Hi Keith, Thanks, I do think that GNSO should also check with other chartering organizations so we can synchronize any action. There was some discussion with ccNSO but I don't think we had any with ALAC. a longer deadline would be helpful and will allow the group to get more input from the chartering organizations. the motion talks about a new vehicle/structure (to be invented?) and accountability mechanisms but doesn't indicate what will happen after GNSO withdrawal. Getting clarity about the post-withdrawal process is needed and that should be discussed with other chartering organizations. Best, Rafik 2017-07-06 23:14 GMT+09:00 Drazek, Keith via council <council@gnso.icann.org

:

Thanks Darcy. I think the work to design the successor structure needs to take place between now and Abu Dhabi, but I take your point that the GNSO and other the chartering organizations may want to have involvement in that work, or at least an opportunity to review and provide feedback before things are finalized. What do others think?

Best,

Keith

*From:* Darcy Southwell [mailto:darcy.southwell@endurance.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, July 05, 2017 6:17 PM *To:* Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com> *Cc:* Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine@icann.org>; council@gnso.icann.org *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] Fwd: Draft motion CCWG-IG

Hi, Keith. I definitely appreciate the time made available to coordinate a successor structure before GNSO withdrawal. I think it’s critical that any attempts to create a new structure come with a deadline to do so. Do you think the 3+ months between now and Abu Dhabi are sufficient to accomplish this? I’m wondering if setting an ICANN61 deadline would be more appropriate. This would allow the Council to meet with the CCWG-IG and any other interested parties in Abu Dhabi to craft the successor framework.

Thanks,

Darcy

*From: *<council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Nathalie Peregrine < nathalie.peregrine@icann.org> *Date: *Monday, July 3, 2017 at 12:41 PM *To: *"Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek@verisign.com>, "council@gnso.icann.org" < council@gnso.icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [council] Fwd: Draft motion CCWG-IG

Dear Keith,

The clean version of the motion has been posted on the corresponding page for the GNSO Council meeting on the 13th July 2017: https://community.icann.org/x/DWfwAw

Kind regards

Nathalie

*From: *<council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of " council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> *Reply-To: *"kdrazek@verisign.com" <kdrazek@verisign.com> *Date: *Monday, July 3, 2017 at 5:13 PM *To: *"council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> *Subject: *[council] Fwd: Draft motion CCWG-IG

Hi all,

As discussed in Johannesburg, attached is a draft motion on the CCWG-IG.

As you'll see, it enables the group to coordinate with the other chartering organizations on a successor structure between now and Abu Dhabi while ensuring there is no gap in coverage.

Happy to discuss further.

Regards,

Keith

<Motion CCWG IG - 30 June 2017 .docx>

_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council

_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council