Dear Julie, DT colleagues, Many thanks to Julie for keeping us on track by circulating the agenda and reminders. As Julie has noted, our main substantive item is to consider whether the GIP is sufficient and appropriate in this particular situation. I personally am inclined to work with an existing process rather than design a new one. I look forward to hearing your comments and ideas. I am pleased to confirm having completed soon after our last call the action item to notify Council leadership of our anticipated timeline. The acknowledgement received from Council Vice Chair Rafik Dammak thanks us for our diligence and planning. Speak to you all soon, Heather On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 2:56 AM Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> wrote:
Dear all,
This is a reminder of the items for DT member consideration and discussion. See details below and attached documents.
Kind regards,
Julie
*From: *Gnso-bylaws-dt <gnso-bylaws-dt-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> *Date: *Thursday, March 28, 2019 at 6:13 PM *To: *"gnso-bylaws-dt@icann.org" <gnso-bylaws-dt@icann.org> *Subject: *[Gnso-bylaws-dt] FOR DISCUSSION: Section 18.12 -- GNSO Input Process & ccNSO Consultation Process
Dear all,
Per the action items below, DT members should note the following actions to prepare for the discussion of the draft guidelines for Section 18.12 at the next DT meeting on 10 April. DT members are encouraged to submit comments, suggestions, thoughts to the DT email distribution list for consideration in advance of the meeting.
*1. GNSO Input Process*: DT members should review the GIP and in the context of the initiation of a Special IFR on the IANA function. See questions below. The GIP is at: https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/annex-3-input-process-manual-18jun18-en.pd... [gnso.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_counc...> and attached in Word and PDF.
-- Is it useful, is anything missing -- a gap analysis. Should help to identify any GNSO-specific items. If we do need something else suggest what that could be.
-- Can we focus on just how to coordinate on just the consultation process. How formal do we need to be with that consultation process? Could be informal during development, but more formal for approval which you can enter into via the respective chairs.
*2. Coordination with the ccNSO Guidelines Review Committee: *DT members should think about what needs to be documented such as timing, consultation, and how to make a final joint decision.
Thank you for your consideration.
With best regards,
Julie
Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
*From: *Gnso-bylaws-dt <gnso-bylaws-dt-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> *Date: *Thursday, March 28, 2019 at 5:55 PM *To: *"gnso-bylaws-dt@icann.org" <gnso-bylaws-dt@icann.org> *Subject: *[Gnso-bylaws-dt] Actions & Notes: GNSO Drafting Team Meeting 27 March 21:00 UTC
Dear all,
Please see below the action items and notes captured by staff from the GNSO Drafting Team meeting held on 27 March 2019 (21:00-22:00 UTC). Staff have posted to the wiki space the action items and notes. *Please note that these are high-level notes and are not meant as a substitute for the recording, chat room, or transcript**.* The recording, AC chat, transcript and attendance records are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=105383460.
Best Regards,
Julie
Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
*ACTIONS & NOTES:*
*Actions:*
*ACTION ITEM re: Timeline* -- Heather will communicate the timeline to the GNSO Council leadership *(DONE 27 March by Heather – final is attached)*
*ACTION ITEMS re: Sections 4.2 and 4.3 Guidelines and Templates*
1. Staff will revise question 10 -- break into 10(a) and 10(b) asking for names and contact information of multiple entities. *(DONE 28 March by staff and attached in Word and PDF)*
2. Send for review to the list as a last call in 2 weeks, asking for objections but if someone objects to a provision they should propose text. *(DONE 28 March by staff)*
*ACTION ITEMS re: Section 18.12 Special IFRs *
*1. GNSO Input Process*: DT members should review the GIP and in the context of the initiation of a Special IFR on the IANA function. See questions below. The GIP is at: https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/annex-3-input-process-manual-18jun18-en.pd... [gnso.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_counc...> and attached in Word and PDF. *(FOR DISCUSSION ON 10 APRIL – INPUT TO THE LIST PRIOR IS APPRECIATED)*
-- Is it useful, is anything missing -- a gap analysis. Should help to identify any GNSO-specific items. If we do need something else suggest what that could be.
-- Can we focus on just how to coordinate on just the consultation process. How formal do we need to be with that consultation process? Could be informal during development, but more formal for approval which you can enter into via the respective chairs.
*2. Coordination with the ccNSO Guidelines Review Committee: *
-- Staff is checking with ccNSO support staff on timing. * (ONGOING)*
-- David McAuley will check with Katrina Sataki, ccNSO Chair. *(ONGOING)*
-- DT members should think about what needs to be documented such as timing, consultation, and how to make a final joint decision. *(FOR DISCUSSION ON 10 APRIL – INPUT TO THE LIST PRIOR IS APPRECIATED)*
*Notes:*
1. Updates to Statements of Interest (SOIs): No updates provided.
2. Review and approval of Draft Timeline:
-- Discussion on 18.12 Special IFRs will include a need to coordinate with the ccNSO.
-- Three-call rotation to complete/approve documents.
-- Substantive work done by end of May.
-- Package would go to the Council in time for the June document deadline (16 June). Suggest putting this on the agenda as a discussion item.
-- One of us to attend the June meeting (Heather volunteers).
-- Gives the time to go back to SGs and Cs.
-- Proposed vote in the July GNSO Council meeting.
*ACTION ITEM: Heather will communicate the timeline to the GNSO Council leadership.*
3. Review and Discuss Revised Draft of Guidelines/Templates for Sections 4.2 and 4.3:
-- Page 7, Question 10: on whether we can ask if you are bringing this Reconsideration Request on behalf -- insert a 10a include the names/contact on whose behalf you are bringing this request.
-- Question 6, re: Question 10 -- could we identify others in this question? The responses to the questions are slightly different.
-- If people disagree that you are bringing the claim on behalf of them then the claim is invalid. ICANN should confirm.
-- What if it can't be verified? This would be so rare I don't think we have to anticipate that this would happen.
-- Question 10 asked if you are bringing it on behalf of multiple entities, but we haven't asked if it is on behalf of a single entity. If there is even one more the question would be accurate.
-- Informal feedback to staff: the form is not as clear as it could be. Once we've used it more in practice it might be further improved.
-- A single entity can represent multiple entities.
*ACTION ITEMS: *
*1. Revise question 10 -- break into 10(a) and 10(b) asking for names and contact information of multiple entities.*
*2. Send for review to the list as a last call in 2 weeks, asking for objections but if someone objects to a provision they should propose text.*
4. Review and Discuss Approach for Guidelines for 18.12 Special IANA Naming Function Reviews (IFRs):
-- Bringing an IFR outside of the IFR process (a "Special IFR" and only in two instances.
-- Where a remedial action has already taken place but has not resolved the problem.
-- These are very limited circumstances.
-- The GIP GIP is proposed, but as a suggestion for the DT to consider. There might be other options, such as a small group within the Council, for example, or a drafting team.
-- Consider not reinventing the wheel.
-- Might require additional time, but perhaps allow for consultation with experts, research, etc.
-- Might be necessary given the IANA function.
-- ccNSO Guidelines Review Committee: May need a bit more time than in the GNSO.
*ACTION ITEMS: *
*1. GNSO Input Process: The DT member review the GIP and in the context of the initiation of a Special IFR on the IANA function. Staff will provide a link to the document. Is it useful, is anything missing -- a gap analysis. Should help to identify any GNSO-specific items. If we do need something else suggest what that could be.*
*-- Can we focus on just how to coordinate on just the consultation process. How formal do we need to be with that consultation process? Could be informal during development, but more formal for approval -- which you can enter into via the respective chairs.*
*2. Coordination with the ccNSO Guidelines Review Committee. *
*-- Staff is checking with ccNSO support staff on timing. *
*-- David McAuley will check with Katrina Sataki, ccNSO Chair. *
*-- DT members should think about what needs to be documented such as timing, consultation, and how to make a final joint decision.*
6. AOB: Next meeting Wednesday, 10 April 2019 at 21:00 UTC. _______________________________________________ Gnso-bylaws-dt mailing list Gnso-bylaws-dt@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-bylaws-dt