Dear Marilyn,
Many thanks for advancing this matter.
Your points are well taken and I even do agree that we should encourage contributions
that address the full set of questions. Nevertheless, we should recognize that an
expert on, let’s say, allocation methods, could well want to limit his/her
contribution to that particular area – without that being seen as
detracting from the value of the contribution as such. Anyway, as I read your amendments
of the draft I find your wording striking the right balance.
As to the working program, it is first of
all clear that we need to modify the timelines in the current GNSO 4mths
operational plan (as prepared by Maria before last Council call). At the call,
I also suggested that the next consolidation document – or “Initial
Report”, to speak PDP-ese - be kept as an evolving draft to be finalized in
Very best regards
Olof
From:
owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Marilyn Cade
Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2005
5:52 AM
To: 'olof nordling';
council@gnso.icann.org
Cc: 'Suzanne Sene'
Subject: RE: [council] Draft Call
for papers, new gTLD PDP
Dear Olof,
Attached, as promised, are more detailed
comments on the proposed call for papers. When I made the proposal for this
additional approach to seeking input, and the Council supported it, I believe
that we intended to solicit organized, and substantive inputs that directly
address the full set of questions in the ToR. I would prefer that we
encourage that. The existing public forum, which is open as well through the
same time frame, provides an opportunity for any contributions, thus no one is
disadvantaged by the additional criteria in terms of having their input
considered.
As part of our outreach, we also need to
establish interaction with the other SOs, and with the GAC. We should add
this to our agenda for the January Council call. In addition, I suggest that we
also invite the SSAC, OECD, and WIPO to meet with the Council in
Also, I want to note that we have a resolution
that notes that the GNSO Council will develop a work program in consultation
with the ICANN staff and ICANN board that sets out a timeframe for work. After
the holiday ends, we should probably undertake work on this, so that it can be
posted to the Council the required 7 days ahead of time for our agenda for the
January meeting. I think we need to be realistic and pragmatic about the time
frames and establish a feasible time frame, and then recommend such a time
frame to the Board. The new gTLD process is challenging and important to
address thoroughly. While it may be unpopular to note that we may spend 6-9
months on this, we should assess, now, the feasibility of completing all of the
data gathering and potentially external research or advice that we will need to
advise the final policy recommendations.
Just one other suggestion: There is a
tendency to use “GNSO” in lieu of “Council”, or
“GNSO Council” in the call for papers. I suggest that it is
preferable to systematically use “GNSO Council” or
“Council” when we are referencing the Council’s work.
The GNSO is the full Supporting Organization, and I find the shorthand use of
GNSO a little confusing.
From:
owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of olof nordling
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2005
10:00 AM
To: council@gnso.icann.org
Subject: [council] Draft Call for
papers, new gTLD PDP
Dear all,
As you may recall we have a Call for Papers regarding the
new gTLD PDP to write for announcement in early January. I have attached a very
first draft to this effect and I would sincerely appreciate comments on the
draft from those of you who happen to be on-line during these largely
holiday-dominated days. The objective would be to have it distributed and posted
on 3 January…
The draft includes the ToR in extenso (the announcement on
the ICANN front page will have to be shorter, cutting the ToR part). Would this
be enough or should we specify another layer of questions – if so, which
questions?
I’m looking forward to receiving your views on any
aspects of the draft.
Very best regards from
Olof