Cooperation with the GAC
Dear all, With my thanks to all who participated in the discussion on policy cooperation with the GAC at the CPWG meeting 28 August, here’s my summary: * Cooperation was seen as useful and expanding it into policy areas worth exploring, looking for issues where we agree and can find common interests. “How and where can the interests of the end users benefit from this cooperation” was suggested as a criterion to inform us about topics to embark on. Addressing issues where the opinions of the two groups are already close to each other is to be preferred. Trying to convince each other on issues we disagree upon is not a good use of our time. * The need to retain our identity and to avoid perceptions of our being “an arm” of another stakeholder group was stressed. On the other hand, when our ideas with another group do align, we should not shy away from saying we agree with them. * As to concrete issues for the policy dialogue with the GAC, the ones that already have been subject to discussions at numerous joint ALAC-GAC meetings – EPDP and SubPro – were mentioned. As a third topic, survival of multistakeholderism in the ICANN context was suggested. * On SubPro, a couple of paths for dialogue came up: * GeoNames where (in spite of the lack of consensus both inside At-Large and the GAC), it might be worth exploring the extent to the overlap , the subset of issues that both might agree upon. In this connection, the default role of the 2012 AGB was mentioned, whether going back to it on many issues would be preferable compared to alternatives that have been proposed. * Global public interests and safeguards (highly regulated sectors, verified TLD’s, registration restrictions, DNS abuse). This topic would include whether SubPro PDP has properly addressed the CCT recommendations that need to be implemented before another new gTLD round. * The need for “getting our own act together” was recognized on issues where there is no internal ALAC/At-Large consensus at present. Best, Yrjö -
Dear CPWG members, Please indicate whether you would like to participate in an intersessional call with interested GAC members on policy cooperation (discussed on the CPWG call 28 August, see summary below) before ICABB66. Best, Yrjö ________________________________ From: Yrjö Länsipuro <yrjo_lansipuro@hotmail.com> Sent: Friday, September 6, 2019 4:57 PM To: cpwg@icann.org <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Cooperation with the GAC Dear all, With my thanks to all who participated in the discussion on policy cooperation with the GAC at the CPWG meeting 28 August, here’s my summary: * Cooperation was seen as useful and expanding it into policy areas worth exploring, looking for issues where we agree and can find common interests. “How and where can the interests of the end users benefit from this cooperation” was suggested as a criterion to inform us about topics to embark on. Addressing issues where the opinions of the two groups are already close to each other is to be preferred. Trying to convince each other on issues we disagree upon is not a good use of our time. * The need to retain our identity and to avoid perceptions of our being “an arm” of another stakeholder group was stressed. On the other hand, when our ideas with another group do align, we should not shy away from saying we agree with them. * As to concrete issues for the policy dialogue with the GAC, the ones that already have been subject to discussions at numerous joint ALAC-GAC meetings – EPDP and SubPro – were mentioned. As a third topic, survival of multistakeholderism in the ICANN context was suggested. * On SubPro, a couple of paths for dialogue came up: * GeoNames where (in spite of the lack of consensus both inside At-Large and the GAC), it might be worth exploring the extent to the overlap , the subset of issues that both might agree upon. In this connection, the default role of the 2012 AGB was mentioned, whether going back to it on many issues would be preferable compared to alternatives that have been proposed. * Global public interests and safeguards (highly regulated sectors, verified TLD’s, registration restrictions, DNS abuse). This topic would include whether SubPro PDP has properly addressed the CCT recommendations that need to be implemented before another new gTLD round. * The need for “getting our own act together” was recognized on issues where there is no internal ALAC/At-Large consensus at present. Best, Yrjö -
Hi Yrjo. I would attend such a call -- depending on the date and time. Marita On 9/16/2019 11:39 PM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear CPWG members,
Please indicate whether you would like to participate in an intersessional call with interested GAC members on policy cooperation (discussed on the CPWG call 28 August, see summary below) before ICABB66.
Best,
Yrjö
------------------------------------------------------------------------ *From:* Yrjö Länsipuro <yrjo_lansipuro@hotmail.com> *Sent:* Friday, September 6, 2019 4:57 PM *To:* cpwg@icann.org <cpwg@icann.org> *Subject:* Cooperation with the GAC Dear all,
With my thanks to all who participated in the discussion on policy cooperation with the GAC atthe CPWG meeting28 August, here’s my summary:
* Cooperation was seen as useful and expanding it into policy areas worth exploring, looking for issues where we agree and can find common interests.“How and where can the interests of the end users benefit from this cooperation” was suggested as a criterion to inform us about topics to embark on. Addressing issues where the opinions ofthe two groups are already closeto each other is to be preferred. Trying to convince each other on issues we disagree upon is not a good use of our time.
* The need to retain our identity and to avoid perceptions of our being “an arm” of another stakeholder group was stressed.On the other hand, when our ideas with another group do align, we should not shy away from saying we agree with them.
* As to concrete issues for the policy dialogue with the GAC, the ones that already have been subject to discussions at numerous joint ALAC-GAC meetings – EPDP and SubPro – were mentioned. As a third topic, survival of multistakeholderism in the ICANN context was suggested.
* On SubPro,a couple of paths for dialogue came up:
o GeoNames where (in spite of the lack of consensus both inside At-Large and the GAC), it might be worth exploring the extent to the overlap , the subset of issues that both might agree upon.In this connection, the default role of the 2012 AGB was mentioned, whether going back to it on many issues would be preferable compared to alternatives that have been proposed.
o Global public interests and safeguards (highly regulated sectors, verified TLD’s, registration restrictions, DNS abuse).This topic would include whether SubPro PDP has properly addressed the CCT recommendations that need to be implemented before another new gTLD round.
* The need for “getting our own act together” was recognized on issues where there is no internal ALAC/At-Large consensus at present.
Best,
Yrjö
-
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ GTLD-WG mailing list GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg
Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Same here. Greg On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 4:10 PM Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> wrote:
Hi Yrjo. I would attend such a call -- depending on the date and time.
Marita
On 9/16/2019 11:39 PM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear CPWG members,
Please indicate whether you would like to participate in an intersessional call with interested GAC members on policy cooperation (discussed on the CPWG call 28 August, see summary below) before ICABB66.
Best,
Yrjö
------------------------------ *From:* Yrjö Länsipuro <yrjo_lansipuro@hotmail.com> <yrjo_lansipuro@hotmail.com> *Sent:* Friday, September 6, 2019 4:57 PM *To:* cpwg@icann.org <cpwg@icann.org> <cpwg@icann.org> *Subject:* Cooperation with the GAC
Dear all,
With my thanks to all who participated in the discussion on policy cooperation with the GAC at the CPWG meeting 28 August, here’s my summary:
- Cooperation was seen as useful and expanding it into policy areas worth exploring, looking for issues where we agree and can find common interests. “How and where can the interests of the end users benefit from this cooperation” was suggested as a criterion to inform us about topics to embark on. Addressing issues where the opinions of the two groups are already close to each other is to be preferred. Trying to convince each other on issues we disagree upon is not a good use of our time.
- The need to retain our identity and to avoid perceptions of our being “an arm” of another stakeholder group was stressed. On the other hand, when our ideas with another group do align, we should not shy away from saying we agree with them.
- As to concrete issues for the policy dialogue with the GAC, the ones that already have been subject to discussions at numerous joint ALAC-GAC meetings – EPDP and SubPro – were mentioned. As a third topic, survival of multistakeholderism in the ICANN context was suggested.
- On SubPro, a couple of paths for dialogue came up:
- GeoNames where (in spite of the lack of consensus both inside At-Large and the GAC), it might be worth exploring the extent to the overlap , the subset of issues that both might agree upon. In this connection, the default role of the 2012 AGB was mentioned, whether going back to it on many issues would be preferable compared to alternatives that have been proposed.
- Global public interests and safeguards (highly regulated sectors, verified TLD’s, registration restrictions, DNS abuse). This topic would include whether SubPro PDP has properly addressed the CCT recommendations that need to be implemented before another new gTLD round.
- The need for “getting our own act together” was recognized on issues where there is no internal ALAC/At-Large consensus at present.
Best,
Yrjö
-
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing listCPWG@icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ GTLD-WG mailing listGTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.orghttps://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg
Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on._______________________________________________ GTLD-WG mailing list GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg
Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- Greg Shatan greg@isoc-ny.org President, ISOC-NY *"The Internet is for everyone"*
Yep, me too - pending on date/time I’d 'like to participate in an intersessional call with interested GAC members on policy cooperation’ before ICANN66 thanks Bastiaan *** Please note that this communication is confidential, legally privileged, and subject to a disclaimer: https://www.ams-ix.net/ams/email-disclaimer ***
On 17 Sep 2019, at 23:55, Greg Shatan <greg@isoc-ny.org> wrote:
Same here.
Greg
On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 4:10 PM Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> wrote: Hi Yrjo. I would attend such a call -- depending on the date and time.
Marita
On 9/16/2019 11:39 PM, Yrjö Länsipuro wrote:
Dear CPWG members,
Please indicate whether you would like to participate in an intersessional call with interested GAC members on policy cooperation (discussed on the CPWG call 28 August, see summary below) before ICABB66.
Best,
Yrjö
From: Yrjö Länsipuro <yrjo_lansipuro@hotmail.com> Sent: Friday, September 6, 2019 4:57 PM To: cpwg@icann.org <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Cooperation with the GAC
Dear all,
With my thanks to all who participated in the discussion on policy cooperation with the GAC at the CPWG meeting 28 August, here’s my summary:
• Cooperation was seen as useful and expanding it into policy areas worth exploring, looking for issues where we agree and can find common interests. “How and where can the interests of the end users benefit from this cooperation” was suggested as a criterion to inform us about topics to embark on. Addressing issues where the opinions of the two groups are already close to each other is to be preferred. Trying to convince each other on issues we disagree upon is not a good use of our time.
• The need to retain our identity and to avoid perceptions of our being “an arm” of another stakeholder group was stressed. On the other hand, when our ideas with another group do align, we should not shy away from saying we agree with them.
• As to concrete issues for the policy dialogue with the GAC, the ones that already have been subject to discussions at numerous joint ALAC-GAC meetings – EPDP and SubPro – were mentioned. As a third topic, survival of multistakeholderism in the ICANN context was suggested.
• On SubPro, a couple of paths for dialogue came up:
• GeoNames where (in spite of the lack of consensus both inside At-Large and the GAC), it might be worth exploring the extent to the overlap , the subset of issues that both might agree upon. In this connection, the default role of the 2012 AGB was mentioned, whether going back to it on many issues would be preferable compared to alternatives that have been proposed.
• Global public interests and safeguards (highly regulated sectors, verified TLD’s, registration restrictions, DNS abuse). This topic would include whether SubPro PDP has properly addressed the CCT recommendations that need to be implemented before another new gTLD round.
• The need for “getting our own act together” was recognized on issues where there is no internal ALAC/At-Large consensus at present.
Best,
Yrjö
-
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list
CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy ( https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ GTLD-WG mailing list
GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg
Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy ( https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on._______________________________________________ GTLD-WG mailing list GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg
Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- Greg Shatan greg@isoc-ny.org President, ISOC-NY "The Internet is for everyone" _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Dear Yrjö, I would like to participate, is this meeting planned with online interpretation? Hug! *Sergio Salinas Porto**Presidente Internauta Argentina - LACRALO/ICANN <https://atlarge.icann.org/ralos/lacralo>**Asociación Argentina de Usuarios de Internet <http://www.internauta.org.ar/>/FeTIA <http://www.fetia.org.ar/>**FUILAC- Federación de Usuarios de Internet de LAC <https://fuilac.org>**facebook: salinasporto <http://www.facebook.com/salinasporto> **twitter: sergiosalinas <http://twitter.com/sergiosalinas>**Mobi:+54 9 223 5 215819**"Ojalá podamos ser desobedientes, cada vez que recibimos órdenes que humillan nuestra * * conciencia o violan nuestro sentido común" Eduardo Galeano* El lun., 16 sept. 2019 a las 21:22, Yrjö Länsipuro (< yrjo_lansipuro@hotmail.com>) escribió:
Dear CPWG members,
Please indicate whether you would like to participate in an intersessional call with interested GAC members on policy cooperation (discussed on the CPWG call 28 August, see summary below) before ICABB66.
Best,
Yrjö
------------------------------ *From:* Yrjö Länsipuro <yrjo_lansipuro@hotmail.com> *Sent:* Friday, September 6, 2019 4:57 PM *To:* cpwg@icann.org <cpwg@icann.org> *Subject:* Cooperation with the GAC
Dear all,
With my thanks to all who participated in the discussion on policy cooperation with the GAC at the CPWG meeting 28 August, here’s my summary:
- Cooperation was seen as useful and expanding it into policy areas worth exploring, looking for issues where we agree and can find common interests. “How and where can the interests of the end users benefit from this cooperation” was suggested as a criterion to inform us about topics to embark on. Addressing issues where the opinions of the two groups are already close to each other is to be preferred. Trying to convince each other on issues we disagree upon is not a good use of our time.
- The need to retain our identity and to avoid perceptions of our being “an arm” of another stakeholder group was stressed. On the other hand, when our ideas with another group do align, we should not shy away from saying we agree with them.
- As to concrete issues for the policy dialogue with the GAC, the ones that already have been subject to discussions at numerous joint ALAC-GAC meetings – EPDP and SubPro – were mentioned. As a third topic, survival of multistakeholderism in the ICANN context was suggested.
- On SubPro, a couple of paths for dialogue came up:
- GeoNames where (in spite of the lack of consensus both inside At-Large and the GAC), it might be worth exploring the extent to the overlap , the subset of issues that both might agree upon. In this connection, the default role of the 2012 AGB was mentioned, whether going back to it on many issues would be preferable compared to alternatives that have been proposed.
- Global public interests and safeguards (highly regulated sectors, verified TLD’s, registration restrictions, DNS abuse). This topic would include whether SubPro PDP has properly addressed the CCT recommendations that need to be implemented before another new gTLD round.
- The need for “getting our own act together” was recognized on issues where there is no internal ALAC/At-Large consensus at present.
Best,
Yrjö
-
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on._______________________________________________ GTLD-WG mailing list GTLD-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg
Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
participants (5)
-
Bastiaan Goslings -
Greg Shatan -
Marita Moll -
Sergio Salinas Porto -
Yrjö Länsipuro