Protecting Rights of Others Working Group: Meeting Call
Colleagues There has been something of a lag on getting the PRO-WG group off the ground. To address that in an efficient manner, I will be convening the first meeting of the group on Tuesday 20 Feb at 7:30 LA, 10:30 am EST, 15:30 UTC, 16:30 CET. Please review the latest draft of the Statement of Work found at http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg03194.html At the first meeting we will: 1. appoint a chair of the group 2. review the existing Statement of Work and agree its final form 3. agree the first tranche of activities to be completed between now and the ICANN Lisbon meeting The rules of the Working Group will be similar to those of the IDN-WG (found at http://gnso.icann.org/announcements/announcement-18nov06.htm) Can I urge you please to consult with your constituencies and propose participants for the group? It is MOST likely that there will be an aggressive schedule of activities to support the work as this work is being conducted in the context of the new TLDs Committee activities and is time critical. This will mean small working groups or individual efforts and, at a minimum, a weekly conference call. Please respond to the GNSO secretariat to indicate that you or your constituency representative wants to be included in a new public mailing list. Kind regards and, of course, any questions, please call or email. Liz ..................................................... Liz Williams Senior Policy Counselor ICANN - Brussels +32 2 234 7874 tel +32 2 234 7848 fax +32 497 07 4243 mob
Liz (thanks) and all, I'm a bit confused. Is this PRO-WG the result or continuation of the discussion on reserved names, or a different process? I just remember there were those two different discussion track (Ute's team on PRO, and Chuck & Marilyn on the RNs, etc.), and the Statement of Work was the document drafted by Chuck & Marilyn on the latter topic. Are these still two different processes or not? It would be good to have a word or two on the purpose of each WG emerging. I remember having suggested (when feedback was sought to improve GNSO website, or even before) that there is a repository at one same page of our active WGs, TFs, Committees, and other Groups so that people can see at a glance the current policy activities. A very brief descriptive or statement of purpose (two or three sentences are fine) could be posted on the page, too, just below each group title. I see two links "Issues" and "Policies" where different categories of things are listed, but not quite what I'm suggesting, which would be more something like "GNSO Current Work & Groups" or something. What have I forgotten this time? Yes, would it make sense to ask for some prospective work as to how many parallel WGs etc. are likely to spin off from the current PDPs before we conclude them? And how many could be launched independently by the council? That may help to plan for the individuals best participation and distribution in the various groups, depending on the human resources available, the interest, the experience of the people in the subject matter or related area, etc. (as opposed to one having to swap from one group to the next because the topic might be more relevant to one's constituency, or one might have more interest in it, for lack of volunteers.) Sometimes, I wonder if we shouldn't launch a "Work Quality and Inclusiveness" PDP to set the maximum number of those groups and issues the council could handle at a time. Best regards, Mawaki --- Liz Williams <liz.williams@icann.org> wrote:
Colleagues
There has been something of a lag on getting the PRO-WG group off the ground. To address that in an efficient manner, I will be convening
the first meeting of the group on Tuesday 20 Feb at 7:30 LA, 10:30 am EST, 15:30 UTC, 16:30 CET.
Please review the latest draft of the Statement of Work found at http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg03194.html
At the first meeting we will:
1. appoint a chair of the group
2. review the existing Statement of Work and agree its final form
3. agree the first tranche of activities to be completed between now and the ICANN Lisbon meeting
The rules of the Working Group will be similar to those of the IDN-WG (found at http://gnso.icann.org/announcements/announcement-18nov06.htm)
Can I urge you please to consult with your constituencies and propose participants for the group? It is MOST likely that there will be an aggressive schedule of activities to support the work as this work is being conducted in the context of the new TLDs Committee activities
and is time critical. This will mean small working groups or individual efforts and, at a minimum, a weekly conference call.
Please respond to the GNSO secretariat to indicate that you or your
constituency representative wants to be included in a new public mailing list.
Kind regards and, of course, any questions, please call or email.
Liz
.....................................................
Liz Williams Senior Policy Counselor ICANN - Brussels +32 2 234 7874 tel +32 2 234 7848 fax +32 497 07 4243 mob
Mawaki, Please see my responses below. Chuck Gomes "This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission."
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mawaki Chango Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 5:24 PM To: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Protecting Rights of Others Working Group: Meeting Call
Liz (thanks) and all,
I'm a bit confused. Is this PRO-WG the result or continuation of the discussion on reserved names, or a different process?
It is a different process.
I just remember there were those two different discussion track (Ute's team on PRO, and Chuck & Marilyn on the RNs, etc.), and the Statement of Work was the document drafted by Chuck & Marilyn on the latter topic. Are these still two different processes or not?
Marilyn and I drafted the SoW for the reserved names working group (RN-WG; Ute and Kristina drafted the SoW for the Protecting the Rights of Others working group (PRO-WG), originally referred to as the sunrise WG. The RN-WG has been going for several weeks. The PRO-WG is just getting ready to start.
It would be good to have a word or two on the purpose of each WG emerging.
Here's the purpose of the RN-WG as stated in the Council approved SoW: "The purpose of the WG will be to perform an initial examination of the role and treatment of reserved domain names at the first and second level., with the goal of providing recommendations for further consideration by the TF or Council. This working group should focus initially on defining the role of reserved strings, and how to proceed with a full examination of issues and possible policy recommendations. This will include prioritizing sub-elements of the broad topic of reserved names in a manner that would facilitate breaking the broad topic into smaller parts that could then be divided into separate policy efforts of a more manageable size and that might also allow some less complicated issues to be resolved in a more timely manner so that some policy changes might be included in the introduction of new gTLDs." I attached the approved SoW if you want to see it.
I remember having suggested (when feedback was sought to improve GNSO website, or even before) that there is a repository at one same page of our active WGs, TFs, Committees, and other Groups so that people can see at a glance the current policy activities. A very brief descriptive or statement of purpose (two or three sentences are fine) could be posted on the page, too, just below each group title. I see two links "Issues" and "Policies" where different categories of things are listed, but not quite what I'm suggesting, which would be more something like "GNSO Current Work & Groups" or something.
What have I forgotten this time? Yes, would it make sense to ask for some prospective work as to how many parallel WGs etc. are likely to spin off from the current PDPs before we conclude them?
It's too early to tell but I think it is easy to project that there will be several follow on efforts recommended regarding reserved names. Our recommendations are due before Lisbon, some of which will probably be to form follow on groups for a few of the reserved names categories.
And how many could be launched independently by the council? That may help to plan for the individuals best participation and distribution in the various groups, depending on the human resources available, the interest, the experience of the people in the subject matter or related area, etc. (as opposed to one having to swap from one group to the next because the topic might be more relevant to one's constituency, or one might have more interest in it, for lack of volunteers.) Sometimes, I wonder if we shouldn't launch a "Work Quality and Inclusiveness" PDP to set the maximum number of those groups and issues the council could handle at a time.
Best regards,
Mawaki
--- Liz Williams <liz.williams@icann.org> wrote:
Colleagues
There has been something of a lag on getting the PRO-WG group off the ground. To address that in an efficient manner, I will be convening
the first meeting of the group on Tuesday 20 Feb at 7:30 LA, 10:30 am EST, 15:30 UTC, 16:30 CET.
Please review the latest draft of the Statement of Work found at http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg03194.html
At the first meeting we will:
1. appoint a chair of the group
2. review the existing Statement of Work and agree its final form
3. agree the first tranche of activities to be completed between now and the ICANN Lisbon meeting
The rules of the Working Group will be similar to those of the IDN-WG (found at http://gnso.icann.org/announcements/announcement-18nov06.htm)
Can I urge you please to consult with your constituencies and propose participants for the group? It is MOST likely that there will be an aggressive schedule of activities to support the work as this work is being conducted in the context of the new TLDs Committee activities
and is time critical. This will mean small working groups or individual efforts and, at a minimum, a weekly conference call.
Please respond to the GNSO secretariat to indicate that you or your
constituency representative wants to be included in a new public mailing list.
Kind regards and, of course, any questions, please call or email.
Liz
.....................................................
Liz Williams Senior Policy Counselor ICANN - Brussels +32 2 234 7874 tel +32 2 234 7848 fax +32 497 07 4243 mob
Chuck, Thanks a lot for this clarifying response. Sorry, I didn't realize I dropped out of the RN process; could you please add me to the RN-WG and send me off list the latest version of the working materials (if any, apart from the SoW)? Thanks, Mawaki --- "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com> wrote:
Mawaki,
Please see my responses below.
Chuck Gomes
"This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission."
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mawaki Chango Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 5:24 PM To: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Protecting Rights of Others Working Group: Meeting Call
Liz (thanks) and all,
I'm a bit confused. Is this PRO-WG the result or continuation of the discussion on reserved names, or a different process?
It is a different process.
I just remember there were those two different discussion track (Ute's team on PRO, and Chuck & Marilyn on the RNs, etc.), and the Statement of Work was the document drafted by Chuck & Marilyn on the latter topic. Are these still two different processes or not?
Marilyn and I drafted the SoW for the reserved names working group (RN-WG; Ute and Kristina drafted the SoW for the Protecting the Rights of Others working group (PRO-WG), originally referred to as the sunrise WG. The RN-WG has been going for several weeks. The PRO-WG is just getting ready to start.
It would be good to have a word or two on the purpose of each WG emerging.
Here's the purpose of the RN-WG as stated in the Council approved SoW: "The purpose of the WG will be to perform an initial examination of the role and treatment of reserved domain names at the first and second level., with the goal of providing recommendations for further consideration by the TF or Council. This working group should focus initially on defining the role of reserved strings, and how to proceed with a full examination of issues and possible policy recommendations. This will include prioritizing sub-elements of the broad topic of reserved names in a manner that would facilitate breaking the broad topic into smaller parts that could then be divided into separate policy efforts of a more manageable size and that might also allow some less complicated issues to be resolved in a more timely manner so that some policy changes might be included in the introduction of new gTLDs." I attached the approved SoW if you want to see it.
I remember having suggested (when feedback was sought to improve GNSO website, or even before) that there is a repository at one same page of our active WGs, TFs, Committees, and other Groups so that people can see at a glance the current policy activities. A very brief descriptive or statement of purpose (two or three sentences are fine) could be posted on the page, too, just below each group title. I see two links "Issues" and "Policies" where different categories of things are listed, but not quite what I'm suggesting, which would be more something like "GNSO Current Work & Groups" or something.
What have I forgotten this time? Yes, would it make sense to ask for some prospective work as to how many parallel WGs etc. are likely to spin off from the current PDPs before we conclude them?
It's too early to tell but I think it is easy to project that there will be several follow on efforts recommended regarding reserved names. Our recommendations are due before Lisbon, some of which will probably be to form follow on groups for a few of the reserved names categories.
And how many could be launched independently by the council? That may help to plan for the individuals best participation and distribution in the various groups, depending on the human resources available, the interest, the experience of the people in the subject matter or related area, etc. (as opposed to one having to swap from one group to the next because the topic might be more relevant to one's constituency, or one might have more interest in it, for lack of volunteers.) Sometimes, I wonder if we shouldn't launch a "Work Quality and Inclusiveness" PDP to set the maximum number of those groups and issues the council could handle at a time.
Best regards,
Mawaki
--- Liz Williams <liz.williams@icann.org> wrote:
Colleagues
There has been something of a lag on getting the PRO-WG group off the ground. To address that in an efficient manner, I will be convening
the first meeting of the group on Tuesday 20 Feb at 7:30 LA, 10:30 am EST, 15:30 UTC, 16:30 CET.
Please review the latest draft of the Statement of Work found at
http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg03194.html
At the first meeting we will:
1. appoint a chair of the group
2. review the existing Statement of Work and agree its final
form
3. agree the first tranche of activities to be completed
and the ICANN Lisbon meeting
The rules of the Working Group will be similar to those of
(found at http://gnso.icann.org/announcements/announcement-18nov06.htm)
Can I urge you please to consult with your constituencies and propose participants for the group? It is MOST likely that there will be an aggressive schedule of activities to support the work as
being conducted in the context of the new TLDs Committee activities
and is time critical. This will mean small working groups or individual efforts and, at a minimum, a weekly conference call.
Please respond to the GNSO secretariat to indicate that you or your
constituency representative wants to be included in a new
between now the IDN-WG this work is public
mailing list.
Kind regards and, of course, any questions, please call or email.
Liz
.....................................................
Liz Williams Senior Policy Counselor ICANN - Brussels +32 2 234 7874 tel +32 2 234 7848 fax +32 497 07 4243 mob
Will do Mawaki. Glen - will you please add Mawaki and send him related info. Thanks. Chuck Gomes "This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission."
-----Original Message----- From: Mawaki Chango [mailto:ki_chango@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 9:37 PM To: Gomes, Chuck; Council GNSO Subject: RE: [council] Protecting Rights of Others Working Group: Meeting Call
Chuck,
Thanks a lot for this clarifying response. Sorry, I didn't realize I dropped out of the RN process; could you please add me to the RN-WG and send me off list the latest version of the working materials (if any, apart from the SoW)? Thanks,
Mawaki
--- "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com> wrote:
Mawaki,
Please see my responses below.
Chuck Gomes
"This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission."
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mawaki Chango Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 5:24 PM To: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Protecting Rights of Others Working Group: Meeting Call
Liz (thanks) and all,
I'm a bit confused. Is this PRO-WG the result or continuation of the discussion on reserved names, or a different process?
It is a different process.
I just remember there were those two different discussion track (Ute's team on PRO, and Chuck & Marilyn on the RNs, etc.), and the Statement of Work was the document drafted by Chuck & Marilyn on the latter topic. Are these still two different processes or not?
Marilyn and I drafted the SoW for the reserved names working group (RN-WG; Ute and Kristina drafted the SoW for the Protecting the Rights of Others working group (PRO-WG), originally referred to as the sunrise WG. The RN-WG has been going for several weeks. The PRO-WG is just getting ready to start.
It would be good to have a word or two on the purpose of each WG emerging.
Here's the purpose of the RN-WG as stated in the Council approved SoW: "The purpose of the WG will be to perform an initial examination of the role and treatment of reserved domain names at the first and second level., with the goal of providing recommendations for further consideration by the TF or Council. This working group should focus initially on defining the role of reserved strings, and how to proceed with a full examination of issues and possible policy recommendations. This will include prioritizing sub-elements of the broad topic of reserved names in a manner that would facilitate breaking the broad topic into smaller parts that could then be divided into separate policy efforts of a more manageable size and that might also allow some less complicated issues to be resolved in a more timely manner so that some policy changes might be included in the introduction of new gTLDs." I attached the approved SoW if you want to see it.
I remember having suggested (when feedback was sought to improve GNSO website, or even before) that there is a repository at one same page of our active WGs, TFs, Committees, and other Groups so that people can see at a glance the current policy activities. A very brief descriptive or statement of purpose (two or three sentences are fine) could be posted on the page, too, just below each group title. I see two links "Issues" and "Policies" where different categories of things are listed, but not quite what I'm suggesting, which would be more something like "GNSO Current Work & Groups" or something.
What have I forgotten this time? Yes, would it make sense to ask for some prospective work as to how many parallel WGs etc. are likely to spin off from the current PDPs before we conclude them?
It's too early to tell but I think it is easy to project that there will be several follow on efforts recommended regarding reserved names. Our recommendations are due before Lisbon, some of which will probably be to form follow on groups for a few of the reserved names categories.
And how many could be launched independently by the council? That may help to plan for the individuals best participation and distribution in the various groups, depending on the human resources available, the interest, the experience of the people in the subject matter or related area, etc. (as opposed to one having to swap from one group to the next because the topic might be more relevant to one's constituency, or one might have more interest in it, for lack of volunteers.) Sometimes, I wonder if we shouldn't launch a "Work Quality and Inclusiveness" PDP to set the maximum number of those groups and issues the council could handle at a time.
Best regards,
Mawaki
--- Liz Williams <liz.williams@icann.org> wrote:
Colleagues
There has been something of a lag on getting the PRO-WG group off the ground. To address that in an efficient manner, I will be convening
the first meeting of the group on Tuesday 20 Feb at 7:30 LA, 10:30 am EST, 15:30 UTC, 16:30 CET.
Please review the latest draft of the Statement of Work found at
http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg03194.html
At the first meeting we will:
1. appoint a chair of the group
2. review the existing Statement of Work and agree its final
form
3. agree the first tranche of activities to be completed
and the ICANN Lisbon meeting
The rules of the Working Group will be similar to those of
(found at http://gnso.icann.org/announcements/announcement-18nov06.htm)
Can I urge you please to consult with your constituencies and propose participants for the group? It is MOST likely that there will be an aggressive schedule of activities to support the work as
being conducted in the context of the new TLDs Committee activities
and is time critical. This will mean small working groups or individual efforts and, at a minimum, a weekly conference call.
Please respond to the GNSO secretariat to indicate that you or your
constituency representative wants to be included in a new
between now the IDN-WG this work is public
mailing list.
Kind regards and, of course, any questions, please call or email.
Liz
.....................................................
Liz Williams Senior Policy Counselor ICANN - Brussels +32 2 234 7874 tel +32 2 234 7848 fax +32 497 07 4243 mob
participants (3)
-
Gomes, Chuck -
Liz Williams -
Mawaki Chango