December 2009 - council - lists.icann.org

Amended Motion To Approve OSC Tool Kit of Services Recommendations
by Gomes, Chuck Dec. 6, 2009

Dec. 6, 2009

In response to Tim's proposed amendments to the Motion To Approve OSC Tool Kit of Services Recommendations, I considered his amendments friendly and hence revised the motion as attached and copied below. Note that the changes are highlighted in the attached document to make it easy to see the amendments. Olga and Wolf, as seconders to the motion, do you also consider the amendments friendly? Glen - please post the amended motion. Chuck Motion To Approve Tool Kit of Services Recommendations for GNSO Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups (amended 4 Dec 09) Motion by: Chuck Gomes Seconded by: Whereas the Board Governance Committee Report on GNSO Improvements (BGC Report) tasked ICANN staff with developing, within six months, in consultation with the GNSO Council, a "tool kit" of basic services that would be made available to all constituencies. (See Report of the Board Governance Committee GNSO Review Working Group on GNSO Improvements, 3 February 2008 located at http://www.icann.org/en/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-repor t-03feb08.pdf, p. 46.); Whereas the ICANN Board approved the BGC GNSO Improvement Recommendations on 26 June 2008 ( http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm#_Toc76113182) Whereas in January 2009 the GNSO Council formed the Operations Steering Committee (OSC) to develop recommendations to implement operational changes contained in the BGC Report; Whereas the OSC established three Work Teams, including the GNSO Stakeholder Group and Constituency Operations Work Team, to take on the work of each of the three operational areas addressed in the BGC Report recommendations; Whereas the GNSO Stakeholder Group and Constituency Operations Work Team developed and approved Tool Kit Services Recommendations for GNSO Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups on 25 October 2009 and sent them to the OSC for review; Whereas the OSC accepted the Work Team's recommendations; Whereas on 5 Nov 09 the document was distributed to the Council list and Councilors were asked to forward the recommendations to their respective groups for review and comment ASAP with the tentative goal of Council action in our December meeting; Whereas the implementation of the toolkit has process and budgetary implications; RESOLVED, the Council approves the recommendations ( http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/tool-kit-services-recommendations-for-gnso- 05nov09-en.pdf <http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/tool-kit-services-recommendations-for-gnso -05nov09-en.pdf> ) and directs Staff to: 1) share the recommendations with the Board; 2) post the document on the GNSO web page at http://gnso.icann.org/ <http://gnso.icann.org/> ; 3) estimate the cost of the services; 4) estimate what funds might be available; 5) prioritize the list of services in cooperation with the Council; 6) develop specifications for providing the services, including requirements for their use and procedures for requesting them; and 7) notify applicable GNSO organizations of the services, specifications and procedures for requesting them.

3 3

Motion to delay decision regarding initiation of a Vertical Integration PDP
by Gomes, Chuck Dec. 6, 2009

Dec. 6, 2009

In response to my query regarding whether Councilors wanted to make a decision regarding whether to initiate a Vertical Integration PDP, I believe everyone who responded favored delaying the decision until January. In response to that, attached and copied below is a motion that I am making to delay decision regarding initiation of a Vertical Integration PDP until January. If there are any questions, please ask. A second would be appreciated. Glen - Please post the motion. Thanks. Chuck

2 2

Revised Tool Kit of Services Recommendations for GNSO Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups (amended 4 Dec 09)
by Gomes, Chuck Dec. 4, 2009

Dec. 4, 2009

It came to my attention today that there was an omission in the Tool Kit of Services Recommendations for GNSO Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups that was distributed to the Council on 5 November. In Seoul the OSC decided to not include the CSG WT minority statements as part of the recommendations document but instead provide a link to them because they were longer than the recommendations document itself. In the version that was sent on 5 November, the minority statements were removed but no link was provided to the minority statements. The attached document corrects that omission. The only change made from the earlier version was that a section titled 'Working Team Level of Support for Recommendations' was added at the end of the document. The motion that I made and amended earlier today now references this amended document. If there are any questions, please ask. Chuck

1 0

RE: [council] Proposed Amended Motion To Approve OSC Tool Kit of Services Recommendations
by Tim Ruiz Dec. 4, 2009

Dec. 4, 2009

Looks good to me. Thanks Chuck. Tim -------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: [council] Proposed Amended Motion To Approve OSC Tool Kit of Services Recommendations From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes(a)verisign.com> Date: Fri, December 04, 2009 1:49 pm To: "Tim Ruiz" <tim(a)godaddy.com>, "GNSO Council " <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Tim, Please let me know if the attached motion with amendments highlighted accomplishes what you intended. Thanks, Chuck > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org > [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz > Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 10:04 AM > To: GNSO Council > Subject: [council] Proposed Amended Motion To Approve OSC > Tool Kit of Services Recommendations > > > Chuck, > > I'd to like propose a friendly amendment to your motion. I've > incorporated it into the full motion below. The amendment > involves adding the last Whereas and replacing the RESOLVED > paragraph with the one included below. It incorporates the > steps Liz noted, making it clear that the > requirements/specifications of requesting support are yet to > be determined. > > > Tim > > ======================= > Motion To Approve Tool Kit of Services Recommendations for > GNSO Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups > > Motion by: Chuck Gomes > Seconded by: > > Whereas the Board Governance Committee Report on GNSO > Improvements (BGC > Report) tasked ICANN staff with developing, within six > months, in consultation with the GNSO Council, a "tool kit" > of basic services that would be made available to all > constituencies. (See Report of the Board Governance Committee > GNSO Review Working Group on GNSO Improvements, 3 February > 2008 located at > http://www.icann.org/en/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvem > ents-report-03feb08.pdf, > p. 46.); > > Whereas the ICANN Board approved the BGC GNSO Improvement > Recommendations on 26 June 2008 > (http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm#_Toc7 > 6113182); > > Whereas in January 2009 the GNSO Council formed the > Operations Steering Committee (OSC) to develop > recommendations to implement operational changes contained in > the BGC Report; > > Whereas the OSC established three Work Teams, including the > GNSO Stakeholder Group and Constituency Operations Work Team, > to take on the work of each of the three operational areas > addressed in the BGC Report recommendations; > > Whereas the GNSO Stakeholder Group and Constituency > Operations Work Team developed and approved Tool Kit Services > Recommendations for GNSO Constituencies and Stakeholder > Groups on 25 October 2009 and sent them to the OSC for review; > > Whereas the OSC accepted the Work Team's recommendations; > > Whereas on 5 Nov 09 the document was distributed to the > Council list and Councilors were asked to forward the > recommendations to their respective groups for review and > comment ASAP with the tentative goal of Council action in our > December meeting; > > Whereas the implementation of the toolkit has process and > budgetary implications; > > RESOLVED, the Council approves the recommendations > (http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/tool-kit-services-recommendation > s-for-gnso-05nov09-en.pdf) > and directs Staff to 1. Share the recommendations with the > Board and post the document on the GNSO web page at > http://gnso.icann.org/; 2. > Determine the cost of the services; 3. Determine what funds > might be available; 4. Prioritize the list of services; 5. > Develop specifications for providing the services, including > requirements for their use and procedures for requesting > them; and 6. Notify the GNSO organizations of the services > and specifications. > ======================= > > >

1 0

Proposed Amended Motion To Approve OSC Tool Kit of Services Recommendations
by Tim Ruiz Dec. 4, 2009

Dec. 4, 2009

Chuck, I'd to like propose a friendly amendment to your motion. I've incorporated it into the full motion below. The amendment involves adding the last Whereas and replacing the RESOLVED paragraph with the one included below. It incorporates the steps Liz noted, making it clear that the requirements/specifications of requesting support are yet to be determined. Tim ======================= Motion To Approve Tool Kit of Services Recommendations for GNSO Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups Motion by: Chuck Gomes Seconded by: Whereas the Board Governance Committee Report on GNSO Improvements (BGC Report) tasked ICANN staff with developing, within six months, in consultation with the GNSO Council, a “tool kit” of basic services that would be made available to all constituencies. (See Report of the Board Governance Committee GNSO Review Working Group on GNSO Improvements, 3 February 2008 located at http://www.icann.org/en/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-report-0…, p. 46.); Whereas the ICANN Board approved the BGC GNSO Improvement Recommendations on 26 June 2008 (http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm#_Toc76113182) Whereas in January 2009 the GNSO Council formed the Operations Steering Committee (OSC) to develop recommendations to implement operational changes contained in the BGC Report; Whereas the OSC established three Work Teams, including the GNSO Stakeholder Group and Constituency Operations Work Team, to take on the work of each of the three operational areas addressed in the BGC Report recommendations; Whereas the GNSO Stakeholder Group and Constituency Operations Work Team developed and approved Tool Kit Services Recommendations for GNSO Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups on 25 October 2009 and sent them to the OSC for review; Whereas the OSC accepted the Work Team's recommendations; Whereas on 5 Nov 09 the document was distributed to the Council list and Councilors were asked to forward the recommendations to their respective groups for review and comment ASAP with the tentative goal of Council action in our December meeting; Whereas the implementation of the toolkit has process and budgetary implications; RESOLVED, the Council approves the recommendations (http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/tool-kit-services-recommendations-for-gnso-05n…) and directs Staff to 1. Share the recommendations with the Board and post the document on the GNSO web page at http://gnso.icann.org/; 2. Determine the cost of the services; 3. Determine what funds might be available; 4. Prioritize the list of services; 5. Develop specifications for providing the services, including requirements for their use and procedures for requesting them; and 6. Notify the GNSO organizations of the services and specifications. =======================

2 2

FW: Updated background reports for Global Policy Proposals for ASNs and recovered IPv4
by Gomes, Chuck Dec. 4, 2009

Dec. 4, 2009

FYI Chuck ________________________________ From: Olof Nordling [mailto:olof.nordling@icann.org] Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 10:31 AM To: ceo(a)auda.org.au; cheryl(a)hovtek.com.au; Gomes, Chuck; adiel(a)afrinic.net; rmohan(a)afilias.info; steve(a)shinkuro.com; karklinsj(a)gmail.com; junsec(a)wide.ad.jp Cc: Louis Lee; secretariat(a)nro.net; Secretary Subject: Updated background reports for Global Policy Proposals for ASNs and recovered IPv4 To Chairs of ICANN SOs and ACs, FYI and for information to your membership: Attached are updated Background Reports for the Global Policy Proposal for "IANA Policy for Allocation of ASN Blocks to Regional Internet Registries" and for the "Global Policy Proposal for the Allocation of IPv4 Blocks to Regional Internet Registries". Both background reports will soon be posted on the ICANN website. Very best regards Olof ------------------- Olof Nordling Director, Services Relations ICANN 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 B-1040 Brussels, Belgium Tel.: +32.2.234 7872 www.icann.org <http://www.icann.org>

1 0

Re: AW: [council] Motion To Approve Tool Kit of Services Recommendations for GNSO Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups
by Gomes, Chuck Dec. 4, 2009

Dec. 4, 2009

Wolf, My understanding is that the Board will need to approve the recommendations for implementation. That was the case with regard to the GNSO Restructure recommendations. Rob/Denise - Am I correct on this? Chuck ________________________________ From: KnobenW(a)telekom.de <KnobenW(a)telekom.de> To: Gomes, Chuck; council(a)gnso.icann.org <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Sent: Thu Dec 03 03:52:14 2009 Subject: AW: [council] Motion To Approve Tool Kit of Services Recommendations for GNSO Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups Chuck, I'd like to second this motion but have one question regarding to the "resolved": does "sharing the recommendations with the board.." mean that there is no further need for board approval? In this case the council might direct staff to execute the recommendations. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich ________________________________ Von: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] Im Auftrag von Gomes, Chuck Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Dezember 2009 06:33 An: council(a)gnso.icann.org Betreff: [council] Motion To Approve Tool Kit of Services Recommendations for GNSO Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups I am making this motion for action in our 17 Dec 09 Council meeting. Glen - Please post this per normal practice. Thanks. Chuck Motion To Approve Tool Kit of Services Recommendations for GNSO Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups Motion by: Chuck Gomes Seconded by: Whereas the Board Governance Committee Report on GNSO Improvements (BGC Report) tasked ICANN staff with developing, within six months, in consultation with the GNSO Council, a “tool kit” of basic services that would be made available to all constituencies. (See Report of the Board Governance Committee GNSO Review Working Group on GNSO Improvements, 3 February 2008 located at http://www.icann.org/en/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-report-0…, p. 46.); Whereas the ICANN Board approved the BGC GNSO Improvement Recommendations on 26 June 2008 (http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm#_Toc76113182 <http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm#_Toc76113182> ); Whereas in January 2009 the GNSO Council formed the Operations Steering Committee (OSC) to develop recommendations to implement operational changes contained in the BGC Report; Whereas the OSC established three Work Teams, including the GNSO Stakeholder Group and Constituency Operations Work Team, to take on the work of each of the three operational areas addressed in the BGC Report recommendations; Whereas the GNSO Stakeholder Group and Constituency Operations Work Team developed and approved Tool Kit Services Recommendations for GNSO Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups on 25 October 2009 and sent them to the OSC for review; Whereas the OSC accepted the Work Team's recommendations; Whereas on 5 Nov 09 the document was distributed to the Council list and Councilors were asked to forward the recommendations to their respective groups for review and comment ASAP with the tentative goal of Council action in our December meeting; RESOLVED, the Council accepts the recommendations (http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/tool-kit-services-recommendations-for-gnso-05n… <http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/tool-kit-services-recommendations-for-gnso-05n…> ) and directs Staff to share the recommendations with the Board and post the document on the GNSO web page at http://gnso.icann.org/ <http://gnso.icann.org/> .

4 6

Status of Delivery of the Issues Report on Vertical Integration
by Margie Milam Dec. 3, 2009

Dec. 3, 2009

Dear All, I just wanted to let you know that delivery of the Issues Report on Vertical Integration will be delayed for one week. Unfortunately, convergence of deliverables for two significant projects, the Issues Report and the STI Report to the GNSO Council, has made it impossible for me to complete them simultaneously. I apologize in advance for any inconvenience to you. Best regards, Margie _____________ Margie Milam Senior Policy Counselor ICANN _____________

2 1

Agenda for GNSO Council Meeting 17 December 2009.
by Glen de Saint Géry Dec. 3, 2009

Dec. 3, 2009

Agenda for GNSO Council Meeting 17 December 2009. http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-17dec09-en.htm Wiki reference : https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?agenda_17_december_2009 Proposed motions: https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?17_december_motions This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures approved 28 October 2009 for the GNSO Council Coordinated Universal Time:15:00 UTC - see below for local times (07:00 Los Angeles, 10:00 Washington DC, 15:00 London, 16:00 Brussels, 02:00 Melbourne next day) Chair: Chuck Gomes; Vice Chairs: Olga Cavalli & Stéphane Van Gelder Note: This meeting will be recorded. Scheduled time for meeting 120 mins. Dial-in numbers sent individually to Council members. Item1: Administrative matters 1.1. Roll call of Council members 1.2. Update any statements of interest 1.3. Review/amend agenda 1.4. Note the status of minutes for the following Council meetings per the new Council Operating Procedures: . 8 October meeting - Approved on 28 November 2009 . 28 October meeting - Approved on 27 November 2009 . 23 November meeting - Approved on 08 December 2009 Item 2: Motion to approve GNSO Improvements Recommendations for a Constituency/Stakeholder Group Toolkit of Services 2.1 Refer to the recommendations document at: http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/tool-kit-services-recommendations-for-gnso-18o… 2.2 Discussion of recommendations 2.3 See the motion at: https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?17_december_motions 2.4 Vote Item 3: Special Trademark Issues (STI) Review Team 3.1 Update - David Maher, STI Review Group Chair 3.2 Refer to the 7 December STI Report at (Insert link to STI Report) (not yet available) 3.3 Council action? Item 4: Action on Issues Report regarding vertical separation of Registries and Registrars 4.1 Refer to Issues Report on Vertical Integration http://gnso.icann.org/issues/vertical-integration/report-04dec09-en.pdf 4.2 Overview of Issues Report (Margie Milam) 4.3 Discussion 4.3 See possible motion(s) at: https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?17_december_motions Note: If a motion is acted on to initiate a PDP, absentee voting will be allowed. Item 5: Prioritization of GNSO work 5.1 Status Report (Olga Cavalli) 5.2 Council action? 5.3 Next steps? Item 6: Status updates 6.1 Board update (Denise Michel) 6.2 New gTLD Implementation Process Update (Kurt Pritz) 6.3 Items of interest to the GNSO from the ccNSO (Olga Cavalli/Han Chuan Lee) 6.4 Other? 6.5 Questions/comments on written status updates sent in advance by leaders of Working Groups, Work Teams, staff projects, etc.? Item 7: AOB Item 8: The updated GNSO Project Status List (formerly Pending Action Item List) is at: http://gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/meetings/pending-action-list.pdf. 8.1 Questions/comments? Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article X, Section 3) ================================================================================= 9. Except as otherwise specified in these Bylaws, Annex A hereto, or the GNSO Operating Procedures, the default threshold to pass a GNSO Council motion or other voting action requires a simple majority vote of each House. The voting thresholds described below shall apply to the following GNSO actions: a. Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more than 25% vote of each House or majority of one House; b. Initiate a Policy Development Process ("PDP") Within Scope (as described in Annex A): requires an affirmative vote of more than 33% of each House or more than 66% of one House; c. Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of more than 75% of one House and a majority of the other House ("GNSO Supermajority"); d. Approve a PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a majority of each House and further requires that one GNSO Council member representative of at least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups supports the Recommendation; e. Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority; and f. Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that "a two-thirds vote of the council" demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded with respect to any contracting party affected by such contract provision. Appendix 2: Absentee Voting Procedures (Council Operating Procedures 4.4) ========================================================================= Members that are absent from a meeting at the time of a vote on the following items may vote by absentee ballot: a. Initiate a policy development process; b. Forward a policy recommendation to the Board; c. Recommend amendments to the ICANN Bylaws; d. Fill a position open for election. The GNSO Secretariat will provide reasonable means for transmitting and authenticating absentee ballots, which could include voting by telephone, e- mail, or web-based interface. Absentee ballots must be submitted within 72 hours following the start of the meeting in which a vote is initiated, except that, in exceptional circumstances announced at the time of the vote, the Chair may reduce this time to 24 hours or extend the time to 7 days. There must be a quorum for the meeting in which the vote is initiated. (07:00 Los Angeles, 10:00 Washington DC, 15:00 London, 16:00 Brussels, 02:00 Melbourne next day) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Local time between October and March, Winter in the NORTHERN hemisphere ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 15:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PDT) UTC-8+0DST 07:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EDT) UTC-5+0DST 10:00 Buenos Aires, Argentina UTC-3+0DST 12:00 Rio de Janeiro/Sao Paulo Brazil UTC-2+1DST 13:00 Dublin, Ireland (GMT) UTC+0DST 15:00 Darmstadt, Germany (CET) UTC+1+0DST 16:00 Paris, France (CET) UTC+1+0DST 16:00 Karachi, Pakistan UTC+5+0DST 20:00 Hong Kong, China UTC+8+0DST 23:00 Tokyo, Japan UTC+9+0DST 00:00 Melbourne,/Sydney Australia (EDT) UTC+10+1DST 02:00 next day ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of March 2010, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

RE: AW: [council] Motion To Approve Tool Kit of Services Recommendations for GNSO Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups
by Tim Ruiz Dec. 3, 2009

Dec. 3, 2009

We'll discuss, but I was okay with it as written until this thread got started. Personally, I think recommendation 6 covers it as it says (especially c and d): 6. Prior to the availability of any tool kit services, ICANN Staff should develop and inform GNSO organizations of the following: a. What services are available b. General specifications of each service c. Any requirements for using the service (initial and ongoing) d. Procedures for requesting each service e. Procedures for cancelling or modifying a service f. Process for evaluating services g. Process for adding or deleting services. Tim -------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: AW: [council] Motion To Approve Tool Kit of Services Recommendations for GNSO Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes(a)verisign.com> Date: Thu, December 03, 2009 1:05 pm To: "Tim Ruiz" <tim(a)godaddy.com> Cc: Stéphane_Van_Gelder <stephane.vangelder(a)indom.com>, "GNSO Council" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> You guys are obviously reading more into this than was intended. Please suggest an amendment that makes you feel comfortable. Chuck > -----Original Message----- > From: Tim Ruiz [mailto:tim@godaddy.com] > Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 2:00 PM > To: Gomes, Chuck > Cc: Stéphane_Van_Gelder; GNSO Council > Subject: RE: AW: [council] Motion To Approve Tool Kit of > Services Recommendations for GNSO Constituencies and > Stakeholder Groups > > > All that is being recommended here is, if a SG or > constituency decides > > to hold a F2F meeting and would like Staff assistance for > doing that, > > then they could opt to use that service if they like. > > Is that really what is meant there? That's not how I took it. > If in fact that is the intent, then I agree with Stephane > that the RrSG is very unlikely to support it or to vote for > the motion. > > The decision on how ICANN's budget is set should not be at > the sole discretion of any SG or constituency. How does ICANN > budget for that? > I would think at the very least, the SG or constituency would > first petition the GNSO Council in some manner. The Council > would work with Staff to make a decision based on priorities, > budget, etc. > > If instead, what was meant is that such funding is possibly > available with Council/Staff approval, that makes sense. > > > Tim > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: RE: AW: [council] Motion To Approve Tool Kit of > Services Recommendations for GNSO Constituencies and > Stakeholder Groups > From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes(a)verisign.com> > Date: Thu, December 03, 2009 8:37 am > To: Stéphane_Van_Gelder <stephane.vangelder(a)indom.com>, "GNSO > Council" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> > > Stephane, > > I find this very surprising and extremely disappointing. The > RrSG has representation on the CSG WT and there was no > concern expressed from the RrSG. The CSG WT sought comments > from SGs months ago and there was no concern from the RrSG. > The RrSG has representation on the OSC and no concern was > expressed from the RrSG. The recommendations were sent to > the full Council list on 5 Nov for discussion and comment and > the topic was raised for discussion on the 23 Nov Council > meeting; still no RrSG comment. Now a motion is made after > many months of comment solicitation, and you say the RrSG may > not support the motion. Am I missing something here? > > More specifically to the point of the recommendations, you > seem to be talking about ICANN funding for F2F meetings. The > Toolkit of Services recommendations say nothing about that. > The recommendations simply say that one of the services that > could be made available for SGs and constituencies is support > for arranging face-to-face meetings for SGs and > constituencies. They make no reference to doing that for > WTs, WGs, or other GNSO organizations besides constituencies > and SGs; in fact, a more general approach that left it open > to other organizations was rejected. All that is being > recommended here is, if a SG or constituency decides to hold > a F2F meeting and would like Staff assistance for doing that, > then they could opt to use that service if they like. > > Chuck > > > > From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org > [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] > On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder > Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 8:02 AM > To: GNSO Council > Subject: Re: AW: [council] Motion To Approve Tool Kit of > Services Recommendations for GNSO Constituencies and > Stakeholder Groups > > > > As written, I would think that the RrSG would find it > difficult to support TK recommendations considering that the > second one is > requesting: > > Support for organizing face-to-face meetings (e.g. date/time, > location, equipment, telephone bridge and, in certain venues, > arranging > accommodations) > > > I know the email I sent to the Council list a few days ago > raising the issue of a tendency towards more and more > requests for F2F meetings for WTs and DTs has not generated > much discussion. I do hope this is simply because people have > other things on their plate and not that the issue is of no > interest to anyone. > > > Perhaps this motion, and the contents of the TK > recommendations, will generate some discussion on the matter... > > > Thanks, > > > Stéphane > > > > > Le 3 déc. 2009 à 09:52, <KnobenW(a)telekom.de> > <KnobenW(a)telekom.de> a écrit : > > Chuck, > > I'd like to second this motion but have one question regarding to the > "resolved": does "sharing the recommendations with the > board.." mean that there is no further need for board > approval? In this case the council might direct staff to > execute the recommendations. > > Best regards > Wolf-Ulrich > > > > > Von: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org > [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] > Im Auftrag von Gomes, Chuck > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Dezember 2009 06:33 > An: council(a)gnso.icann.org > Betreff: [council] Motion To Approve Tool Kit of Services > Recommendations for GNSO Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups > > > > I am making this motion for action in our 17 Dec 09 Council meeting. > > Glen - Please post this per normal practice. Thanks. > > Chuck > > Motion To Approve Tool Kit of Services Recommendations for > GNSO Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups > > Motion by: Chuck Gomes > Seconded by: > > Whereas the Board Governance Committee Report on GNSO > Improvements (BGC > Report) tasked ICANN staff with developing, within six > months, in consultation with the GNSO Council, a tool kit > of basic services that would be made available to all > constituencies. (See Report of the Board Governance > Committee GNSO Review Working Group on GNSO Improvements, 3 > February 2008 located at > http://www.icann.org/en/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvem > ents-report-03feb08.pdf, > p. 46.); > > Whereas the ICANN Board approved the BGC GNSO Improvement > Recommendations on 26 June 2008 > (http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm#_Toc7 > 6113182); > > Whereas in January 2009 the GNSO Council formed the > Operations Steering Committee (OSC) to develop > recommendations to implement operational changes contained in > the BGC Report; > > Whereas the OSC established three Work Teams, including the > GNSO Stakeholder Group and Constituency Operations Work Team, > to take on the work of each of the three operational areas > addressed in the BGC Report recommendations; > > Whereas the GNSO Stakeholder Group and Constituency > Operations Work Team developed and approved Tool Kit Services > Recommendations for GNSO Constituencies and Stakeholder > Groups on 25 October 2009 and sent them to the OSC for review; > > Whereas the OSC accepted the Work Team's recommendations; > > Whereas on 5 Nov 09 the document was distributed to the > Council list and Councilors were asked to forward the > recommendations to their respective groups for review and > comment ASAP with the tentative goal of Council action in our > December meeting; > > RESOLVED, the Council accepts the recommendations > (http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/tool-kit-services-recommendation > s-for-gnso-05nov09-en.pdf) > and directs Staff to share the recommendations with the Board > and post the document on the GNSO web page at http://gnso.icann.org/. > >

2 1