Final Briefing Note
All, I have revised the briefing note to accommodate suggested changes / inputs. Some of the comments suggestions pertained more to our work as a group so we need to pick that up on list or in our meetings. Please see attached the final version in word (in case last-minute changes are needed) and in PDF (for distribution) formats. Thanks, Jonathan
Thanks, Jonathan, and apologies to all for not getting these suggested edits in sooner; I hope they can be taken into account. The edits relate to the survey, which I have understood as an important first step in determining whether the existing/current means by which GAC members are informed about upcoming PDPs at the initial stage has value/utility or needs to be reconsidered. It has been my impression that we intended to emphasize the importance of getting feedback on this stage from the GAC during our exchange in London. I have some additional thoughts to share on the presentation of the PDP portion of our work and will do so separately. Thanks, Suz From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 12:44 PM To: GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note All, I have revised the briefing note to accommodate suggested changes / inputs. Some of the comments suggestions pertained more to our work as a group so we need to pick that up on list or in our meetings. Please see attached the final version in word (in case last-minute changes are needed) and in PDF (for distribution) formats. Thanks, Jonathan
OK thanks Suzanne. Your edits definitely improve the document so definitely a case of better late than never. When do you think you can get the additional thoughts on the PDP track or are those not a condition for finalising the briefing? Looking at your note below, I suspect that they are intended for the presentation to be delivered in London. Am I correct? Key point is to get the briefing out ASAP i.e. sufficiently ahead of London. Jonathan. From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 19:31 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Importance: High Thanks, Jonathan, and apologies to all for not getting these suggested edits in sooner; I hope they can be taken into account. The edits relate to the survey, which I have understood as an important first step in determining whether the existing/current means by which GAC members are informed about upcoming PDPs at the initial stage has value/utility or needs to be reconsidered. It has been my impression that we intended to emphasize the importance of getting feedback on this stage from the GAC during our exchange in London. I have some additional thoughts to share on the presentation of the PDP portion of our work and will do so separately. Thanks, Suz From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 12:44 PM To: GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note All, I have revised the briefing note to accommodate suggested changes / inputs. Some of the comments suggestions pertained more to our work as a group so we need to pick that up on list or in our meetings. Please see attached the final version in word (in case last-minute changes are needed) and in PDF (for distribution) formats. Thanks, Jonathan
Thanks, Jonathan; glad to know the edits were helpful. I plan to look over the material tonight and since we have cancelled tomorrow's 9 a.m. call, I am shooting for a suggested approach tomorrow before noon my time; will that work? Cheers, Suz From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 4:58 PM To: Suzanne Radell; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note OK thanks Suzanne. Your edits definitely improve the document so definitely a case of better late than never. When do you think you can get the additional thoughts on the PDP track or are those not a condition for finalising the briefing? Looking at your note below, I suspect that they are intended for the presentation to be delivered in London. Am I correct? Key point is to get the briefing out ASAP i.e. sufficiently ahead of London. Jonathan. From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 19:31 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org<mailto:GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Importance: High Thanks, Jonathan, and apologies to all for not getting these suggested edits in sooner; I hope they can be taken into account. The edits relate to the survey, which I have understood as an important first step in determining whether the existing/current means by which GAC members are informed about upcoming PDPs at the initial stage has value/utility or needs to be reconsidered. It has been my impression that we intended to emphasize the importance of getting feedback on this stage from the GAC during our exchange in London. I have some additional thoughts to share on the presentation of the PDP portion of our work and will do so separately. Thanks, Suz From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 12:44 PM To: GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org<mailto:GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org> Subject: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note All, I have revised the briefing note to accommodate suggested changes / inputs. Some of the comments suggestions pertained more to our work as a group so we need to pick that up on list or in our meetings. Please see attached the final version in word (in case last-minute changes are needed) and in PDF (for distribution) formats. Thanks, Jonathan
Thanks Suzanne. Just checking, would like me to hold off on finalising the Briefing Note prior to you providing additional information / input? Jonathan From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 22:01 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Thanks, Jonathan; glad to know the edits were helpful. I plan to look over the material tonight and since we have cancelled tomorrow's 9 a.m. call, I am shooting for a suggested approach tomorrow before noon my time; will that work? Cheers, Suz From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 4:58 PM To: Suzanne Radell; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note OK thanks Suzanne. Your edits definitely improve the document so definitely a case of better late than never. When do you think you can get the additional thoughts on the PDP track or are those not a condition for finalising the briefing? Looking at your note below, I suspect that they are intended for the presentation to be delivered in London. Am I correct? Key point is to get the briefing out ASAP i.e. sufficiently ahead of London. Jonathan. From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 19:31 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Importance: High Thanks, Jonathan, and apologies to all for not getting these suggested edits in sooner; I hope they can be taken into account. The edits relate to the survey, which I have understood as an important first step in determining whether the existing/current means by which GAC members are informed about upcoming PDPs at the initial stage has value/utility or needs to be reconsidered. It has been my impression that we intended to emphasize the importance of getting feedback on this stage from the GAC during our exchange in London. I have some additional thoughts to share on the presentation of the PDP portion of our work and will do so separately. Thanks, Suz From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 12:44 PM To: GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note All, I have revised the briefing note to accommodate suggested changes / inputs. Some of the comments suggestions pertained more to our work as a group so we need to pick that up on list or in our meetings. Please see attached the final version in word (in case last-minute changes are needed) and in PDF (for distribution) formats. Thanks, Jonathan
Hi Jonathan, and apologies for taking longer than expected. I just sent an email out in the past five minutes. Please let me know what you think. One possible solution to avoiding a further delay in getting the briefing note out is to send the note out as it, with whatever edits you've received to date, and hold off on the attachments (write ups of the day to day and PDP work to date) pending further refinements. Would that help? Cheers, Suz From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 1:39 PM To: Suzanne Radell; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Thanks Suzanne. Just checking, would like me to hold off on finalising the Briefing Note prior to you providing additional information / input? Jonathan From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 22:01 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org<mailto:GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Thanks, Jonathan; glad to know the edits were helpful. I plan to look over the material tonight and since we have cancelled tomorrow's 9 a.m. call, I am shooting for a suggested approach tomorrow before noon my time; will that work? Cheers, Suz From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 4:58 PM To: Suzanne Radell; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org<mailto:GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note OK thanks Suzanne. Your edits definitely improve the document so definitely a case of better late than never. When do you think you can get the additional thoughts on the PDP track or are those not a condition for finalising the briefing? Looking at your note below, I suspect that they are intended for the presentation to be delivered in London. Am I correct? Key point is to get the briefing out ASAP i.e. sufficiently ahead of London. Jonathan. From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 19:31 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org<mailto:GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Importance: High Thanks, Jonathan, and apologies to all for not getting these suggested edits in sooner; I hope they can be taken into account. The edits relate to the survey, which I have understood as an important first step in determining whether the existing/current means by which GAC members are informed about upcoming PDPs at the initial stage has value/utility or needs to be reconsidered. It has been my impression that we intended to emphasize the importance of getting feedback on this stage from the GAC during our exchange in London. I have some additional thoughts to share on the presentation of the PDP portion of our work and will do so separately. Thanks, Suz From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 12:44 PM To: GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org<mailto:GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org> Subject: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note All, I have revised the briefing note to accommodate suggested changes / inputs. Some of the comments suggestions pertained more to our work as a group so we need to pick that up on list or in our meetings. Please see attached the final version in word (in case last-minute changes are needed) and in PDF (for distribution) formats. Thanks, Jonathan
Many thanks Suzanne and apologies for replying to earlier messages before I complete reading the whole thread .. If I understand your proposal correctly, it is indeed the intention .. The plan is to circulate a short, concise briefing note to update and set expectations of both the GAC and the GNSO .. I don't think, but I stand to be corrected, that we'll be attaching the full day to day and PDP documents .. Rather we will be preparing slides that reflect agreed parts of both work tracks .. Kind Regards --Manal From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Suzanne Radell Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 7:53 PM To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Hi Jonathan, and apologies for taking longer than expected. I just sent an email out in the past five minutes. Please let me know what you think. One possible solution to avoiding a further delay in getting the briefing note out is to send the note out as it, with whatever edits you've received to date, and hold off on the attachments (write ups of the day to day and PDP work to date) pending further refinements. Would that help? Cheers, Suz From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 1:39 PM To: Suzanne Radell; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Thanks Suzanne. Just checking, would like me to hold off on finalising the Briefing Note prior to you providing additional information / input? Jonathan From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 22:01 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Thanks, Jonathan; glad to know the edits were helpful. I plan to look over the material tonight and since we have cancelled tomorrow's 9 a.m. call, I am shooting for a suggested approach tomorrow before noon my time; will that work? Cheers, Suz From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 4:58 PM To: Suzanne Radell; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note OK thanks Suzanne. Your edits definitely improve the document so definitely a case of better late than never. When do you think you can get the additional thoughts on the PDP track or are those not a condition for finalising the briefing? Looking at your note below, I suspect that they are intended for the presentation to be delivered in London. Am I correct? Key point is to get the briefing out ASAP i.e. sufficiently ahead of London. Jonathan. From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 19:31 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Importance: High Thanks, Jonathan, and apologies to all for not getting these suggested edits in sooner; I hope they can be taken into account. The edits relate to the survey, which I have understood as an important first step in determining whether the existing/current means by which GAC members are informed about upcoming PDPs at the initial stage has value/utility or needs to be reconsidered. It has been my impression that we intended to emphasize the importance of getting feedback on this stage from the GAC during our exchange in London. I have some additional thoughts to share on the presentation of the PDP portion of our work and will do so separately. Thanks, Suz From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 12:44 PM To: GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note All, I have revised the briefing note to accommodate suggested changes / inputs. Some of the comments suggestions pertained more to our work as a group so we need to pick that up on list or in our meetings. Please see attached the final version in word (in case last-minute changes are needed) and in PDF (for distribution) formats. Thanks, Jonathan
Hi Suzanne, I believe we have three objectives: 1. Circulate the briefing note to ensure GAC & GNSO are as informed as possible and as soon as possible 2. Continue with refining our work ahead of London 3. Prepare a presentation for London Now, clearly 1-3 above have to be self-consistent and, to the extent that we can make use of the briefing note to prepare for key issues we want answers to, then the briefing note should do that. With that in mind, I have attached the latest version of the briefing note (downgraded to DRAFT J )with three highlights where I need a link if possible (from Marika?), certainly for A. With B & C, they currently point to the mailing list which may be adequate? Especially since we will continue to refine on lust A. Survey B. Work Track 1 C. Work Track 2 There is no current plan to provide attachments but rather links described above. Have a look at the attached and with the above in mind, please could you or Manal give your best steer as to whether or not we further refine the briefing note or send as is. Thanks, Jonathan From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 03 June 2014 18:53 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Hi Jonathan, and apologies for taking longer than expected. I just sent an email out in the past five minutes. Please let me know what you think. One possible solution to avoiding a further delay in getting the briefing note out is to send the note out as it, with whatever edits you've received to date, and hold off on the attachments (write ups of the day to day and PDP work to date) pending further refinements. Would that help? Cheers, Suz From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 1:39 PM To: Suzanne Radell; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Thanks Suzanne. Just checking, would like me to hold off on finalising the Briefing Note prior to you providing additional information / input? Jonathan From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 22:01 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Thanks, Jonathan; glad to know the edits were helpful. I plan to look over the material tonight and since we have cancelled tomorrow's 9 a.m. call, I am shooting for a suggested approach tomorrow before noon my time; will that work? Cheers, Suz From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 4:58 PM To: Suzanne Radell; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note OK thanks Suzanne. Your edits definitely improve the document so definitely a case of better late than never. When do you think you can get the additional thoughts on the PDP track or are those not a condition for finalising the briefing? Looking at your note below, I suspect that they are intended for the presentation to be delivered in London. Am I correct? Key point is to get the briefing out ASAP i.e. sufficiently ahead of London. Jonathan. From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 19:31 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Importance: High Thanks, Jonathan, and apologies to all for not getting these suggested edits in sooner; I hope they can be taken into account. The edits relate to the survey, which I have understood as an important first step in determining whether the existing/current means by which GAC members are informed about upcoming PDPs at the initial stage has value/utility or needs to be reconsidered. It has been my impression that we intended to emphasize the importance of getting feedback on this stage from the GAC during our exchange in London. I have some additional thoughts to share on the presentation of the PDP portion of our work and will do so separately. Thanks, Suz From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 12:44 PM To: GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note All, I have revised the briefing note to accommodate suggested changes / inputs. Some of the comments suggestions pertained more to our work as a group so we need to pick that up on list or in our meetings. Please see attached the final version in word (in case last-minute changes are needed) and in PDF (for distribution) formats. Thanks, Jonathan
I've added the link for the survey to the attached version. For items B and C, we could also post the latest version of the documents under discussion to the wiki (and create a separate page for each initiative) and link to that? Best regards, Marika From: Jonathan Robinson <jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com> Date: Wednesday 4 June 2014 13:52 To: 'Suzanne Radell' <SRadell@ntia.doc.gov>, "GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org" <GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Hi Suzanne, I believe we have three objectives: 1. Circulate the briefing note to ensure GAC & GNSO are as informed as possible and as soon as possible 2. Continue with refining our work ahead of London 3. Prepare a presentation for London Now, clearly 1-3 above have to be self-consistent and, to the extent that we can make use of the briefing note to prepare for key issues we want answers to, then the briefing note should do that. With that in mind, I have attached the latest version of the briefing note (downgraded to DRAFT J )with three highlights where I need a link if possible (from Marika?), certainly for A. With B & C, they currently point to the mailing list which may be adequate? Especially since we will continue to refine on lust A. Survey B. Work Track 1 C. Work Track 2 There is no current plan to provide attachments but rather links described above. Have a look at the attached and with the above in mind, please could you or Manal give your best steer as to whether or not we further refine the briefing note or send as is. Thanks, Jonathan From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 03 June 2014 18:53 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Hi Jonathan, and apologies for taking longer than expected. I just sent an email out in the past five minutes. Please let me know what you think. One possible solution to avoiding a further delay in getting the briefing note out is to send the note out as it, with whatever edits you¹ve received to date, and hold off on the attachments (write ups of the day to day and PDP work to date) pending further refinements. Would that help? Cheers, Suz From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 1:39 PM To: Suzanne Radell; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Thanks Suzanne. Just checking, would like me to hold off on finalising the Briefing Note prior to you providing additional information / input? Jonathan From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 22:01 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Thanks, Jonathan; glad to know the edits were helpful. I plan to look over the material tonight and since we have cancelled tomorrow¹s 9 a.m. call, I am shooting for a suggested approach tomorrow before noon my time; will that work? Cheers, Suz From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 4:58 PM To: Suzanne Radell; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note OK thanks Suzanne. Your edits definitely improve the document so definitely a case of better late than never. When do you think you can get the additional thoughts on the PDP track or are those not a condition for finalising the briefing? Looking at your note below, I suspect that they are intended for the presentation to be delivered in London. Am I correct? Key point is to get the briefing out ASAP i.e. sufficiently ahead of London. Jonathan. From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 19:31 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Importance: High Thanks, Jonathan, and apologies to all for not getting these suggested edits in sooner; I hope they can be taken into account. The edits relate to the survey, which I have understood as an important first step in determining whether the existing/current means by which GAC members are informed about upcoming PDPs at the initial stage has value/utility or needs to be reconsidered. It has been my impression that we intended to emphasize the importance of getting feedback on this stage from the GAC during our exchange in London. I have some additional thoughts to share on the presentation of the PDP portion of our work and will do so separately. Thanks, Suz From:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 12:44 PM To: GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note All, I have revised the briefing note to accommodate suggested changes / inputs. Some of the comments suggestions pertained more to our work as a group so we need to pick that up on list or in our meetings. Please see attached the final version in word (in case last-minute changes are needed) and in PDF (for distribution) formats. Thanks, Jonathan
Many thanks Marika .. I'm fine with your suggestion if ok with Jonathan and Suzanne .. Kindly make sure to remove the track changes before circulating .. Kind Regards --Manal Sent from my iPhone On Jun 4, 2014, at 2:47 PM, "Marika Konings" <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
I've added the link for the survey to the attached version. For items B and C, we could also post the latest version of the documents under discussion to the wiki (and create a separate page for each initiative) and link to that?
Best regards,
Marika
From: Jonathan Robinson <jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com> Date: Wednesday 4 June 2014 13:52 To: 'Suzanne Radell' <SRadell@ntia.doc.gov>, "GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org" <GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note
Hi Suzanne,
I believe we have three objectives:
1. Circulate the briefing note to ensure GAC & GNSO are as informed as possible and as soon as possible 2. Continue with refining our work ahead of London 3. Prepare a presentation for London
Now, clearly 1-3 above have to be self-consistent and, to the extent that we can make use of the briefing note to prepare for key issues we want answers to, then the briefing note should do that.
With that in mind, I have attached the latest version of the briefing note (downgraded to DRAFT J )with three highlights where I need a link if possible (from Marika?), certainly for A. With B & C, they currently point to the mailing list which may be adequate? Especially since we will continue to refine on lust
A. Survey B. Work Track 1 C. Work Track 2
There is no current plan to provide attachments but rather links described above.
Have a look at the attached and with the above in mind, please could you or Manal give your best steer as to whether or not we further refine the briefing note or send as is.
Thanks,
Jonathan
From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 03 June 2014 18:53 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note
Hi Jonathan, and apologies for taking longer than expected. I just sent an email out in the past five minutes. Please let me know what you think. One possible solution to avoiding a further delay in getting the briefing note out is to send the note out as it, with whatever edits you’ve received to date, and hold off on the attachments (write ups of the day to day and PDP work to date) pending further refinements. Would that help? Cheers, Suz
From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 1:39 PM To: Suzanne Radell; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note
Thanks Suzanne. Just checking, would like me to hold off on finalising the Briefing Note prior to you providing additional information / input? Jonathan
From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 22:01 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note
Thanks, Jonathan; glad to know the edits were helpful. I plan to look over the material tonight and since we have cancelled tomorrow’s 9 a.m. call, I am shooting for a suggested approach tomorrow before noon my time; will that work? Cheers, Suz
From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 4:58 PM To: Suzanne Radell; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note
OK thanks Suzanne. Your edits definitely improve the document so definitely a case of better late than never. When do you think you can get the additional thoughts on the PDP track or are those not a condition for finalising the briefing? Looking at your note below, I suspect that they are intended for the presentation to be delivered in London. Am I correct? Key point is to get the briefing out ASAP i.e. sufficiently ahead of London. Jonathan.
From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 19:31 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Importance: High
Thanks, Jonathan, and apologies to all for not getting these suggested edits in sooner; I hope they can be taken into account. The edits relate to the survey, which I have understood as an important first step in determining whether the existing/current means by which GAC members are informed about upcoming PDPs at the initial stage has value/utility or needs to be reconsidered. It has been my impression that we intended to emphasize the importance of getting feedback on this stage from the GAC during our exchange in London. I have some additional thoughts to share on the presentation of the PDP portion of our work and will do so separately. Thanks, Suz
From:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 12:44 PM To: GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note
All,
I have revised the briefing note to accommodate suggested changes / inputs.
Some of the comments suggestions pertained more to our work as a group so we need to pick that up on list or in our meetings.
Please see attached the final version in word (in case last-minute changes are needed) and in PDF (for distribution) formats.
Thanks,
Jonathan
<GAC GNSO CG - Pre-ICANN London Briefing Note - DRAFT - 04 June 2014 - MK.doc> _______________________________________________ Gac-gnso-cg mailing list Gac-gnso-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gac-gnso-cg
Yes please Marika. Please post the current versions and provide the links asap. That way, any changes will also remain current. Also, please also create a (currently empty page) and provide the link to it for the Liaison specification. Once the Liaison specification has been reviewed and/or agreed by the group, we can upload it to that page. Jonathan From: Marika Konings [mailto:marika.konings@icann.org] Sent: 04 June 2014 13:46 To: Jonathan Robinson; 'Suzanne Radell'; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note I've added the link for the survey to the attached version. For items B and C, we could also post the latest version of the documents under discussion to the wiki (and create a separate page for each initiative) and link to that? Best regards, Marika From: Jonathan Robinson <jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com> Date: Wednesday 4 June 2014 13:52 To: 'Suzanne Radell' <SRadell@ntia.doc.gov>, "GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org" <GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Hi Suzanne, I believe we have three objectives: 1. Circulate the briefing note to ensure GAC & GNSO are as informed as possible and as soon as possible 2. Continue with refining our work ahead of London 3. Prepare a presentation for London Now, clearly 1-3 above have to be self-consistent and, to the extent that we can make use of the briefing note to prepare for key issues we want answers to, then the briefing note should do that. With that in mind, I have attached the latest version of the briefing note (downgraded to DRAFT J )with three highlights where I need a link if possible (from Marika?), certainly for A. With B & C, they currently point to the mailing list which may be adequate? Especially since we will continue to refine on lust A. Survey B. Work Track 1 C. Work Track 2 There is no current plan to provide attachments but rather links described above. Have a look at the attached and with the above in mind, please could you or Manal give your best steer as to whether or not we further refine the briefing note or send as is. Thanks, Jonathan From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 03 June 2014 18:53 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Hi Jonathan, and apologies for taking longer than expected. I just sent an email out in the past five minutes. Please let me know what you think. One possible solution to avoiding a further delay in getting the briefing note out is to send the note out as it, with whatever edits you've received to date, and hold off on the attachments (write ups of the day to day and PDP work to date) pending further refinements. Would that help? Cheers, Suz From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 1:39 PM To: Suzanne Radell; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Thanks Suzanne. Just checking, would like me to hold off on finalising the Briefing Note prior to you providing additional information / input? Jonathan From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 22:01 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Thanks, Jonathan; glad to know the edits were helpful. I plan to look over the material tonight and since we have cancelled tomorrow's 9 a.m. call, I am shooting for a suggested approach tomorrow before noon my time; will that work? Cheers, Suz From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 4:58 PM To: Suzanne Radell; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note OK thanks Suzanne. Your edits definitely improve the document so definitely a case of better late than never. When do you think you can get the additional thoughts on the PDP track or are those not a condition for finalising the briefing? Looking at your note below, I suspect that they are intended for the presentation to be delivered in London. Am I correct? Key point is to get the briefing out ASAP i.e. sufficiently ahead of London. Jonathan. From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 19:31 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Importance: High Thanks, Jonathan, and apologies to all for not getting these suggested edits in sooner; I hope they can be taken into account. The edits relate to the survey, which I have understood as an important first step in determining whether the existing/current means by which GAC members are informed about upcoming PDPs at the initial stage has value/utility or needs to be reconsidered. It has been my impression that we intended to emphasize the importance of getting feedback on this stage from the GAC during our exchange in London. I have some additional thoughts to share on the presentation of the PDP portion of our work and will do so separately. Thanks, Suz From:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 12:44 PM To: GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note All, I have revised the briefing note to accommodate suggested changes / inputs. Some of the comments suggestions pertained more to our work as a group so we need to pick that up on list or in our meetings. Please see attached the final version in word (in case last-minute changes are needed) and in PDF (for distribution) formats. Thanks, Jonathan
Hi Jonathan, I've create a page for work track I (see https://community.icann.org/x/b6fhAg) on which I've posted both the document outlining the different options under consideration (latest version) as well as the draft liaison specification. These documents can be easily updated if further changes are made before London and are clearly marked as documents under review. Idem for work track II: https://community.icann.org/x/cqfhAg. Let me know if there is anything else you need at this stage. Best regards, Marika From: Jonathan Robinson <jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com> Date: Friday 6 June 2014 11:33 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>, 'Suzanne Radell' <SRadell@ntia.doc.gov>, "GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org" <GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Yes please Marika. Please post the current versions and provide the links asap. That way, any changes will also remain current. Also, please also create a (currently empty page) and provide the link to it for the Liaison specification. Once the Liaison specification has been reviewed and/or agreed by the group, we can upload it to that page. Jonathan From: Marika Konings [mailto:marika.konings@icann.org] Sent: 04 June 2014 13:46 To: Jonathan Robinson; 'Suzanne Radell'; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note I've added the link for the survey to the attached version. For items B and C, we could also post the latest version of the documents under discussion to the wiki (and create a separate page for each initiative) and link to that? Best regards, Marika From: Jonathan Robinson <jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com> Date: Wednesday 4 June 2014 13:52 To: 'Suzanne Radell' <SRadell@ntia.doc.gov>, "GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org" <GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Hi Suzanne, I believe we have three objectives: 1. Circulate the briefing note to ensure GAC & GNSO are as informed as possible and as soon as possible 2. Continue with refining our work ahead of London 3. Prepare a presentation for London Now, clearly 1-3 above have to be self-consistent and, to the extent that we can make use of the briefing note to prepare for key issues we want answers to, then the briefing note should do that. With that in mind, I have attached the latest version of the briefing note (downgraded to DRAFT J )with three highlights where I need a link if possible (from Marika?), certainly for A. With B & C, they currently point to the mailing list which may be adequate? Especially since we will continue to refine on lust A. Survey B. Work Track 1 C. Work Track 2 There is no current plan to provide attachments but rather links described above. Have a look at the attached and with the above in mind, please could you or Manal give your best steer as to whether or not we further refine the briefing note or send as is. Thanks, Jonathan From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 03 June 2014 18:53 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Hi Jonathan, and apologies for taking longer than expected. I just sent an email out in the past five minutes. Please let me know what you think. One possible solution to avoiding a further delay in getting the briefing note out is to send the note out as it, with whatever edits you¹ve received to date, and hold off on the attachments (write ups of the day to day and PDP work to date) pending further refinements. Would that help? Cheers, Suz From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 1:39 PM To: Suzanne Radell; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Thanks Suzanne. Just checking, would like me to hold off on finalising the Briefing Note prior to you providing additional information / input? Jonathan From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 22:01 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Thanks, Jonathan; glad to know the edits were helpful. I plan to look over the material tonight and since we have cancelled tomorrow¹s 9 a.m. call, I am shooting for a suggested approach tomorrow before noon my time; will that work? Cheers, Suz From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 4:58 PM To: Suzanne Radell; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note OK thanks Suzanne. Your edits definitely improve the document so definitely a case of better late than never. When do you think you can get the additional thoughts on the PDP track or are those not a condition for finalising the briefing? Looking at your note below, I suspect that they are intended for the presentation to be delivered in London. Am I correct? Key point is to get the briefing out ASAP i.e. sufficiently ahead of London. Jonathan. From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 19:31 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Importance: High Thanks, Jonathan, and apologies to all for not getting these suggested edits in sooner; I hope they can be taken into account. The edits relate to the survey, which I have understood as an important first step in determining whether the existing/current means by which GAC members are informed about upcoming PDPs at the initial stage has value/utility or needs to be reconsidered. It has been my impression that we intended to emphasize the importance of getting feedback on this stage from the GAC during our exchange in London. I have some additional thoughts to share on the presentation of the PDP portion of our work and will do so separately. Thanks, Suz From:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 12:44 PM To: GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note All, I have revised the briefing note to accommodate suggested changes / inputs. Some of the comments suggestions pertained more to our work as a group so we need to pick that up on list or in our meetings. Please see attached the final version in word (in case last-minute changes are needed) and in PDF (for distribution) formats. Thanks, Jonathan
Many thanks Marika From: Marika Konings [mailto:marika.konings@icann.org] Sent: 06 June 2014 11:39 To: Jonathan Robinson; 'Suzanne Radell'; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Hi Jonathan, I've create a page for work track I (see https://community.icann.org/x/b6fhAg) on which I've posted both the document outlining the different options under consideration (latest version) as well as the draft liaison specification. These documents can be easily updated if further changes are made before London and are clearly marked as documents under review. Idem for work track II: https://community.icann.org/x/cqfhAg. Let me know if there is anything else you need at this stage. Best regards, Marika From: Jonathan Robinson <jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com> Date: Friday 6 June 2014 11:33 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>, 'Suzanne Radell' <SRadell@ntia.doc.gov>, "GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org" <GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Yes please Marika. Please post the current versions and provide the links asap. That way, any changes will also remain current. Also, please also create a (currently empty page) and provide the link to it for the Liaison specification. Once the Liaison specification has been reviewed and/or agreed by the group, we can upload it to that page. Jonathan From: Marika Konings [mailto:marika.konings@icann.org] Sent: 04 June 2014 13:46 To: Jonathan Robinson; 'Suzanne Radell'; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note I've added the link for the survey to the attached version. For items B and C, we could also post the latest version of the documents under discussion to the wiki (and create a separate page for each initiative) and link to that? Best regards, Marika From: Jonathan Robinson <jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com> Date: Wednesday 4 June 2014 13:52 To: 'Suzanne Radell' <SRadell@ntia.doc.gov>, "GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org" <GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Hi Suzanne, I believe we have three objectives: 1. Circulate the briefing note to ensure GAC & GNSO are as informed as possible and as soon as possible 2. Continue with refining our work ahead of London 3. Prepare a presentation for London Now, clearly 1-3 above have to be self-consistent and, to the extent that we can make use of the briefing note to prepare for key issues we want answers to, then the briefing note should do that. With that in mind, I have attached the latest version of the briefing note (downgraded to DRAFT J )with three highlights where I need a link if possible (from Marika?), certainly for A. With B & C, they currently point to the mailing list which may be adequate? Especially since we will continue to refine on lust A. Survey B. Work Track 1 C. Work Track 2 There is no current plan to provide attachments but rather links described above. Have a look at the attached and with the above in mind, please could you or Manal give your best steer as to whether or not we further refine the briefing note or send as is. Thanks, Jonathan From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 03 June 2014 18:53 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Hi Jonathan, and apologies for taking longer than expected. I just sent an email out in the past five minutes. Please let me know what you think. One possible solution to avoiding a further delay in getting the briefing note out is to send the note out as it, with whatever edits you've received to date, and hold off on the attachments (write ups of the day to day and PDP work to date) pending further refinements. Would that help? Cheers, Suz From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 1:39 PM To: Suzanne Radell; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Thanks Suzanne. Just checking, would like me to hold off on finalising the Briefing Note prior to you providing additional information / input? Jonathan From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 22:01 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Thanks, Jonathan; glad to know the edits were helpful. I plan to look over the material tonight and since we have cancelled tomorrow's 9 a.m. call, I am shooting for a suggested approach tomorrow before noon my time; will that work? Cheers, Suz From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 4:58 PM To: Suzanne Radell; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note OK thanks Suzanne. Your edits definitely improve the document so definitely a case of better late than never. When do you think you can get the additional thoughts on the PDP track or are those not a condition for finalising the briefing? Looking at your note below, I suspect that they are intended for the presentation to be delivered in London. Am I correct? Key point is to get the briefing out ASAP i.e. sufficiently ahead of London. Jonathan. From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 19:31 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Importance: High Thanks, Jonathan, and apologies to all for not getting these suggested edits in sooner; I hope they can be taken into account. The edits relate to the survey, which I have understood as an important first step in determining whether the existing/current means by which GAC members are informed about upcoming PDPs at the initial stage has value/utility or needs to be reconsidered. It has been my impression that we intended to emphasize the importance of getting feedback on this stage from the GAC during our exchange in London. I have some additional thoughts to share on the presentation of the PDP portion of our work and will do so separately. Thanks, Suz From:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 12:44 PM To: GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note All, I have revised the briefing note to accommodate suggested changes / inputs. Some of the comments suggestions pertained more to our work as a group so we need to pick that up on list or in our meetings. Please see attached the final version in word (in case last-minute changes are needed) and in PDF (for distribution) formats. Thanks, Jonathan
Thanks Jonathan .. I'm fine with circulating the version attached with the links you have indicated .. Kind Regards --Manal Sent from my iPhone On Jun 4, 2014, at 1:53 PM, "Jonathan Robinson" <jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com> wrote:
Hi Suzanne,
I believe we have three objectives:
1. Circulate the briefing note to ensure GAC & GNSO are as informed as possible and as soon as possible 2. Continue with refining our work ahead of London 3. Prepare a presentation for London
Now, clearly 1-3 above have to be self-consistent and, to the extent that we can make use of the briefing note to prepare for key issues we want answers to, then the briefing note should do that.
With that in mind, I have attached the latest version of the briefing note (downgraded to DRAFT J )with three highlights where I need a link if possible (from Marika?), certainly for A. With B & C, they currently point to the mailing list which may be adequate? Especially since we will continue to refine on lust
A. Survey B. Work Track 1 C. Work Track 2
There is no current plan to provide attachments but rather links described above.
Have a look at the attached and with the above in mind, please could you or Manal give your best steer as to whether or not we further refine the briefing note or send as is.
Thanks,
Jonathan
From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 03 June 2014 18:53 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note
Hi Jonathan, and apologies for taking longer than expected. I just sent an email out in the past five minutes. Please let me know what you think. One possible solution to avoiding a further delay in getting the briefing note out is to send the note out as it, with whatever edits you’ve received to date, and hold off on the attachments (write ups of the day to day and PDP work to date) pending further refinements. Would that help? Cheers, Suz
From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 1:39 PM To: Suzanne Radell; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note
Thanks Suzanne. Just checking, would like me to hold off on finalising the Briefing Note prior to you providing additional information / input? Jonathan
From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 22:01 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note
Thanks, Jonathan; glad to know the edits were helpful. I plan to look over the material tonight and since we have cancelled tomorrow’s 9 a.m. call, I am shooting for a suggested approach tomorrow before noon my time; will that work? Cheers, Suz
From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 4:58 PM To: Suzanne Radell; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note
OK thanks Suzanne. Your edits definitely improve the document so definitely a case of better late than never. When do you think you can get the additional thoughts on the PDP track or are those not a condition for finalising the briefing? Looking at your note below, I suspect that they are intended for the presentation to be delivered in London. Am I correct? Key point is to get the briefing out ASAP i.e. sufficiently ahead of London. Jonathan.
From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 19:31 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Importance: High
Thanks, Jonathan, and apologies to all for not getting these suggested edits in sooner; I hope they can be taken into account. The edits relate to the survey, which I have understood as an important first step in determining whether the existing/current means by which GAC members are informed about upcoming PDPs at the initial stage has value/utility or needs to be reconsidered. It has been my impression that we intended to emphasize the importance of getting feedback on this stage from the GAC during our exchange in London. I have some additional thoughts to share on the presentation of the PDP portion of our work and will do so separately. Thanks, Suz
From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 12:44 PM To: GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note
All,
I have revised the briefing note to accommodate suggested changes / inputs.
Some of the comments suggestions pertained more to our work as a group so we need to pick that up on list or in our meetings.
Please see attached the final version in word (in case last-minute changes are needed) and in PDF (for distribution) formats.
Thanks,
Jonathan
<GAC GNSO CG - Pre-ICANN London Briefing Note - DRAFT - 04 June 2014.doc> _______________________________________________ Gac-gnso-cg mailing list Gac-gnso-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gac-gnso-cg
Hi again, everyone, and in view of the short time we have before London, I've taken the liberty of proposing some ideas that Amr and I have not had the chance to review separately (apologies, Amr, and please feel free to edit my proposal). In reviewing Marika's most recent rendition of the PDP chart, I think we might want/need to add back in the issues/questions that had been included in Mikey's original text in order for our respective communities to understand what we're trying to highlight. Isn't the point we're trying to highlight the absence of GAC comments on Issues Reports, despite the technical opportunity to do so (e.g. they're all posted for public comment)? If we're all in agreement that we're trying to engage the GAC at the earliest possible point, then it is precisely at this stage (e.g. request for an Issues Report and the Issues Report itself) that we need to find better mechanisms for doing so? I also have a question with regard to the "Opportunity for Input" section, which indicates that an AC may raise an issue for policy development. While this may have happened in the past in terms of an ALAC request, I'm not aware of any similar GAC request. It has always been my understanding that the majority of the requests for Issue Reports have come from the GNSO itself (or perhaps from the Board?); is there any way to capture that in the chart? And could/should the chart indicate the timeline for these first two steps: e.g. how long after a request for an Issues Report is made does the ICANN staff have to draft one? How long does the GNSO then have to determine its agreement with the staff draft, or to submit edits? After such edits are submitted, how long does ICANN staff have to circulated a revised version and when/how does the GNSO consider that version the final Issues Report that is posted for public comment? My sense is the more detail we can provide with regard to the timelines for these initial two steps, the closer we can get to answering the questions that Mikey included. Please feel free to comment/revise, etc. Thanks, Suz Suzanne Murray Radell Senior Policy Advisor, NTIA/OIA sradell@ntia.doc.gov 202-482-3167 From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 4:58 PM To: Suzanne Radell; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note OK thanks Suzanne. Your edits definitely improve the document so definitely a case of better late than never. When do you think you can get the additional thoughts on the PDP track or are those not a condition for finalising the briefing? Looking at your note below, I suspect that they are intended for the presentation to be delivered in London. Am I correct? Key point is to get the briefing out ASAP i.e. sufficiently ahead of London. Jonathan. From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 19:31 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org<mailto:GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Importance: High Thanks, Jonathan, and apologies to all for not getting these suggested edits in sooner; I hope they can be taken into account. The edits relate to the survey, which I have understood as an important first step in determining whether the existing/current means by which GAC members are informed about upcoming PDPs at the initial stage has value/utility or needs to be reconsidered. It has been my impression that we intended to emphasize the importance of getting feedback on this stage from the GAC during our exchange in London. I have some additional thoughts to share on the presentation of the PDP portion of our work and will do so separately. Thanks, Suz From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 12:44 PM To: GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org<mailto:GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org> Subject: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note All, I have revised the briefing note to accommodate suggested changes / inputs. Some of the comments suggestions pertained more to our work as a group so we need to pick that up on list or in our meetings. Please see attached the final version in word (in case last-minute changes are needed) and in PDF (for distribution) formats. Thanks, Jonathan
Suzanne, to clarify on the timing question, Staff has 45 days to prepare the Preliminary Issue Report but may ask for an extension if additional time is needed. Following that the Preliminary Issue Report is published for public comment for at least 30 days. The summary and analysis of public comments as well as Final Issue Report are expected to be delivered to the GNSO Council within 30 days of the closing of the public comment forum, although staff may request an extension. Following that, the GNSO Council is expected to consider the Final Issue Report and vote on whether to initiate the PDP at the subsequent Council meeting, although this consideration may postponed for one meeting (but no more). Please note that the Council usually does not suggest changes or edits to the Final Issue Report the report is considered 'as is', although if the Council decides to initiate a PDP, it can provide specific direction to the DT developing the charter for the PDP to take into account (if a DT is formed). If helpful, I can include the different timeframes in the flow chart. Best regards, Marika From: Suzanne Radell <SRadell@ntia.doc.gov> Date: Tuesday 3 June 2014 19:50 To: Jonathan Robinson <jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com>, "GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org" <GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Hi again, everyone, and in view of the short time we have before London, I¹ve taken the liberty of proposing some ideas that Amr and I have not had the chance to review separately (apologies, Amr, and please feel free to edit my proposal). In reviewing Marika¹s most recent rendition of the PDP chart, I think we might want/need to add back in the issues/questions that had been included in Mikey¹s original text in order for our respective communities to understand what we¹re trying to highlight. Isn¹t the point we¹re trying to highlight the absence of GAC comments on Issues Reports, despite the technical opportunity to do so (e.g. they¹re all posted for public comment)? If we¹re all in agreement that we¹re trying to engage the GAC at the earliest possible point, then it is precisely at this stage (e.g. request for an Issues Report and the Issues Report itself) that we need to find better mechanisms for doing so? I also have a question with regard to the ³Opportunity for Input² section, which indicates that an AC may raise an issue for policy development. While this may have happened in the past in terms of an ALAC request, I¹m not aware of any similar GAC request. It has always been my understanding that the majority of the requests for Issue Reports have come from the GNSO itself (or perhaps from the Board?); is there any way to capture that in the chart? And could/should the chart indicate the timeline for these first two steps: e.g. how long after a request for an Issues Report is made does the ICANN staff have to draft one? How long does the GNSO then have to determine its agreement with the staff draft, or to submit edits? After such edits are submitted, how long does ICANN staff have to circulated a revised version and when/how does the GNSO consider that version the final Issues Report that is posted for public comment? My sense is the more detail we can provide with regard to the timelines for these initial two steps, the closer we can get to answering the questions that Mikey included. Please feel free to comment/revise, etc. Thanks, Suz Suzanne Murray Radell Senior Policy Advisor, NTIA/OIA sradell@ntia.doc.gov 202-482-3167 From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 4:58 PM To: Suzanne Radell; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note OK thanks Suzanne. Your edits definitely improve the document so definitely a case of better late than never. When do you think you can get the additional thoughts on the PDP track or are those not a condition for finalising the briefing? Looking at your note below, I suspect that they are intended for the presentation to be delivered in London. Am I correct? Key point is to get the briefing out ASAP i.e. sufficiently ahead of London. Jonathan. From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: 02 June 2014 19:31 To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note Importance: High Thanks, Jonathan, and apologies to all for not getting these suggested edits in sooner; I hope they can be taken into account. The edits relate to the survey, which I have understood as an important first step in determining whether the existing/current means by which GAC members are informed about upcoming PDPs at the initial stage has value/utility or needs to be reconsidered. It has been my impression that we intended to emphasize the importance of getting feedback on this stage from the GAC during our exchange in London. I have some additional thoughts to share on the presentation of the PDP portion of our work and will do so separately. Thanks, Suz From:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 12:44 PM To: GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note All, I have revised the briefing note to accommodate suggested changes / inputs. Some of the comments suggestions pertained more to our work as a group so we need to pick that up on list or in our meetings. Please see attached the final version in word (in case last-minute changes are needed) and in PDF (for distribution) formats. Thanks, Jonathan
Just one comment since it's not yet distributed, aren't we going to include the link of the survey? Kind Regards --Manal From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 6:44 PM To: GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org Subject: [Gac-gnso-cg] Final Briefing Note All, I have revised the briefing note to accommodate suggested changes / inputs. Some of the comments suggestions pertained more to our work as a group so we need to pick that up on list or in our meetings. Please see attached the final version in word (in case last-minute changes are needed) and in PDF (for distribution) formats. Thanks, Jonathan
participants (4)
-
Jonathan Robinson -
Manal Ismail -
Marika Konings -
Suzanne Radell