Hello Avri,
Also I understood that there were questions which the Board wished the staff to consult with the GNSO council about. Is this not the case? Or will there be questions that the members of the council and the constituencies should be considering prior to the meeting?
My recollection of the discussion in New Delhi at the Board level was as follows: (1) The Board has asked the staff to determine whether all the GNSO recommendations can be implemented, and to provide an implementation report before the Board approves the recommendations. (2) The staff briefed the Board on work done so far on implementation. A similar staff briefing was also provided to the GNSO Council. (3) In the staff briefing to the Board, the staff noted that with respect to some recommendations that the community may have different views with respect to the detailed implementation. It was expected that these views would reflect the different views within the GNSO when a particular recommendation was being discussed. For example - with respect to the recommendations on confusingly similar - some would want the implementation to be as narrow as possible, and some may want the implementation to be wider. The same would apply to recommendations on topics such as morality. (4) The Board requested staff to continue to discuss implementation details of the recommendations with the GNSO. Where possible the implementation suggestions from staff should closely align with the intent of the GNSO. Where it is difficult to get widespread agreement on the implementation of a recommendation, the staff have been asked to summarise the different views for the Board. I would assume from the timing of the Los Angeles meeting, that the staff will attempt to report the GNSO Council views on implementation to the Board at its meeting in Riga. In terms of my personal discussions amongst Board members (rather than a formal Board meeting discussion) I haven't heard any new concerns about the more controversial recommendations that haven't already been discussed within the new gTLD committee, and at the public forums. The concerns that are more specific to the Board will be the impact on ICANN's budget - including ensuring that any fees cover the cost of implementation, and the impact on ICANN from a risk management perspective (e.g not exposing ICANN to extensive legal litigation). Regards, Bruce Tonkin