Hello All, I haven't received the issues paper referred to below yet. Therefore we will not have a GNSO meeting on Thursday this week to discuss. Regards, Bruce Tonkin
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin Sent: Thursday, 22 September 2005 5:11 PM To: GNSO Council Subject: [council] ICANN Strategic Planning Process
Hello All,
See note from Paul Twomey below.
I proposed we schedule a GNSO Council meeting for Thursday 6 October 2005 to discuss the issues paper which will be available next week. We can then respond back to Paul by 15 October 2005.
Regards, Bruce Tonkin
-----Original Message----- From: Paul Twomey [mailto:twomey@icann.org] Sent: Thursday, 22 September 2005 4:58 PM To: Bruce Tonkin Subject: ICANN Strategic Planning Process
Dear Bruce
We are now in the middle of the ICANN strategic planning process for the 2006-2009 plan. In Luxembourg, the process was outlined, and a copy of that outline is attached.
At present we are waiting for the response from the final SO/AC and hope to have the issues paper available next week. This puts us a little behind schedule, but not hopelessly so.
The next step is to have the SOs, ACs and other members of the community respond to the issues paper. We will be asking for two elements in those responses.
The first element will be an indication of whether the issues that have been identified in the issues paper are the correct issues. The issues paper is based on the input that was received from the consultation process. There will undoubtedly be places where the perspectives of members of the GNSO differ from some of the views of other members of the community. What we are looking for is a validation that the major issues have been covered and that the views of the GNSO are represented, not that you agree with everything that everybody said. Based on those issues, we would like the GNSO to identify what it believes the strategic priorities for ICANN should be, and, if possible, how ICANN should go about addressing those priorities. If the priorities really are to be priorities, there should be no more than five of them.
Although it is a tight deadline, we would like to have those responses by 15 October.
As mentioned in Luxembourg, we would then like to convene a meeting of the Chairs of the SOs and ACs (or their representatives) to agree on a common set of priorities. The arrangements for this meeting are still being finalised and we will let you know the details as soon as possible.
Once these key strategic priorities have been formulated, they will be circulated for comment. Based on the feedback received, a draft strategic plan will be prepared for distribution in November. Further consultation will take place at the Vancouver meeting, with a view to having the Board approve a final version of the plan in January.
Thank you for your assistance in the planning process.
Regards,
Paul