Report from 3.4.13 ccNSO Council meeting
To the GNSO Council: As liaison to the ccNSO Council, I participate in its meeting on Tuesday, March 12. There were four bits of the hour-long meeting (they seek to keep to a strict 60 minute limit) that are of particular interest to us. 1. Chair Lesley Cowley reported on calls with Jonathan Robinson regarding a meeting in Beijing between the two councils. Such a meeting, in as much as the two worlds -- country code and generic TLDs -- are so different they demand a bit of forethought in an attempt to develop a more substantive agenda. This was reflected in the three items that are likely to be on that agenda: a. Internet governance (most of the regional reports were of collaboration with national government organizations on the matter; additionally, there is concern that the internet governance discussion does not reflect the unique nature of the cc’s) b. The effect of new gTLDs on ICANN's table of organization (with the understanding that the cc's are keen to remain separate and apart from such changes) c. Handling direct requests from the Board and other Advisory Committee (the ccNSO feels it has a method in place to handle such things and will likely brief us on it) 2. Vice Chair Keith Davidson reported on a meeting with Fadi who said that ICANN intends to further internationalize the organization by putting executives in Singapore and Istanbul. No discussion on who or when. 3. A number of the ccNSO Council members expressed concern over findings of the Echo reputation study done by and about ICANN. The discussion focused on how different its negative results were from the positive results from studies about ccTLDs. 4. Cowley noted that it was unlikely that the ccNNO Council will meet with the GAC in Beijing "as the GAC is focused on new gTLDs" Cheers, John Berard
Hi John, Very little to add except thanks for this really useful summary. I'd been looking through the ccnso's February minutes to try and identify items of mutual interest and hadn't come up with much besides, perhaps, Peter Van Roste's concern that ICANN staff might make more use of the existing community members and their expertise when it comes to outreach and engagement on Internet governance. That's perhaps worthy of a sub-bullet under topic a). All the best, Maria On 14 March 2013 15:07, <john@crediblecontext.com> wrote:
To the GNSO Council:
As liaison to the ccNSO Council, I participate in its meeting on Tuesday, March 12. There were four bits of the hour-long meeting (they seek to keep to a strict 60 minute limit) that are of particular interest to us.
1. Chair Lesley Cowley reported on calls with Jonathan Robinson regarding a meeting in Beijing between the two councils. Such a meeting, in as much as the two worlds -- country code and generic TLDs -- are so different they demand a bit of forethought in an attempt to develop a more substantive agenda. This was reflected in the three items that are likely to be on that agenda:
a. Internet governance (most of the regional reports were of collaboration with national government organizations on the matter; additionally, there is concern that the internet governance discussion does not reflect the unique nature of the cc’s)
b. The effect of new gTLDs on ICANN's table of organization (with the understanding that the cc's are keen to remain separate and apart from such changes)
c. Handling direct requests from the Board and other Advisory Committee (the ccNSO feels it has a method in place to handle such things and will likely brief us on it)
2. Vice Chair Keith Davidson reported on a meeting with Fadi who said that ICANN intends to further internationalize the organization by putting executives in Singapore and Istanbul. No discussion on who or when.
3. A number of the ccNSO Council members expressed concern over findings of the Echo reputation study done by and about ICANN. The discussion focused on how different its negative results were from the positive results from studies about ccTLDs.
4. Cowley noted that it was unlikely that the ccNNO Council will meet with the GAC in Beijing "as the GAC is focused on new gTLDs"
Cheers,
John Berard
Thanks John, It’s helpful to receive this succinct digest of relevant points. Were you asked any questions or for input on the GNSO, the Council and our work? Jonathan From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of john@crediblecontext.com Sent: 14 March 2013 15:07 To: council@gnso.icann.org Subject: [council] Report from 3.4.13 ccNSO Council meeting To the GNSO Council: As liaison to the ccNSO Council, I participate in its meeting on Tuesday, March 12. There were four bits of the hour-long meeting (they seek to keep to a strict 60 minute limit) that are of particular interest to us. 1. Chair Lesley Cowley reported on calls with Jonathan Robinson regarding a meeting in Beijing between the two councils. Such a meeting, in as much as the two worlds -- country code and generic TLDs -- are so different they demand a bit of forethought in an attempt to develop a more substantive agenda. This was reflected in the three items that are likely to be on that agenda: a. Internet governance (most of the regional reports were of collaboration with national government organizations on the matter; additionally, there is concern that the internet governance discussion does not reflect the unique nature of the cc’s) b. The effect of new gTLDs on ICANN's table of organization (with the understanding that the cc's are keen to remain separate and apart from such changes) c. Handling direct requests from the Board and other Advisory Committee (the ccNSO feels it has a method in place to handle such things and will likely brief us on it) 2. Vice Chair Keith Davidson reported on a meeting with Fadi who said that ICANN intends to further internationalize the organization by putting executives in Singapore and Istanbul. No discussion on who or when. 3. A number of the ccNSO Council members expressed concern over findings of the Echo reputation study done by and about ICANN. The discussion focused on how different its negative results were from the positive results from studies about ccTLDs. 4. Cowley noted that it was unlikely that the ccNNO Council will meet with the GAC in Beijing "as the GAC is focused on new gTLDs" Cheers, John Berard
Jonathan, No, no questions or legitimate opportunity for a liaison to jump in. Cheers, Berard Sent from my iPhone On Mar 15, 2013, at 12:57 AM, "Jonathan Robinson" <jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com> wrote:
Thanks John,
It’s helpful to receive this succinct digest of relevant points.
Were you asked any questions or for input on the GNSO, the Council and our work?
Jonathan
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of john@crediblecontext.com Sent: 14 March 2013 15:07 To: council@gnso.icann.org Subject: [council] Report from 3.4.13 ccNSO Council meeting
To the GNSO Council:
As liaison to the ccNSO Council, I participate in its meeting on Tuesday, March 12. There were four bits of the hour-long meeting (they seek to keep to a strict 60 minute limit) that are of particular interest to us.
1. Chair Lesley Cowley reported on calls with Jonathan Robinson regarding a meeting in Beijing between the two councils. Such a meeting, in as much as the two worlds -- country code and generic TLDs -- are so different they demand a bit of forethought in an attempt to develop a more substantive agenda. This was reflected in the three items that are likely to be on that agenda:
a. Internet governance (most of the regional reports were of collaboration with national government organizations on the matter; additionally, there is concern that the internet governance discussion does not reflect the unique nature of the cc’s)
b. The effect of new gTLDs on ICANN's table of organization (with the understanding that the cc's are keen to remain separate and apart from such changes)
c. Handling direct requests from the Board and other Advisory Committee (the ccNSO feels it has a method in place to handle such things and will likely brief us on it)
2. Vice Chair Keith Davidson reported on a meeting with Fadi who said that ICANN intends to further internationalize the organization by putting executives in Singapore and Istanbul. No discussion on who or when.
3. A number of the ccNSO Council members expressed concern over findings of the Echo reputation study done by and about ICANN. The discussion focused on how different its negative results were from the positive results from studies about ccTLDs.
4. Cowley noted that it was unlikely that the ccNNO Council will meet with the GAC in Beijing "as the GAC is focused on new gTLDs"
Cheers,
John Berard
participants (4)
-
John Berard -
john＠crediblecontext.com
-
Jonathan Robinson -
Maria Farrell