ICANN) will continue in the role of staff liaison/advisor, similar to the support she provided in the drafting team by advising on ICANN's legal and fiduciary responsibilities. · Lauren Allison is providing internal support to ICANN org on this topic and is also expected to join this call on a regular basis. · CCWG should be comfortable with this level of staff support provided - if there are any concerns, these should be flagged. High level principles of operation of CCWGs: · CCWG will be lead and co-ordinated by the co-chairs appointed by the Chartering Organizations. To date, the GNSO and ccNSO have appointed a co-chair (Jonathan Robinson - GNSO, Ching Chiao - ccNSO). · Leadership team meets prior to the meeting to prepare the agenda and prep for the meeting. · CCWG is expected to work as a collaborative unit - need to excercise discipline. · Members are appointed by chartering organization and serve a specific liaison role. · Participants participate in the same way as members do, the only difference may be if there is a need for a consensus call (noting that the leadership will do its best to avoid the need for any votes). · Observers can follow the discussions on the mailing list, but are not invited to join calls. · All members and participants are required to complete a statement of interest and a declaration of interest. · If after a number of reminders you have not completed your SOI or DOI your status will be downgraded to observer until you have completed the required statements. · For more information about the practical workings of Adobe Connect, wiki, etc., please review the communication tools webinar (see https://participate.icann.org/p830qbsrcot/). · Is there anything as "good standing" for CCWG members/participants similar to https://www.w3.org/2004/02/Process-20040205/groups.html#good-standing? No, not currently, only requirements are SOI and DOI. 3. Update on CO membership appointments and chairs · Still awaiting appointments from the ASO, ALAC and GAC - these are forthcoming · All have confirmed their participation and adoption of the charter. · The ccNSO Council has appointed Ching as an interim co-chair - the Council will revisit its decision during ICANN59 whether it will officially appoint a co-chair to this group, and if so, whether it is Ching or someone else. 4. Review CCWG charter · See slides circulated (https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/63156495/new%20gTLD%20Aucti...) 5. Discuss what information and/or preparation is needed to start developing work plan · What briefing / input is needed? For example, should another briefing on the legal and fiduciary constraints be provided? Any other information / expertise that will be required? · What preparations / inputs are needed prior to developing the work plan? · Determine what expertise is available in the CCWG. Consider surveying the CCWG to determine what expertise is available in the CCWG to see what expertise may be missing. · CCWG will need to give consideration as part of its deliberations to local/global nature of mechanism recommended. · Need briefings from people that do this as part of their daily jobs to get further insights into best practices. Need to avoid reinventing the wheel so important to benefit from those that have expertise in this area. Note a number of suggestions and offers made in the chat. Develop a list of possible organisations to invite / speak to at the outset. · Create two documents: table of expertise of CCWG members - individuals can add to this (proposer, expertise). Create document to start ad-hoc thinking about the questions. Action item #1: Start building list of prospective individuals / organizations that could provide input and expertise at the outset of the CCWG deliberations Action item #2: Staff to develop draft table of expertise for CCWG completion and start ad-hoc document which will allow CCWG members/participants to share thinking about charter questions. 6. Discuss proposed timing, duration and frequency of meetings · Factoring in time zone spread of CCWG members and participants, suggests that a single time slot of 15.00 UTC may work for most. If this does not work, may need to consider alternatives, including rotation. · Proposed to continue on Thursdays, for 90 minutes, every two weeks. · For ICANN58, staff will be requesting a slot on Wednesday from 15.15-16.45 local time for the CCWG. CCWG can decide at a later date whether you want to use this slot or not. 7. AOB 8. Confirm next steps & time / date for next meeting · 9 February at 15.00 UTC for 90 minutes Marika Konings Senior Policy Director & Team Leader for the GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses[learn.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses_...> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages[gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gns...>.
Thanks Marika, I have also suggested that Sam Eisner brief the group on the very definition of ICANN’s Mission, as it was recently updated with the purpose of defining its scope more clearly, as part of the IANA Stewardship Transition. Best Mathieu De : ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org] De la part de Marika Konings Envoyé : mercredi 1 février 2017 23:26 À : ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org Objet : [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Your input requested - List of topics & individuals/organizations Dear All, In relation to action item #1, please find at the following link a table to which the CCWG can start adding possible topics for future briefings as well as individuals/organizations that the CCWG may want to consult at some point in time: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QtwFa9nCIMq8JYCtBHxAyQraWQ6M-iNNP4Kyq6q9.... Ideally the CCWG will be in a position to match the individuals/organizations with the topics that are identified for which further information and/or briefings are needed. This may of course also include CCWG members and/or participants that may have relevant knowledge and expertise (note, a draft survey to assess CCWG skills and expertise is forthcoming shortly). At this stage, the list only includes some recommendations from staff. At the end of the document you will find the suggestions that have been made on the mailing list to date. Those that made those suggestions are encouraged to add the relevant details to the tables. Of course, any other suggestions are also welcome. Best regards, Marika P.S. you will also find the Word version attached for those that are unfamiliar or do not have access to Google Docs. From: <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Date: Thursday, January 26, 2017 at 10:14 AM To: "ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> Subject: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes and action items from today's new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG Dear All, Please find below the notes and action items from today’s meeting. The next meeting will be scheduled for Thursday 9 February at 15.00 UTC for 90 minutes. Best regards, Marika Notes - 26 January 2017 CCWG Auction Proceeds These high-level notes are designed to help PDP WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the transcript and/or recording. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately and are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/x/D7HDAw[community.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_D...> . 1. Roll Call · Attendance will be taken from Adobe Connect · This WG has members, participants and observers. Only members and participants are invited to calls. The call details are circulated on a non-archived mailing list (ntyf). Please do not circulate these details. Should you want to change your status from observer to participant, please contact gnso-secs@icann.org. · Please remember to mute your microphone when not speaking. 2. Welcome & Introductions · Get to know each other via participation or possible an in person meeting at a future ICANN meeting. Feel free to reach out to staff or raising your hands if you have any questions. · If you want to speak, please use the raising hand feature in Adobe Connect. · Staff support for this effort will be provided by Marika Konings (GNSO), Joke Braeken (ccNSO) and Nathalie Peregrine (SO/AC Support Team). · Two Board liaisons have been appointed to this effort (Asha Hemrajani and Becky Burr) as the Board has fiduciary responsibilities. Expected to be a go between the CCWG and Board to highlight any concerns or questions the CCWG and/or Board may have. · Samantha Eisner (deputy legal Counsel, ICANN) will continue in the role of staff liaison/advisor, similar to the support she provided in the drafting team by advising on ICANN's legal and fiduciary responsibilities. · Lauren Allison is providing internal support to ICANN org on this topic and is also expected to join this call on a regular basis. · CCWG should be comfortable with this level of staff support provided - if there are any concerns, these should be flagged. High level principles of operation of CCWGs: · CCWG will be lead and co-ordinated by the co-chairs appointed by the Chartering Organizations. To date, the GNSO and ccNSO have appointed a co-chair (Jonathan Robinson - GNSO, Ching Chiao - ccNSO). · Leadership team meets prior to the meeting to prepare the agenda and prep for the meeting. · CCWG is expected to work as a collaborative unit - need to excercise discipline. · Members are appointed by chartering organization and serve a specific liaison role. · Participants participate in the same way as members do, the only difference may be if there is a need for a consensus call (noting that the leadership will do its best to avoid the need for any votes). · Observers can follow the discussions on the mailing list, but are not invited to join calls. · All members and participants are required to complete a statement of interest and a declaration of interest. · If after a number of reminders you have not completed your SOI or DOI your status will be downgraded to observer until you have completed the required statements. · For more information about the practical workings of Adobe Connect, wiki, etc., please review the communication tools webinar (see https://participate.icann.org/p830qbsrcot/). · Is there anything as "good standing" for CCWG members/participants similar to https://www.w3.org/2004/02/Process-20040205/groups.html#good-standing? No, not currently, only requirements are SOI and DOI. 3. Update on CO membership appointments and chairs · Still awaiting appointments from the ASO, ALAC and GAC - these are forthcoming · All have confirmed their participation and adoption of the charter. · The ccNSO Council has appointed Ching as an interim co-chair - the Council will revisit its decision during ICANN59 whether it will officially appoint a co-chair to this group, and if so, whether it is Ching or someone else. 4. Review CCWG charter · See slides circulated (https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/63156495/new%20gTLD%20Aucti... <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/63156495/new%20gTLD%20Aucti...> &modificationDate=1485303016000&api=v2) 5. Discuss what information and/or preparation is needed to start developing work plan · What briefing / input is needed? For example, should another briefing on the legal and fiduciary constraints be provided? Any other information / expertise that will be required? · What preparations / inputs are needed prior to developing the work plan? · Determine what expertise is available in the CCWG. Consider surveying the CCWG to determine what expertise is available in the CCWG to see what expertise may be missing. · CCWG will need to give consideration as part of its deliberations to local/global nature of mechanism recommended. · Need briefings from people that do this as part of their daily jobs to get further insights into best practices. Need to avoid reinventing the wheel so important to benefit from those that have expertise in this area. Note a number of suggestions and offers made in the chat. Develop a list of possible organisations to invite / speak to at the outset. · Create two documents: table of expertise of CCWG members - individuals can add to this (proposer, expertise). Create document to start ad-hoc thinking about the questions. Action item #1: Start building list of prospective individuals / organizations that could provide input and expertise at the outset of the CCWG deliberations Action item #2: Staff to develop draft table of expertise for CCWG completion and start ad-hoc document which will allow CCWG members/participants to share thinking about charter questions. 6. Discuss proposed timing, duration and frequency of meetings · Factoring in time zone spread of CCWG members and participants, suggests that a single time slot of 15.00 UTC may work for most. If this does not work, may need to consider alternatives, including rotation. · Proposed to continue on Thursdays, for 90 minutes, every two weeks. · For ICANN58, staff will be requesting a slot on Wednesday from 15.15-16.45 local time for the CCWG. CCWG can decide at a later date whether you want to use this slot or not. 7. AOB 8. Confirm next steps & time / date for next meeting · 9 February at 15.00 UTC for 90 minutes Marika Konings Senior Policy Director & Team Leader for the GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings@icann.org Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses[learn.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses_...> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages[gnso.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gns...> .
All, I just updated this Google doc. So willing to share with you our 20 years experience at NLnet in being a dutch tax-exempt charity, awarding funds worldwide via an Open Call process to projects in the domain of Internet technology. Kind regards, Marc Op 2-2-2017 om 8:38 schreef Mathieu Weill:
Thanks Marika,
I have also suggested that Sam Eisner brief the group on the very definition of ICANN’s Mission, as it was recently updated with the purpose of defining its scope more clearly, as part of the IANA Stewardship Transition.
Best
Mathieu
*De :*ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org] *De la part de* Marika Konings *Envoyé :* mercredi 1 février 2017 23:26 *À :* ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org *Objet :* [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Your input requested - List of topics & individuals/organizations
Dear All,
In relation to action item #1, please find at the following link a table to which the CCWG can start adding possible topics for future briefings as well as individuals/organizations that the CCWG may want to consult at some point in time: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QtwFa9nCIMq8JYCtBHxAyQraWQ6M-iNNP4Kyq6q9.... Ideally the CCWG will be in a position to match the individuals/organizations with the topics that are identified for which further information and/or briefings are needed. This may of course also include CCWG members and/or participants that may have relevant knowledge and expertise (note, a draft survey to assess CCWG skills and expertise is forthcoming shortly).
At this stage, the list only includes some recommendations from staff. At the end of the document you will find the suggestions that have been made on the mailing list to date. Those that made those suggestions are encouraged to add the relevant details to the tables. Of course, any other suggestions are also welcome.
Best regards,
Marika
P.S. you will also find the Word version attached for those that are unfamiliar or do not have access to Google Docs.
*From: *<ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> *Date: *Thursday, January 26, 2017 at 10:14 AM *To: *"ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> *Subject: *[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes and action items from today's new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG
Dear All,
Please find below the notes and action items from today’s meeting. The next meeting will be scheduled for Thursday 9 February at 15.00 UTC for 90 minutes.
Best regards,
Marika
* *
*Notes - 26 January 2017 CCWG Auction Proceeds*
* *
/These high-level notes are designed to help PDP WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the transcript and/or recording. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately and are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/x/D7HDAw[community.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_D...>. /
*1. Roll Call*
· Attendance will be taken from Adobe Connect
· This WG has members, participants and observers. Only members and participants are invited to calls. The call details are circulated on a non-archived mailing list (ntyf). Please do not circulate these details. Should you want to change your status from observer to participant, please contact gnso-secs@icann.org <mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>.
· Please remember to mute your microphone when not speaking.
*2. Welcome & Introductions*
· Get to know each other via participation or possible an in person meeting at a future ICANN meeting. Feel free to reach out to staff or raising your hands if you have any questions.
· If you want to speak, please use the raising hand feature in Adobe Connect.
· Staff support for this effort will be provided by Marika Konings (GNSO), Joke Braeken (ccNSO) and Nathalie Peregrine (SO/AC Support Team).
· Two Board liaisons have been appointed to this effort (Asha Hemrajani and Becky Burr) as the Board has fiduciary responsibilities. Expected to be a go between the CCWG and Board to highlight any concerns or questions the CCWG and/or Board may have.
· Samantha Eisner (deputy legal Counsel, ICANN) will continue in the role of staff liaison/advisor, similar to the support she provided in the drafting team by advising on ICANN's legal and fiduciary responsibilities.
· Lauren Allison is providing internal support to ICANN org on this topic and is also expected to join this call on a regular basis.
· CCWG should be comfortable with this level of staff support provided - if there are any concerns, these should be flagged.
/High level principles of operation of CCWGs:/
· CCWG will be lead and co-ordinated by the co-chairs appointed by the Chartering Organizations. To date, the GNSO and ccNSO have appointed a co-chair (Jonathan Robinson - GNSO, Ching Chiao - ccNSO).
· Leadership team meets prior to the meeting to prepare the agenda and prep for the meeting.
· CCWG is expected to work as a collaborative unit - need to excercise discipline.
· Members are appointed by chartering organization and serve a specific liaison role.
· Participants participate in the same way as members do, the only difference may be if there is a need for a consensus call (noting that the leadership will do its best to avoid the need for any votes).
· Observers can follow the discussions on the mailing list, but are not invited to join calls.
· All members and participants are required to complete a statement of interest and a declaration of interest.
· If after a number of reminders you have not completed your SOI or DOI your status will be downgraded to observer until you have completed the required statements.
· For more information about the practical workings of Adobe Connect, wiki, etc., please review the communication tools webinar (see https://participate.icann.org/p830qbsrcot/).
· Is there anything as "good standing" for CCWG members/participants similar to https://www.w3.org/2004/02/Process-20040205/groups.html#good-standing? No, not currently, only requirements are SOI and DOI.
*3. Update on CO membership appointments and chairs*
· Still awaiting appointments from the ASO, ALAC and GAC - these are forthcoming
· All have confirmed their participation and adoption of the charter.
· The ccNSO Council has appointed Ching as an interim co-chair - the Council will revisit its decision during ICANN59 whether it will officially appoint a co-chair to this group, and if so, whether it is Ching or someone else.
*4. Review CCWG charter *
· See slides circulated (https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/63156495/new%20gTLD%20Aucti...)
*5. Discuss what information and/or preparation is needed to start developing work plan*
· What briefing / input is needed? For example, should another briefing on the legal and fiduciary constraints be provided? Any other information / expertise that will be required?
· What preparations / inputs are needed prior to developing the work plan?
· Determine what expertise is available in the CCWG. Consider surveying the CCWG to determine what expertise is available in the CCWG to see what expertise may be missing.
· CCWG will need to give consideration as part of its deliberations to local/global nature of mechanism recommended.
· Need briefings from people that do this as part of their daily jobs to get further insights into best practices. Need to avoid reinventing the wheel so important to benefit from those that have expertise in this area. Note a number of suggestions and offers made in the chat. Develop a list of possible organisations to invite / speak to at the outset.
· Create two documents: table of expertise of CCWG members - individuals can add to this (proposer, expertise). Create document to start ad-hoc thinking about the questions.
*Action item #1*: Start building list of prospective individuals / organizations that could provide input and expertise at the outset of the CCWG deliberations
*Action item #2*: Staff to develop draft table of expertise for CCWG completion and start ad-hoc document which will allow CCWG members/participants to share thinking about charter questions.
*6. Discuss proposed timing, duration and frequency of meetings*
· Factoring in time zone spread of CCWG members and participants, suggests that a single time slot of 15.00 UTC may work for most. If this does not work, may need to consider alternatives, including rotation.
· Proposed to continue on Thursdays, for 90 minutes, every two weeks.
· For ICANN58, staff will be requesting a slot on Wednesday from 15.15-16.45 local time for the CCWG. CCWG can decide at a later date whether you want to use this slot or not.
*7. AOB*
*8. Confirm next steps & time / date for next meeting*
· 9 February at 15.00 UTC for 90 minutes
*/Marika Konings/*
/Senior Policy Director & Team Leader for the GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) /
/Email: marika.konings@icann.org <mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> /
/ /
/Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO/
/Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses[learn.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses_...> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages[gnso.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gns...>. /
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
-- Marc Gauw, Directeur Stichting NLnet + 31 6 24 874 224 + 31 20 888 4252 marc.gauw@nlnet.nl Science Park 400 1098 XH Amsterdam
Done, first 2 cents :) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Sylvia Cadena | APNIC Foundation | Head of Programs | sylvia@apnic.net<mailto:sylvia@apnic.net> http://www.apnic.foundation<http://www.apnic.foundation/> ISIF Asia | http://www.isif.asia<http://www.isif.asia/> FB ISIF.asia | G+ ISIFAsia | @ISIF_Asia 6 Cordelia Street, South Brisbane, QLD, 4101 Australia | PO Box 3646 Tel: +61 7 3858 3100 | Fax: +61 7 3858 3199 * Love trees. Print only if necessary. On 2/02/2017, 10:51 PM, "ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Marc Gauw" <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of marc.gauw@nlnet.nl<mailto:marc.gauw@nlnet.nl>> wrote: All, I just updated this Google doc. So willing to share with you our 20 years experience at NLnet in being a dutch tax-exempt charity, awarding funds worldwide via an Open Call process to projects in the domain of Internet technology. Kind regards, Marc Op 2-2-2017 om 8:38 schreef Mathieu Weill: Thanks Marika, I have also suggested that Sam Eisner brief the group on the very definition of ICANN’s Mission, as it was recently updated with the purpose of defining its scope more clearly, as part of the IANA Stewardship Transition. Best Mathieu De : ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org] De la part de Marika Konings Envoyé : mercredi 1 février 2017 23:26 À : ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> Objet : [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Your input requested - List of topics & individuals/organizations Dear All, In relation to action item #1, please find at the following link a table to which the CCWG can start adding possible topics for future briefings as well as individuals/organizations that the CCWG may want to consult at some point in time: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QtwFa9nCIMq8JYCtBHxAyQraWQ6M-iNNP4Kyq6q9.... Ideally the CCWG will be in a position to match the individuals/organizations with the topics that are identified for which further information and/or briefings are needed. This may of course also include CCWG members and/or participants that may have relevant knowledge and expertise (note, a draft survey to assess CCWG skills and expertise is forthcoming shortly). At this stage, the list only includes some recommendations from staff. At the end of the document you will find the suggestions that have been made on the mailing list to date. Those that made those suggestions are encouraged to add the relevant details to the tables. Of course, any other suggestions are also welcome. Best regards, Marika P.S. you will also find the Word version attached for those that are unfamiliar or do not have access to Google Docs. From: <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org><mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org><mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> Date: Thursday, January 26, 2017 at 10:14 AM To: "ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org"<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org><mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> Subject: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes and action items from today's new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG Dear All, Please find below the notes and action items from today’s meeting. The next meeting will be scheduled for Thursday 9 February at 15.00 UTC for 90 minutes. Best regards, Marika Notes - 26 January 2017 CCWG Auction Proceeds These high-level notes are designed to help PDP WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the transcript and/or recording. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately and are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/x/D7HDAw[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_D7HDAw&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=vItA34uTu0FtkgcQCuJc8AmJn77jDHI3siyI64lNySY&s=MGLfLooJIjOM7z93zv9aa2z6zNaMM26J_gYlwPV9_vk&e=>. 1. Roll Call · Attendance will be taken from Adobe Connect · This WG has members, participants and observers. Only members and participants are invited to calls. The call details are circulated on a non-archived mailing list (ntyf). Please do not circulate these details. Should you want to change your status from observer to participant, please contact gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>. · Please remember to mute your microphone when not speaking. 2. Welcome & Introductions · Get to know each other via participation or possible an in person meeting at a future ICANN meeting. Feel free to reach out to staff or raising your hands if you have any questions. · If you want to speak, please use the raising hand feature in Adobe Connect. · Staff support for this effort will be provided by Marika Konings (GNSO), Joke Braeken (ccNSO) and Nathalie Peregrine (SO/AC Support Team). · Two Board liaisons have been appointed to this effort (Asha Hemrajani and Becky Burr) as the Board has fiduciary responsibilities. Expected to be a go between the CCWG and Board to highlight any concerns or questions the CCWG and/or Board may have. · Samantha Eisner (deputy legal Counsel, ICANN) will continue in the role of staff liaison/advisor, similar to the support she provided in the drafting team by advising on ICANN's legal and fiduciary responsibilities. · Lauren Allison is providing internal support to ICANN org on this topic and is also expected to join this call on a regular basis. · CCWG should be comfortable with this level of staff support provided - if there are any concerns, these should be flagged. High level principles of operation of CCWGs: · CCWG will be lead and co-ordinated by the co-chairs appointed by the Chartering Organizations. To date, the GNSO and ccNSO have appointed a co-chair (Jonathan Robinson - GNSO, Ching Chiao - ccNSO). · Leadership team meets prior to the meeting to prepare the agenda and prep for the meeting. · CCWG is expected to work as a collaborative unit - need to excercise discipline. · Members are appointed by chartering organization and serve a specific liaison role. · Participants participate in the same way as members do, the only difference may be if there is a need for a consensus call (noting that the leadership will do its best to avoid the need for any votes). · Observers can follow the discussions on the mailing list, but are not invited to join calls. · All members and participants are required to complete a statement of interest and a declaration of interest. · If after a number of reminders you have not completed your SOI or DOI your status will be downgraded to observer until you have completed the required statements. · For more information about the practical workings of Adobe Connect, wiki, etc., please review the communication tools webinar (see https://participate.icann.org/p830qbsrcot/). · Is there anything as "good standing" for CCWG members/participants similar to https://www.w3.org/2004/02/Process-20040205/groups.html#good-standing? No, not currently, only requirements are SOI and DOI. 3. Update on CO membership appointments and chairs · Still awaiting appointments from the ASO, ALAC and GAC - these are forthcoming · All have confirmed their participation and adoption of the charter. · The ccNSO Council has appointed Ching as an interim co-chair - the Council will revisit its decision during ICANN59 whether it will officially appoint a co-chair to this group, and if so, whether it is Ching or someone else. 4. Review CCWG charter · See slides circulated (https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/63156495/new%20gTLD%20Aucti...) 5. Discuss what information and/or preparation is needed to start developing work plan · What briefing / input is needed? For example, should another briefing on the legal and fiduciary constraints be provided? Any other information / expertise that will be required? · What preparations / inputs are needed prior to developing the work plan? · Determine what expertise is available in the CCWG. Consider surveying the CCWG to determine what expertise is available in the CCWG to see what expertise may be missing. · CCWG will need to give consideration as part of its deliberations to local/global nature of mechanism recommended. · Need briefings from people that do this as part of their daily jobs to get further insights into best practices. Need to avoid reinventing the wheel so important to benefit from those that have expertise in this area. Note a number of suggestions and offers made in the chat. Develop a list of possible organisations to invite / speak to at the outset. · Create two documents: table of expertise of CCWG members - individuals can add to this (proposer, expertise). Create document to start ad-hoc thinking about the questions. Action item #1: Start building list of prospective individuals / organizations that could provide input and expertise at the outset of the CCWG deliberations Action item #2: Staff to develop draft table of expertise for CCWG completion and start ad-hoc document which will allow CCWG members/participants to share thinking about charter questions. 6. Discuss proposed timing, duration and frequency of meetings · Factoring in time zone spread of CCWG members and participants, suggests that a single time slot of 15.00 UTC may work for most. If this does not work, may need to consider alternatives, including rotation. · Proposed to continue on Thursdays, for 90 minutes, every two weeks. · For ICANN58, staff will be requesting a slot on Wednesday from 15.15-16.45 local time for the CCWG. CCWG can decide at a later date whether you want to use this slot or not. 7. AOB 8. Confirm next steps & time / date for next meeting · 9 February at 15.00 UTC for 90 minutes Marika Konings Senior Policy Director & Team Leader for the GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses[learn.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses_...> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages[gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gns...>. _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds -- Marc Gauw, Directeur Stichting NLnet + 31 6 24 874 224 + 31 20 888 4252 marc.gauw@nlnet.nl<mailto:marc.gauw@nlnet.nl> Science Park 400 1098 XH Amsterdam
With ICANN 58 a couple of months away, I suppose that like me, people need to arrange travel (or not) to Denmark. Do we already know if we're going to meet, and which day ? And if we don't know yet, when will we know ? Thanks.
Hi Daniel, Staff has tentatively requested Wednesday from 15.15 – 16.45 local time for a CCWG-Auction Proceeds meeting. It is up to the CCWG to decide whether or not you want to make use of that slot, but it is easier to cancel the slot than to request one at a later date. Best regards, Marika On 2/2/17, 12:07 PM, "Daniel Dardailler" <danield@w3.org> wrote: With ICANN 58 a couple of months away, I suppose that like me, people need to arrange travel (or not) to Denmark. Do we already know if we're going to meet, and which day ? And if we don't know yet, when will we know ? Thanks.
Excellent idea - I support. Matthew On 02/02/2017 19:39, Dietmar Stefitz wrote:
Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] [Ext] F2f planned in Copenhagen ? Hola Marika,
For me this date and time is perfect. I will assist.
Best regards, Dietmar Stefitz
Thursday, February 2, 2017, 7:13:53 PM, you wrote:
*MK> Hi Daniel,
MK> Staff has tentatively requested Wednesday from 15.15 – 16.45 MK> local time for a CCWG-Auction Proceeds meeting. It is up to the MK> CCWG to decide whether or not you want to make use of that slot, MK> but it is easier to cancel the slot than to request one at a later date.
MK> Best regards,
MK> Marika
MK> On 2/2/17, 12:07 PM, "Daniel Dardailler" <*danield@w3.org <mailto:danield@w3.org>*> wrote:
MK> With ICANN 58 a couple of months away, I suppose that like me, people MK> need to arrange travel (or not) to Denmark. MK> MK> Do we already know if we're going to meet, and which day ? MK> And if we don't know yet, when will we know ? MK> MK> Thanks. MK> MK>
MK> _______________________________________________ MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list *MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> MK> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds>
/-- Saludos, Dietmar
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds /
-- ------------ Matthew Shears Global Internet Policy and Human Rights Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) + 44 771 2472987
Seems like a good idea. Stephanie Perrin On 2017-02-03 07:09, matthew shears wrote:
Excellent idea - I support. Matthew
On 02/02/2017 19:39, Dietmar Stefitz wrote:
Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] [Ext] F2f planned in Copenhagen ? Hola Marika,
For me this date and time is perfect. I will assist.
Best regards, Dietmar Stefitz
Thursday, February 2, 2017, 7:13:53 PM, you wrote:
*MK> Hi Daniel,
MK> Staff has tentatively requested Wednesday from 15.15 – 16.45 MK> local time for a CCWG-Auction Proceeds meeting. It is up to the MK> CCWG to decide whether or not you want to make use of that slot, MK> but it is easier to cancel the slot than to request one at a later date.
MK> Best regards,
MK> Marika
MK> On 2/2/17, 12:07 PM, "Daniel Dardailler" <*danield@w3.org <mailto:danield@w3.org>*> wrote:
MK> With ICANN 58 a couple of months away, I suppose that like me, people MK> need to arrange travel (or not) to Denmark. MK> MK> Do we already know if we're going to meet, and which day ? MK> And if we don't know yet, when will we know ? MK> MK> Thanks. MK> MK>
MK> _______________________________________________ MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list *MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> MK> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds>
/-- Saludos, Dietmar
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds /
-- ------------ Matthew Shears Global Internet Policy and Human Rights Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) + 44 771 2472987
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
Hi all, I'll be there too - I definitely support the idea. Best Hadia Hadia Elminiawi Director, DNS-Entrepreneurship Center [Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/268513_180152888707645_7698168_n.jpg][logo] National Telecommunication Regulatory Authority Tel: +202 3534 4392 Fax: +202 3537 4000 Email: hadia@tra.gov.eg<https://mail.dnsec.eg/owa/redir.aspx?C=8f4aa197b9f840be8139d76b29a0df99&URL=...> From: ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Stephanie Perrin Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 4:55 PM To: ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] [Ext] F2f planned in Copenhagen ? Seems like a good idea. Stephanie Perrin On 2017-02-03 07:09, matthew shears wrote: Excellent idea - I support. Matthew On 02/02/2017 19:39, Dietmar Stefitz wrote: Hola Marika, For me this date and time is perfect. I will assist. Best regards, Dietmar Stefitz Thursday, February 2, 2017, 7:13:53 PM, you wrote: MK> Hi Daniel, MK> Staff has tentatively requested Wednesday from 15.15 - 16.45 MK> local time for a CCWG-Auction Proceeds meeting. It is up to the MK> CCWG to decide whether or not you want to make use of that slot, MK> but it is easier to cancel the slot than to request one at a later date. MK> Best regards, MK> Marika MK> On 2/2/17, 12:07 PM, "Daniel Dardailler" <danield@w3.org<mailto:danield@w3.org>> wrote: MK> With ICANN 58 a couple of months away, I suppose that like me, people MK> need to arrange travel (or not) to Denmark. MK> MK> Do we already know if we're going to meet, and which day ? MK> And if we don't know yet, when will we know ? MK> MK> Thanks. MK> MK> MK> _______________________________________________ MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> MK> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds<https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds> -- Saludos, Dietmar _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds -- ------------ Matthew Shears Global Internet Policy and Human Rights Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) + 44 771 2472987 _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
Hi all, If could be present at Icann58 as well. Waiting for the final confirmation, I will block my agenda already. Kind regards, Marc Op 6-2-2017 om 11:56 schreef Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi:
Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] [Ext] F2f planned in Copenhagen ?
Hi all,
I'll be there too - I definitely support the idea.
Best
Hadia
Hadia Elminiawi
Director, DNS-Entrepreneurship Center
Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/268513_18015288870764...
National Telecommunication Regulatory Authority
Tel: +202 3534 4392
Fax: +202 3537 4000
Email: hadia@tra.gov.eg <https://mail.dnsec.eg/owa/redir.aspx?C=8f4aa197b9f840be8139d76b29a0df99&URL=...>
*From:*ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Stephanie Perrin *Sent:* Friday, February 03, 2017 4:55 PM *To:* ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] [Ext] F2f planned in Copenhagen ?
Seems like a good idea.
Stephanie Perrin
On 2017-02-03 07:09, matthew shears wrote:
Excellent idea - I support. Matthew
On 02/02/2017 19:39, Dietmar Stefitz wrote:
Hola Marika,
For me this date and time is perfect. I will assist.
Best regards, Dietmar Stefitz
Thursday, February 2, 2017, 7:13:53 PM, you wrote:
*MK> Hi Daniel,
MK> Staff has tentatively requested Wednesday from 15.15 – 16.45 MK> local time for a CCWG-Auction Proceeds meeting. It is up to the MK> CCWG to decide whether or not you want to make use of that slot, MK> but it is easier to cancel the slot than to request one at a later date.
MK> Best regards,
MK> Marika
MK> On 2/2/17, 12:07 PM, "Daniel Dardailler" <*danield@w3.org <mailto:danield@w3.org>*> wrote:
MK> With ICANN 58 a couple of months away, I suppose that like me, people MK> need to arrange travel (or not) to Denmark. MK> MK> Do we already know if we're going to meet, and which day ? MK> And if we don't know yet, when will we know ? MK> MK> Thanks. MK> MK>
MK> _______________________________________________ MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list *MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> MK> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds>
/-- Saludos, Dietmar
/
/_______________________________________________/
/Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list/
/Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>/
/https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds/
--
------------
Matthew Shears
Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
+ 44 771 2472987
_______________________________________________
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
-- Marc Gauw, Directeur Stichting NLnet + 31 6 24 874 224 + 31 20 888 4252 marc.gauw@nlnet.nl Science Park 400 1098 XH Amsterdam
Me too ! Marie-Noémie [http://www.francetelecom.com/sirius/logos_mail/orange_logo.gif] Marie-Noémie Marques Internet Governance & Digital Development Regulatory Affairs Phone: + 33 1 44 44 76 94 Mobile: + 33 6 75 65 32 92 Orange 78 rue Olivier de Serres F-75505 Paris Cedex 15 marienoemie.marques@orange.com<mailto:marienoemie.marques@orange.com> Please consider the environment - do you really need to print this email ? De : ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org] De la part de Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi Envoyé : lundi 6 février 2017 11:56 À : Stephanie Perrin; ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org Objet : Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] [Ext] F2f planned in Copenhagen ? Hi all, I'll be there too - I definitely support the idea. Best Hadia Hadia Elminiawi Director, DNS-Entrepreneurship Center [Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/268513_180152888707645_7698168_n.jpg][logo] National Telecommunication Regulatory Authority Tel: +202 3534 4392 Fax: +202 3537 4000 Email: hadia@tra.gov.eg<https://mail.dnsec.eg/owa/redir.aspx?C=8f4aa197b9f840be8139d76b29a0df99&URL=...> From: ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Stephanie Perrin Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 4:55 PM To: ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] [Ext] F2f planned in Copenhagen ? Seems like a good idea. Stephanie Perrin On 2017-02-03 07:09, matthew shears wrote: Excellent idea - I support. Matthew On 02/02/2017 19:39, Dietmar Stefitz wrote: Hola Marika, For me this date and time is perfect. I will assist. Best regards, Dietmar Stefitz Thursday, February 2, 2017, 7:13:53 PM, you wrote: MK> Hi Daniel, MK> Staff has tentatively requested Wednesday from 15.15 - 16.45 MK> local time for a CCWG-Auction Proceeds meeting. It is up to the MK> CCWG to decide whether or not you want to make use of that slot, MK> but it is easier to cancel the slot than to request one at a later date. MK> Best regards, MK> Marika MK> On 2/2/17, 12:07 PM, "Daniel Dardailler" <danield@w3.org<mailto:danield@w3.org>> wrote: MK> With ICANN 58 a couple of months away, I suppose that like me, people MK> need to arrange travel (or not) to Denmark. MK> MK> Do we already know if we're going to meet, and which day ? MK> And if we don't know yet, when will we know ? MK> MK> Thanks. MK> MK> MK> _______________________________________________ MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> MK> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds<https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds> -- Saludos, Dietmar _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds -- ------------ Matthew Shears Global Internet Policy and Human Rights Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) + 44 771 2472987 _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.
I will be there and support the opportunity to have a face to face meeting. By the way, for all women in this group, DNS WOMEN cocktail will be on Wednesday evening from 7 PM. We will send more information about the place later on. Kisses to all Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 Sorry for any typos. HAPPY 2017! From: <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of "marienoemie.marques@orange.com" <marienoemie.marques@orange.com> Date: Monday, February 6, 2017 at 10:15 AM To: Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi <Hadia@tra.gov.eg>, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca>, "ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] [Ext] F2f planned in Copenhagen ? Me too ! Marie-Noémie [ttp://www.francetelecom.com/sirius/logos_mail/orange_logo.gif] Marie-Noémie Marques Internet Governance & Digital Development Regulatory Affairs Phone: + 33 1 44 44 76 94 Mobile: + 33 6 75 65 32 92 Orange 78 rue Olivier de Serres F–75505 Paris Cedex 15 marienoemie.marques@orange.com<mailto:marienoemie.marques@orange.com> Please consider the environment - do you really need to print this email ? De : ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org] De la part de Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi Envoyé : lundi 6 février 2017 11:56 À : Stephanie Perrin; ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org Objet : Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] [Ext] F2f planned in Copenhagen ? Hi all, I'll be there too - I definitely support the idea. Best Hadia Hadia Elminiawi Director, DNS-Entrepreneurship Center [escription: Description: Description: Description: Description: Desc][ogo] National Telecommunication Regulatory Authority Tel: +202 3534 4392 Fax: +202 3537 4000 Email: hadia@tra.gov.eg<https://mail.dnsec.eg/owa/redir.aspx?C=8f4aa197b9f840be8139d76b29a0df99&URL=...> From: ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Stephanie Perrin Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 4:55 PM To: ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] [Ext] F2f planned in Copenhagen ? Seems like a good idea. Stephanie Perrin On 2017-02-03 07:09, matthew shears wrote: Excellent idea - I support. Matthew On 02/02/2017 19:39, Dietmar Stefitz wrote: Hola Marika, For me this date and time is perfect. I will assist. Best regards, Dietmar Stefitz Thursday, February 2, 2017, 7:13:53 PM, you wrote: MK> Hi Daniel, MK> Staff has tentatively requested Wednesday from 15.15 – 16.45 MK> local time for a CCWG-Auction Proceeds meeting. It is up to the MK> CCWG to decide whether or not you want to make use of that slot, MK> but it is easier to cancel the slot than to request one at a later date. MK> Best regards, MK> Marika MK> On 2/2/17, 12:07 PM, "Daniel Dardailler" <danield@w3.org<mailto:danield@w3.org>> wrote: MK> With ICANN 58 a couple of months away, I suppose that like me, people MK> need to arrange travel (or not) to Denmark. MK> MK> Do we already know if we're going to meet, and which day ? MK> And if we don't know yet, when will we know ? MK> MK> Thanks. MK> MK> MK> _______________________________________________ MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> MK> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds<https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds> -- Saludos, Dietmar _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds -- ------------ Matthew Shears Global Internet Policy and Human Rights Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) + 44 771 2472987 _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.
On 2017-02-02 19:13, Marika Konings wrote:
Hi Daniel,
Staff has tentatively requested Wednesday from 15.15 – 16.45 local time for a CCWG-Auction Proceeds meeting. It is up to the CCWG to decide whether or not you want to make use of that slot, but it is easier to cancel the slot than to request one at a later date.
I'll be there as well. I'm a bit surprised by seeing only 90 minutes allocated for a f2f. I hardly see how we can discuss, let alone resolve, more than a couple of issues in this timeframe, especially since it's our first f2f, so lots of "get to know each other" overhead. Or maybe I'm confused and this f2f will not be a working group meeting (making progress on our issue list) but more of a report to the community kind of event ? Related to ICANN WG f2f, I have a few questions. So far, I haven't seen any dramatic difference in the way this group is run vs. a W3C working group developping a technical specification. We also have teleconfs, we have email exchanges (and documents being edited in parallel), but all our WG f2f are at least one full day, sometimes 2 or 3 days long. And they usually have 3 of those per year (besides those held at our plenary). IETF is similar I think. The rationale is that f2f, given their higher communication bandwidth, are where most progress are made in resolving issues, and also that of course it costs a lot of money to gather 20 experts in one location, so better use their time effectively. Maybe there is a difference between a f2f run as part of an ICANN plenary, and an isolated WG f2f ?
Best regards,
Marika
On 2/2/17, 12:07 PM, "Daniel Dardailler" <danield@w3.org> wrote:
With ICANN 58 a couple of months away, I suppose that like me, people need to arrange travel (or not) to Denmark.
Do we already know if we're going to meet, and which day ? And if we don't know yet, when will we know ?
Thanks.
Hello, I would have easily added a +1 to a longer face 2 face meeting as well. However as I understand it, we are only trying to take advantage of the ICANN58 meeting hence this is not a meeting specifically planned for us which means not all members will be available physically. I would suggest we do a check on how many people will be present physically and if the number is significant (paying attention to community diversity) then we could proceed with a prolonged meeting. Otherwise it will be difficult for remote participation to remain active beyond 90min (120min max). That said, we also need to note that an extension could also have implications on the schedule of various communities who have already prepared their agenda in a certain way. We need to avoid conflicts of schedule as much as possible. Regards Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos On Feb 4, 2017 10:27, "Daniel Dardailler" <danield@w3.org> wrote:
On 2017-02-02 19:13, Marika Konings wrote:
Hi Daniel,
Staff has tentatively requested Wednesday from 15.15 – 16.45 local time for a CCWG-Auction Proceeds meeting. It is up to the CCWG to decide whether or not you want to make use of that slot, but it is easier to cancel the slot than to request one at a later date.
I'll be there as well.
I'm a bit surprised by seeing only 90 minutes allocated for a f2f. I hardly see how we can discuss, let alone resolve, more than a couple of issues in this timeframe, especially since it's our first f2f, so lots of "get to know each other" overhead.
Or maybe I'm confused and this f2f will not be a working group meeting (making progress on our issue list) but more of a report to the community kind of event ?
Related to ICANN WG f2f, I have a few questions.
So far, I haven't seen any dramatic difference in the way this group is run vs. a W3C working group developping a technical specification. We also have teleconfs, we have email exchanges (and documents being edited in parallel), but all our WG f2f are at least one full day, sometimes 2 or 3 days long. And they usually have 3 of those per year (besides those held at our plenary). IETF is similar I think.
The rationale is that f2f, given their higher communication bandwidth, are where most progress are made in resolving issues, and also that of course it costs a lot of money to gather 20 experts in one location, so better use their time effectively.
Maybe there is a difference between a f2f run as part of an ICANN plenary, and an isolated WG f2f ?
Best regards,
Marika
On 2/2/17, 12:07 PM, "Daniel Dardailler" <danield@w3.org> wrote:
With ICANN 58 a couple of months away, I suppose that like me, people need to arrange travel (or not) to Denmark.
Do we already know if we're going to meet, and which day ? And if we don't know yet, when will we know ?
Thanks.
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
if many of us are there, maybe it would be useful to convene otherwise in an additional slot for a more casual conversation. marika, do you know who will be there and who won’t? EN
On Feb 4, 2017, at 6:08 AM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
I would have easily added a +1 to a longer face 2 face meeting as well. However as I understand it, we are only trying to take advantage of the ICANN58 meeting hence this is not a meeting specifically planned for us which means not all members will be available physically.
I would suggest we do a check on how many people will be present physically and if the number is significant (paying attention to community diversity) then we could proceed with a prolonged meeting. Otherwise it will be difficult for remote participation to remain active beyond 90min (120min max).
That said, we also need to note that an extension could also have implications on the schedule of various communities who have already prepared their agenda in a certain way. We need to avoid conflicts of schedule as much as possible.
Regards
Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos
On Feb 4, 2017 10:27, "Daniel Dardailler" <danield@w3.org <mailto:danield@w3.org>> wrote: On 2017-02-02 19:13, Marika Konings wrote: Hi Daniel,
Staff has tentatively requested Wednesday from 15.15 – 16.45 local time for a CCWG-Auction Proceeds meeting. It is up to the CCWG to decide whether or not you want to make use of that slot, but it is easier to cancel the slot than to request one at a later date.
I'll be there as well.
I'm a bit surprised by seeing only 90 minutes allocated for a f2f. I hardly see how we can discuss, let alone resolve, more than a couple of issues in this timeframe, especially since it's our first f2f, so lots of "get to know each other" overhead.
Or maybe I'm confused and this f2f will not be a working group meeting (making progress on our issue list) but more of a report to the community kind of event ?
Related to ICANN WG f2f, I have a few questions.
So far, I haven't seen any dramatic difference in the way this group is run vs. a W3C working group developping a technical specification. We also have teleconfs, we have email exchanges (and documents being edited in parallel), but all our WG f2f are at least one full day, sometimes 2 or 3 days long. And they usually have 3 of those per year (besides those held at our plenary). IETF is similar I think.
The rationale is that f2f, given their higher communication bandwidth, are where most progress are made in resolving issues, and also that of course it costs a lot of money to gather 20 experts in one location, so better use their time effectively.
Maybe there is a difference between a f2f run as part of an ICANN plenary, and an isolated WG f2f ?
Best regards,
Marika
On 2/2/17, 12:07 PM, "Daniel Dardailler" <danield@w3.org <mailto:danield@w3.org>> wrote:
With ICANN 58 a couple of months away, I suppose that like me, people need to arrange travel (or not) to Denmark.
Do we already know if we're going to meet, and which day ? And if we don't know yet, when will we know ?
Thanks.
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds>_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
Usually there are sign-up rooms available, but these rooms do not have not any AV or remote participation, nor do these meetings appear on the schedule. However, if you are just looking for a room to have an informal conversation with other CCWG members / participants that may be around, I’m happy to explore the options. Just let me know the preferred time/date and I can see what is available. Best regards, Marika From: <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of elliot noss <enoss@tucows.com> Date: Saturday, February 4, 2017 at 7:54 AM To: Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> Cc: "ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] [Ext] F2f planned in Copenhagen ? if many of us are there, maybe it would be useful to convene otherwise in an additional slot for a more casual conversation. marika, do you know who will be there and who won’t? EN On Feb 4, 2017, at 6:08 AM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com<mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com>> wrote: Hello, I would have easily added a +1 to a longer face 2 face meeting as well. However as I understand it, we are only trying to take advantage of the ICANN58 meeting hence this is not a meeting specifically planned for us which means not all members will be available physically. I would suggest we do a check on how many people will be present physically and if the number is significant (paying attention to community diversity) then we could proceed with a prolonged meeting. Otherwise it will be difficult for remote participation to remain active beyond 90min (120min max). That said, we also need to note that an extension could also have implications on the schedule of various communities who have already prepared their agenda in a certain way. We need to avoid conflicts of schedule as much as possible. Regards Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos On Feb 4, 2017 10:27, "Daniel Dardailler" <danield@w3.org<mailto:danield@w3.org>> wrote: On 2017-02-02 19:13, Marika Konings wrote: Hi Daniel, Staff has tentatively requested Wednesday from 15.15 – 16.45 local time for a CCWG-Auction Proceeds meeting. It is up to the CCWG to decide whether or not you want to make use of that slot, but it is easier to cancel the slot than to request one at a later date. I'll be there as well. I'm a bit surprised by seeing only 90 minutes allocated for a f2f. I hardly see how we can discuss, let alone resolve, more than a couple of issues in this timeframe, especially since it's our first f2f, so lots of "get to know each other" overhead. Or maybe I'm confused and this f2f will not be a working group meeting (making progress on our issue list) but more of a report to the community kind of event ? Related to ICANN WG f2f, I have a few questions. So far, I haven't seen any dramatic difference in the way this group is run vs. a W3C working group developping a technical specification. We also have teleconfs, we have email exchanges (and documents being edited in parallel), but all our WG f2f are at least one full day, sometimes 2 or 3 days long. And they usually have 3 of those per year (besides those held at our plenary). IETF is similar I think. The rationale is that f2f, given their higher communication bandwidth, are where most progress are made in resolving issues, and also that of course it costs a lot of money to gather 20 experts in one location, so better use their time effectively. Maybe there is a difference between a f2f run as part of an ICANN plenary, and an isolated WG f2f ? Best regards, Marika On 2/2/17, 12:07 PM, "Daniel Dardailler" <danield@w3.org<mailto:danield@w3.org>> wrote: With ICANN 58 a couple of months away, I suppose that like me, people need to arrange travel (or not) to Denmark. Do we already know if we're going to meet, and which day ? And if we don't know yet, when will we know ? Thanks. _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
Whether the F2F meeting formal or informal it is important to keep the recordings for these meeting. Being the CCWG a big group it is not always possible to all be in person to all ICANN public meetings. Much better to provide the remote participants. On 6 Feb 2017 04:39, "Marika Konings" <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote: Usually there are sign-up rooms available, but these rooms do not have not any AV or remote participation, nor do these meetings appear on the schedule. However, if you are just looking for a room to have an informal conversation with other CCWG members / participants that may be around, I’m happy to explore the options. Just let me know the preferred time/date and I can see what is available. Best regards, Marika *From: *<ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of elliot noss < enoss@tucows.com> *Date: *Saturday, February 4, 2017 at 7:54 AM *To: *Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> *Cc: *"ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] [Ext] F2f planned in Copenhagen ? if many of us are there, maybe it would be useful to convene otherwise in an additional slot for a more casual conversation. marika, do you know who will be there and who won’t? EN On Feb 4, 2017, at 6:08 AM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> wrote: Hello, I would have easily added a +1 to a longer face 2 face meeting as well. However as I understand it, we are only trying to take advantage of the ICANN58 meeting hence this is not a meeting specifically planned for us which means not all members will be available physically. I would suggest we do a check on how many people will be present physically and if the number is significant (paying attention to community diversity) then we could proceed with a prolonged meeting. Otherwise it will be difficult for remote participation to remain active beyond 90min (120min max). That said, we also need to note that an extension could also have implications on the schedule of various communities who have already prepared their agenda in a certain way. We need to avoid conflicts of schedule as much as possible. Regards Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos On Feb 4, 2017 10:27, "Daniel Dardailler" <danield@w3.org> wrote: On 2017-02-02 19:13, Marika Konings wrote: Hi Daniel, Staff has tentatively requested Wednesday from 15.15 – 16.45 local time for a CCWG-Auction Proceeds meeting. It is up to the CCWG to decide whether or not you want to make use of that slot, but it is easier to cancel the slot than to request one at a later date. I'll be there as well. I'm a bit surprised by seeing only 90 minutes allocated for a f2f. I hardly see how we can discuss, let alone resolve, more than a couple of issues in this timeframe, especially since it's our first f2f, so lots of "get to know each other" overhead. Or maybe I'm confused and this f2f will not be a working group meeting (making progress on our issue list) but more of a report to the community kind of event ? Related to ICANN WG f2f, I have a few questions. So far, I haven't seen any dramatic difference in the way this group is run vs. a W3C working group developping a technical specification. We also have teleconfs, we have email exchanges (and documents being edited in parallel), but all our WG f2f are at least one full day, sometimes 2 or 3 days long. And they usually have 3 of those per year (besides those held at our plenary). IETF is similar I think. The rationale is that f2f, given their higher communication bandwidth, are where most progress are made in resolving issues, and also that of course it costs a lot of money to gather 20 experts in one location, so better use their time effectively. Maybe there is a difference between a f2f run as part of an ICANN plenary, and an isolated WG f2f ? Best regards, Marika On 2/2/17, 12:07 PM, "Daniel Dardailler" <danield@w3.org> wrote: With ICANN 58 a couple of months away, I suppose that like me, people need to arrange travel (or not) to Denmark. Do we already know if we're going to meet, and which day ? And if we don't know yet, when will we know ? Thanks. _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
I do not support a longer f2f nor more than one session; many in Copenhagen will be there with other committed agendas already. I would be interested to know the agenda anyway of the arranged 1 1/2 meeting. If its not a public meeting I suggest it could take the place of the fortnightly call, with remote participation for those not able to travel. Waudo On Sat, Feb 4, 2017, at 02:08 PM, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
Hello,
I would have easily added a +1 to a longer face 2 face meeting as well. However as I understand it, we are only trying to take advantage of the ICANN58 meeting hence this is not a meeting specifically planned for us which means not all members will be available physically.
I would suggest we do a check on how many people will be present physically and if the number is significant (paying attention to community diversity) then we could proceed with a prolonged meeting. Otherwise it will be difficult for remote participation to remain active beyond 90min (120min max).
That said, we also need to note that an extension could also have implications on the schedule of various communities who have already prepared their agenda in a certain way. We need to avoid conflicts of schedule as much as possible.
Regards
Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos
On Feb 4, 2017 10:27, "Daniel Dardailler" <danield@w3.org> wrote:
On 2017-02-02 19:13, Marika Konings wrote:
Hi Daniel,
Staff has tentatively requested Wednesday from 15.15 – 16.45 local time for a CCWG-Auction Proceeds meeting. It is up to the CCWG to decide whether or not you want to make use of that slot, but it is easier to cancel the slot than to request one at a later date. I'll be there as well.
I'm a bit surprised by seeing only 90 minutes allocated for a f2f. I hardly see how we can discuss, let alone resolve, more than a couple of issues in this timeframe, especially since it's our first f2f, so lots of "get to know each other" overhead.
Or maybe I'm confused and this f2f will not be a working group meeting (making progress on our issue list) but more of a report to the community kind of event ?
Related to ICANN WG f2f, I have a few questions.
So far, I haven't seen any dramatic difference in the way this group is run vs. a W3C working group developping a technical specification. We also have teleconfs, we have email exchanges (and documents being edited in parallel), but all our WG f2f are at least one full day, sometimes 2 or 3 days long. And they usually have 3 of those per year (besides those held at our plenary). IETF is similar I think.
The rationale is that f2f, given their higher communication bandwidth, are where most progress are made in resolving issues, and also that of course it costs a lot of money to gather 20 experts in one location, so better use their time effectively.
Maybe there is a difference between a f2f run as part of an ICANN plenary, and an isolated WG f2f ?
Best regards,
Marika
On 2/2/17, 12:07 PM, "Daniel Dardailler" <danield@w3.org> wrote:
With ICANN 58 a couple of months away, I suppose that like me, people need to arrange travel (or not) to Denmark.
Do we already know if we're going to meet, and which day ? And if we don't know yet, when will we know ?
Thanks.
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
+1. May be a doodle poll, to be able to see who is going to make it to Copenhagen and than we will be in a good position to consider planning this meeting. Thanks. Zakir From: Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> To: Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org> Cc: ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org Sent: Saturday, February 4, 2017 4:08 PM Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] [Ext] F2f planned in Copenhagen ? Hello, I would have easily added a +1 to a longer face 2 face meeting as well. However as I understand it, we are only trying to take advantage of the ICANN58 meeting hence this is not a meeting specifically planned for us which means not all members will be available physically. I would suggest we do a check on how many people will be present physically and if the number is significant (paying attention to community diversity) then we could proceed with a prolonged meeting. Otherwise it will be difficult for remote participation to remain active beyond 90min (120min max). That said, we also need to note that an extension could also have implications on the schedule of various communities who have already prepared their agenda in a certain way. We need to avoid conflicts of schedule as much as possible. Regards Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos On Feb 4, 2017 10:27, "Daniel Dardailler" <danield@w3.org> wrote: On 2017-02-02 19:13, Marika Konings wrote: Hi Daniel, Staff has tentatively requested Wednesday from 15.15 – 16.45 local time for a CCWG-Auction Proceeds meeting. It is up to the CCWG to decide whether or not you want to make use of that slot, but it is easier to cancel the slot than to request one at a later date. I'll be there as well. I'm a bit surprised by seeing only 90 minutes allocated for a f2f. I hardly see how we can discuss, let alone resolve, more than a couple of issues in this timeframe, especially since it's our first f2f, so lots of "get to know each other" overhead. Or maybe I'm confused and this f2f will not be a working group meeting (making progress on our issue list) but more of a report to the community kind of event ? Related to ICANN WG f2f, I have a few questions. So far, I haven't seen any dramatic difference in the way this group is run vs. a W3C working group developping a technical specification. We also have teleconfs, we have email exchanges (and documents being edited in parallel), but all our WG f2f are at least one full day, sometimes 2 or 3 days long. And they usually have 3 of those per year (besides those held at our plenary). IETF is similar I think. The rationale is that f2f, given their higher communication bandwidth, are where most progress are made in resolving issues, and also that of course it costs a lot of money to gather 20 experts in one location, so better use their time effectively. Maybe there is a difference between a f2f run as part of an ICANN plenary, and an isolated WG f2f ? Best regards, Marika On 2/2/17, 12:07 PM, "Daniel Dardailler" <danield@w3.org> wrote: With ICANN 58 a couple of months away, I suppose that like me, people need to arrange travel (or not) to Denmark. Do we already know if we're going to meet, and which day ? And if we don't know yet, when will we know ? Thanks. ______________________________ _________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/l istinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
Daniel, you may be interested in the following document which outlines the principles for ICANN CCWGs which was recently adopted by the GNSO and ccNSO: https://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/uniform-framework-principles-recommendation.... Some ICANN CCWGs meet F2F during an ICANN meeting either to continue its deliberations and/or to update the community on its activities, but for such meetings there is usually not more than 90 minutes available as there are a lot of competing activities. In recent past, the transition related CCWGs have met F2F just prior or even outside an ICANN meetings, but those activities were driven by an external timeline and as such should be considered the exception rather than the rule. CCWGs like other ICANN WGs are expected to conduct most of their work through teleconferences and mailing list deliberations. I hope this is helpful. Best regards, Marika On 2/4/17, 3:27 AM, "Daniel Dardailler" <danield@w3.org> wrote: On 2017-02-02 19:13, Marika Konings wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > Staff has tentatively requested Wednesday from 15.15 – 16.45 local > time for a CCWG-Auction Proceeds meeting. It is up to the CCWG to > decide whether or not you want to make use of that slot, but it is > easier to cancel the slot than to request one at a later date. I'll be there as well. I'm a bit surprised by seeing only 90 minutes allocated for a f2f. I hardly see how we can discuss, let alone resolve, more than a couple of issues in this timeframe, especially since it's our first f2f, so lots of "get to know each other" overhead. Or maybe I'm confused and this f2f will not be a working group meeting (making progress on our issue list) but more of a report to the community kind of event ? Related to ICANN WG f2f, I have a few questions. So far, I haven't seen any dramatic difference in the way this group is run vs. a W3C working group developping a technical specification. We also have teleconfs, we have email exchanges (and documents being edited in parallel), but all our WG f2f are at least one full day, sometimes 2 or 3 days long. And they usually have 3 of those per year (besides those held at our plenary). IETF is similar I think. The rationale is that f2f, given their higher communication bandwidth, are where most progress are made in resolving issues, and also that of course it costs a lot of money to gather 20 experts in one location, so better use their time effectively. Maybe there is a difference between a f2f run as part of an ICANN plenary, and an isolated WG f2f ? > > Best regards, > > Marika > > On 2/2/17, 12:07 PM, "Daniel Dardailler" <danield@w3.org> wrote: > > With ICANN 58 a couple of months away, I suppose that like me, > people > need to arrange travel (or not) to Denmark. > > Do we already know if we're going to meet, and which day ? > And if we don't know yet, when will we know ? > > Thanks.
participants (16)
-
Daniel Dardailler -
Dietmar Stefitz -
elliot noss -
Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi -
Marc Gauw -
marienoemie.marques＠orange.com -
Marika Konings -
Mathieu Weill -
matthew shears -
Nadira Alaraj -
Seun Ojedeji -
Stephanie Perrin -
Sylvia Cadena -
Vanda Scartezini -
waudo siganga -
Zakir Syed