Dear Jonathan:

 

I have added two additional examples regarding success of the new gTLD program, which I am happy to speak to during our meeting with the Board.

 

 

 

All,

 

Following up on below and our preparatory session yesterday, I have notes on the following questions / discussion points

I feel we could do with a little more substance / clarity here.

 

Please can you give your input / comments on list asap. 

 

-          Add to

-          Remove from

-          Modify

-          Volunteer / Commit to lead

 

We may get to discuss more at lunch.

 

Jonathan

 

----

 

Overarching Issues / Challenges (Jonathan, A.N. Other?)

-          Volume of work and pace of change

-          Concerns over dominance of top-down / executive & board led initiatives

-          Guarantee of the preservation of bottom-up and consensus based multi-stakeholder system

 

Specific Questions & Issues

-          IGO / INGO Issue (Thomas)

o   Board commitment to bottom-up processes (PDP)

o   Specific issues

-          Current view of board of the success (or not) of the new gTLD programme (Introduced by?)
(Follow-on: How is the board planning to evaluate success?). 
Examples:

o   Name collisions. GEO TLDs. Reservation list (Who?)

o   RAA. Data retention requirements (James +1)(Ching +1)

o   Universal acceptance? IOS 7 (Ching +1)

o    New gTLD objections.

§  An ad hoc, unbalanced and unduly narrow proposed SCO review mechanism.

§  Unmitigated and uncapped ICC delays and fees in community and limited public interest objections.

-          What is the decision making process leading to reconciling GAC advice / GNSO policy? (John)

-          A number of SSAC reports seem to be backlogged (Mikey)

o   What is the Board’s approach to addressing SSR backlog?

-          Strategy Panels (Maria / James)

o   N.B. Were these adequately covered yesterday with Fadi?

 

 

All,

 

I have spoken with Steve Crocker and out of that conversation, a proposed structure of our 90 minutes meeting with the board has emerged (see below).

 

Note that there is specific scope for raising key questions / issues with the board and the structure anticipates some of these.

 

I propose to deliver the GNSO Council update using a few slides if necessary.

 

Any thoughts or comments on fleshing this out are welcome, particularly on “specific questions” and “current challenges / issues”.

 

Thanks,

 

 

Jonathan

 

---

 

GNSO Council

·         GNSO Council update to ICANN Board (10 mins)

o   Brief description of GNSO Council and GNSO process improvements. 
Focus on reality v. possible perception.  

o   Specific highlight of GAC / GNSO work on early GAC engagement in the policy process.

·         Specific questions the GNSO Council has for the ICANN Board, i.e. the GNSO Council’s “asks" if not covered elsewhere on agenda (15 mins)

·         Highlight current challenges GNSO is currently dealing with.
This might include the pace of change, concerns about top-down vs bottom up, etc. (15 mins)

 

ICANN Board

·         ICANN Board update on how the Board is working, where our focus is, etc.  
Division of labor and coordination with the CEO. (10 mins)

·         Clarification about the role, purpose and operation of the new Board Advisory Committees. (15 mins)

·         ICANN Board’s view of ICANN Globalization, IANA Globalization and general Internet Governance. (20 mins)

===========================================================
CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Pursuant to Regulations Governing Practice Before the Internal Revenue
Service, any tax advice contained herein is not intended or written to be used and cannot be used
by a taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer.
===========================================================
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
This electronic mail message and any attached files contain information intended for the exclusive
use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is
proprietary, privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law.  If you
are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any viewing, copying, disclosure or 
distribution of this information may be subject to legal restriction or sanction.  Please notify
the sender, by electronic mail or telephone, of any unintended recipients and delete the original 
message without making any copies.
===========================================================
NOTIFICATION:  Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP is an Illinois limited liability partnership that has
elected to be governed by the Illinois Uniform Partnership Act (1997).
===========================================================