Fwd: EPDP Team resources request
Hi all, Based on our deliberations during Kobe meeting, I sent this letter with request for immediate resources for phase 2 to GNSO Council for consideration. I also included a request for pre-meeting in Marrakesh. The request needed to be made now because the deadline (26th March) for such meeting requests but I still welcome input on whether or not to go ahead with the pre-meeting. Best Regards, Rafik ---------- Forwarded message --------- De : Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@gmail.com> Date: mar. 26 mars 2019 à 13:12 Subject: EPDP Team resources request To: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com> Cc: Council GNSO <council@gnso.icann.org> Dear Keith, As directed by the GNSO Council, the EPDP Team has commenced its work on phase 2 by focusing on the development of a work plan and timeline for the phase 2 deliberations. As part of these discussions, the EPDP Team is also expected to identify whether any additional resources are needed, beyond the traditional support that is provided to GNSO policy development activities, to meet the milestones and timeline proposed. The EPDP Team would like to recognize the critical importance of the additional resources provided for phase 1 in facilitating the deliberations and allowing the EPDP Team to deliver a Final Report within the timeframe provided. The EPDP Team wants to ensure that any specific resource requests are fiscally responsible by demonstrating clear alignment with the work plan and timeline, as such, some additional time will be needed to formulate any such requests. Nevertheless, there are some immediate resources that the EPDP Team considers crucial in supporting the initial stages of phase 2 and as such we would like to request that the GNSO Council petition the ICANN Board to provide immediate support for the following resources: · Continued availability of legal counsel, following the same process and approach in phase 1 (any questions are vetted through the legal committee); · Continued support for telecom services and transcriptions, but to reduce costs, transcriptions would have a 72 hour turnaround time (instead of 24 hour); · Mediation support for the EPDP Team meetings at ICANN65 in Marrakesh. Some have also requested that travel support is to be made available for ICANN65 for EPDP Team members who would otherwise not be able to attend and where no alternate is able to step in. We leave it up to the Council’s discretion to determine whether this is a reasonable request to include with the above. In order to take full advantage of the face-to-face opportunity that Marrakesh offers and minimize conflict with other meetings, we would also like to request support for organizing a one day face-to-face meeting on day zero of ICANN65. A request for such a meeting would need to be made by 26 March at the latest and is subject to approval by ICANN Org as well as availability of facilities. If such a request is granted, this would also require funded travelers to arrive a day earlier than normally foreseen, including an additional hotel night. We look forward to receiving your feedback. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this request further, please let me know. Best Regards, Rafik Dammak Interim Chair and GNSO Council liaison to the EPDP Team
Hi Rafik: Thanks for doing this - especially the request for release of resources in a way that enables the team to retain its momentum. I have been thinking about the June meeting in Marrakech, and it struck me that an extra day at the start of the meeting is not required. The Marrakech meeting is a Policy Forum, intended to provide extended periods to focus on specific policy initiatives. There is no opening ceremony, public forum, constituency day, etc. It seems that the policy forum was developed to address issues exactly such as the one before us. Can we not take 2 1/2 -3 days of the policy forum to have an effective face-to-face meeting (such as the ones in LA and Toronto)? It seems that this is the policy forum’s raison d’être. The cost avoidance would be significant. Hotel accommodations for 30+ (everyone would save their employers a few hundred bucks), plus ICANN support costs and facility rental. By spending 2 1/2 to 3 days in Marrakech (rather than one day) we would obviate the need for an immediate face-to-face meeting. The cost savings might go to the few without travel funding to Marrakech. Can we ask that the schedule accommodate this policy effort? Best regards, Kurt
On Mar 25, 2019, at 9:15 PM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
Based on our deliberations during Kobe meeting, I sent this letter with request for immediate resources for phase 2 to GNSO Council for consideration.
I also included a request for pre-meeting in Marrakesh. The request needed to be made now because the deadline (26th March) for such meeting requests but I still welcome input on whether or not to go ahead with the pre-meeting.
Best Regards,
Rafik
---------- Forwarded message --------- De : Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@gmail.com <mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com>> Date: mar. 26 mars 2019 à 13:12 Subject: EPDP Team resources request To: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com <mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>> Cc: Council GNSO <council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>>
Dear Keith,
As directed by the GNSO Council, the EPDP Team has commenced its work on phase 2 by focusing on the development of a work plan and timeline for the phase 2 deliberations.
As part of these discussions, the EPDP Team is also expected to identify whether any additional resources are needed, beyond the traditional support that is provided to GNSO policy development activities, to meet the milestones and timeline proposed. The EPDP Team would like to recognize the critical importance of the additional resources provided for phase 1 in facilitating the deliberations and allowing the EPDP Team to deliver a Final Report within the timeframe provided.
The EPDP Team wants to ensure that any specific resource requests are fiscally responsible by demonstrating clear alignment with the work plan and timeline, as such, some additional time will be needed to formulate any such requests. Nevertheless, there are some immediate resources that the EPDP Team considers crucial in supporting the initial stages of phase 2 and as such we would like to request that the GNSO Council petition the ICANN Board to provide immediate support for the following resources:
· Continued availability of legal counsel, following the same process and approach in phase 1 (any questions are vetted through the legal committee); · Continued support for telecom services and transcriptions, but to reduce costs, transcriptions would have a 72 hour turnaround time (instead of 24 hour); · Mediation support for the EPDP Team meetings at ICANN65 in Marrakesh.
Some have also requested that travel support is to be made available for ICANN65 for EPDP Team members who would otherwise not be able to attend and where no alternate is able to step in. We leave it up to the Council’s discretion to determine whether this is a reasonable request to include with the above.
In order to take full advantage of the face-to-face opportunity that Marrakesh offers and minimize conflict with other meetings, we would also like to request support for organizing a one day face-to-face meeting on day zero of ICANN65. A request for such a meeting would need to be made by 26 March at the latest and is subject to approval by ICANN Org as well as availability of facilities. If such a request is granted, this would also require funded travelers to arrive a day earlier than normally foreseen, including an additional hotel night.
We look forward to receiving your feedback. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this request further, please let me know.
Best Regards,
Rafik Dammak Interim Chair and GNSO Council liaison to the EPDP Team
_______________________________________________ Gnso-epdp-team mailing list Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team
The problem with that is some (many?) of us are also involved with other activites that fill the days. Alan -- Sent from my mobile. Please excuse brevity and typos. On March 27, 2019 2:52:18 PM GMT+09:00, Kurt Pritz <kurt@kjpritz.com> wrote: Hi Rafik: Thanks for doing this - especially the request for release of resources in a way that enables the team to retain its momentum. I have been thinking about the June meeting in Marrakech, and it struck me that an extra day at the start of the meeting is not required. The Marrakech meeting is a Policy Forum, intended to provide extended periods to focus on specific policy initiatives. There is no opening ceremony, public forum, constituency day, etc. It seems that the policy forum was developed to address issues exactly such as the one before us. Can we not take 2 1/2 -3 days of the policy forum to have an effective face-to-face meeting (such as the ones in LA and Toronto)? It seems that this is the policy forum’s raison d’être. The cost avoidance would be significant. Hotel accommodations for 30+ (everyone would save their employers a few hundred bucks), plus ICANN support costs and facility rental. By spending 2 1/2 to 3 days in Marrakech (rather than one day) we would obviate the need for an immediate face-to-face meeting. The cost savings might go to the few without travel funding to Marrakech. Can we ask that the schedule accommodate this policy effort? Best regards, Kurt On Mar 25, 2019, at 9:15 PM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@gmail.com<mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi all, Based on our deliberations during Kobe meeting, I sent this letter with request for immediate resources for phase 2 to GNSO Council for consideration. I also included a request for pre-meeting in Marrakesh. The request needed to be made now because the deadline (26th March) for such meeting requests but I still welcome input on whether or not to go ahead with the pre-meeting. Best Regards, Rafik ---------- Forwarded message --------- De : Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@gmail.com<mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com>> Date: mar. 26 mars 2019 à 13:12 Subject: EPDP Team resources request To: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>> Cc: Council GNSO <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Dear Keith, As directed by the GNSO Council, the EPDP Team has commenced its work on phase 2 by focusing on the development of a work plan and timeline for the phase 2 deliberations. As part of these discussions, the EPDP Team is also expected to identify whether any additional resources are needed, beyond the traditional support that is provided to GNSO policy development activities, to meet the milestones and timeline proposed. The EPDP Team would like to recognize the critical importance of the additional resources provided for phase 1 in facilitating the deliberations and allowing the EPDP Team to deliver a Final Report within the timeframe provided. The EPDP Team wants to ensure that any specific resource requests are fiscally responsible by demonstrating clear alignment with the work plan and timeline, as such, some additional time will be needed to formulate any such requests. Nevertheless, there are some immediate resources that the EPDP Team considers crucial in supporting the initial stages of phase 2 and as such we would like to request that the GNSO Council petition the ICANN Board to provide immediate support for the following resources: • Continued availability of legal counsel, following the same process and approach in phase 1 (any questions are vetted through the legal committee); • Continued support for telecom services and transcriptions, but to reduce costs, transcriptions would have a 72 hour turnaround time (instead of 24 hour); • Mediation support for the EPDP Team meetings at ICANN65 in Marrakesh. Some have also requested that travel support is to be made available for ICANN65 for EPDP Team members who would otherwise not be able to attend and where no alternate is able to step in. We leave it up to the Council’s discretion to determine whether this is a reasonable request to include with the above. In order to take full advantage of the face-to-face opportunity that Marrakesh offers and minimize conflict with other meetings, we would also like to request support for organizing a one day face-to-face meeting on day zero of ICANN65. A request for such a meeting would need to be made by 26 March at the latest and is subject to approval by ICANN Org as well as availability of facilities. If such a request is granted, this would also require funded travelers to arrive a day earlier than normally foreseen, including an additional hotel night. We look forward to receiving your feedback. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this request further, please let me know. Best Regards, Rafik Dammak Interim Chair and GNSO Council liaison to the EPDP Team _______________________________________________ Gnso-epdp-team mailing list Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team
That is a good point, Alan. I would also note that venue space is likely to be limited, with the GNSO room (which we typically use) likely to be in use by the GNSO Council, RPM working group, and Subsequent Procedures working group, if not others, during the four day meeting. So we may not even have the space available for a full-day meeting unless it happens on Day 0. Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Wednesday, March 27, 2019 6:56 AM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
The problem with that is some (many?) of us are also involved with other activites that fill the days.
Alan -- Sent from my mobile. Please excuse brevity and typos.
On March 27, 2019 2:52:18 PM GMT+09:00, Kurt Pritz <kurt@kjpritz.com> wrote:
Hi Rafik:
Thanks for doing this - especially the request for release of resources in a way that enables the team to retain its momentum.
I have been thinking about the June meeting in Marrakech, and it struck me that an extra day at the start of the meeting is not required. The Marrakech meeting is a Policy Forum, intended to provide extended periods to focus on specific policy initiatives. There is no opening ceremony, public forum, constituency day, etc.
It seems that the policy forum was developed to address issues exactly such as the one before us. Can we not take 2 1/2 -3 days of the policy forum to have an effective face-to-face meeting (such as the ones in LA and Toronto)? It seems that this is the policy forum’s raison d’être.
The cost avoidance would be significant. Hotel accommodations for 30+ (everyone would save their employers a few hundred bucks), plus ICANN support costs and facility rental. By spending 2 1/2 to 3 days in Marrakech (rather than one day) we would obviate the need for an immediate face-to-face meeting.
The cost savings might go to the few without travel funding to Marrakech.
Can we ask that the schedule accommodate this policy effort?
Best regards,
Kurt
On Mar 25, 2019, at 9:15 PM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
Based on our deliberations during Kobe meeting, I sent this letter with request for immediate resources for phase 2 to GNSO Council for consideration.
I also included a request for pre-meeting in Marrakesh. The request needed to be made now because the deadline (26th March) for such meeting requests but I still welcome input on whether or not to go ahead with the pre-meeting.
Best Regards,
Rafik
---------- Forwarded message --------- De : Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@gmail.com> Date: mar. 26 mars 2019 à 13:12 Subject: EPDP Team resources request To: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com> Cc: Council GNSO <council@gnso.icann.org>
Dear Keith,
As directed by the GNSO Council, the EPDP Team has commenced its work on phase 2 by focusing on the development of a work plan and timeline for the phase 2 deliberations.
As part of these discussions, the EPDP Team is also expected to identify whether any additional resources are needed, beyond the traditional support that is provided to GNSO policy development activities, to meet the milestones and timeline proposed. The EPDP Team would like to recognize the critical importance of the additional resources provided for phase 1 in facilitating the deliberations and allowing the EPDP Team to deliver a Final Report within the timeframe provided.
The EPDP Team wants to ensure that any specific resource requests are fiscally responsible by demonstrating clear alignment with the work plan and timeline, as such, some additional time will be needed to formulate any such requests. Nevertheless, there are some immediate resources that the EPDP Team considers crucial in supporting the initial stages of phase 2 and as such we would like to request that the GNSO Council petition the ICANN Board to provide immediate support for the following resources:
· Continued availability of legal counsel, following the same process and approach in phase 1 (any questions are vetted through the legal committee); · Continued support for telecom services and transcriptions, but to reduce costs, transcriptions would have a 72 hour turnaround time (instead of 24 hour); · Mediation support for the EPDP Team meetings at ICANN65 in Marrakesh.
Some have also requested that travel support is to be made available for ICANN65 for EPDP Team members who would otherwise not be able to attend and where no alternate is able to step in. We leave it up to the Council’s discretion to determine whether this is a reasonable request to include with the above.
In order to take full advantage of the face-to-face opportunity that Marrakesh offers and minimize conflict with other meetings, we would also like to request support for organizing a one day face-to-face meeting on day zero of ICANN65. A request for such a meeting would need to be made by 26 March at the latest and is subject to approval by ICANN Org as well as availability of facilities. If such a request is granted, this would also require funded travelers to arrive a day earlier than normally foreseen, including an additional hotel night.
We look forward to receiving your feedback. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this request further, please let me know.
Best Regards,
Rafik Dammak Interim Chair and GNSO Council liaison to the EPDP Team
_______________________________________________ Gnso-epdp-team mailing list Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team
Hi, Any decision to hold a day zero meeting needs to be confirmed as soon as possible to allow for proper advanced planning. Once (cheaper) airfare is booked it is often impossible/very costly to change. Alex On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 9:54 AM Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> wrote:
That is a good point, Alan.
I would also note that venue space is likely to be limited, with the GNSO room (which we typically use) likely to be in use by the GNSO Council, RPM working group, and Subsequent Procedures working group, if not others, during the four day meeting. So we may not even have the space available for a full-day meeting unless it happens on Day 0.
Best wishes,
Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Wednesday, March 27, 2019 6:56 AM, Alan Greenberg < alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
The problem with that is some (many?) of us are also involved with other activites that fill the days.
Alan -- Sent from my mobile. Please excuse brevity and typos.
On March 27, 2019 2:52:18 PM GMT+09:00, Kurt Pritz <kurt@kjpritz.com> wrote:
Hi Rafik:
Thanks for doing this - especially the request for release of resources in a way that enables the team to retain its momentum.
I have been thinking about the June meeting in Marrakech, and it struck me that an extra day at the start of the meeting is not required. The Marrakech meeting is a Policy Forum, intended to provide extended periods to focus on specific policy initiatives. There is no opening ceremony, public forum, constituency day, etc.
It seems that the policy forum was developed to address issues exactly such as the one before us. Can we not take 2 1/2 -3 days of the policy forum to have an effective face-to-face meeting (such as the ones in LA and Toronto)? It seems that this is the policy forum’s raison d’être.
The cost avoidance would be significant. Hotel accommodations for 30+ (everyone would save their employers a few hundred bucks), plus ICANN support costs and facility rental. By spending 2 1/2 to 3 days in Marrakech (rather than one day) we would obviate the need for an immediate face-to-face meeting.
The cost savings might go to the few without travel funding to Marrakech.
Can we ask that the schedule accommodate this policy effort?
Best regards,
Kurt
On Mar 25, 2019, at 9:15 PM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
Based on our deliberations during Kobe meeting, I sent this letter with request for immediate resources for phase 2 to GNSO Council for consideration.
I also included a request for pre-meeting in Marrakesh. The request needed to be made now because the deadline (26th March) for such meeting requests but I still welcome input on whether or not to go ahead with the pre-meeting.
Best Regards,
Rafik
---------- Forwarded message --------- De : *Rafik Dammak* <rafik.dammak@gmail.com> Date: mar. 26 mars 2019 à 13:12 Subject: EPDP Team resources request To: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com> Cc: Council GNSO <council@gnso.icann.org>
Dear Keith,
As directed by the GNSO Council, the EPDP Team has commenced its work on phase 2 by focusing on the development of a work plan and timeline for the phase 2 deliberations.
As part of these discussions, the EPDP Team is also expected to identify whether any additional resources are needed, beyond the traditional support that is provided to GNSO policy development activities, to meet the milestones and timeline proposed. The EPDP Team would like to recognize the critical importance of the additional resources provided for phase 1 in facilitating the deliberations and allowing the EPDP Team to deliver a Final Report within the timeframe provided.
The EPDP Team wants to ensure that any specific resource requests are fiscally responsible by demonstrating clear alignment with the work plan and timeline, as such, some additional time will be needed to formulate any such requests. Nevertheless, there are some immediate resources that the EPDP Team considers crucial in supporting the initial stages of phase 2 and as such we would like to request that the GNSO Council petition the ICANN Board to provide immediate support for the following resources:
· Continued availability of legal counsel, following the same process and approach in phase 1 (any questions are vetted through the legal committee); · Continued support for telecom services and transcriptions, but to reduce costs, transcriptions would have a 72 hour turnaround time (instead of 24 hour); · Mediation support for the EPDP Team meetings at ICANN65 in Marrakesh.
Some have also requested that travel support is to be made available for ICANN65 for EPDP Team members who would otherwise not be able to attend and where no alternate is able to step in. We leave it up to the Council’s discretion to determine whether this is a reasonable request to include with the above.
In order to take full advantage of the face-to-face opportunity that Marrakesh offers and minimize conflict with other meetings, we would also like to request support for organizing a one day face-to-face meeting on day zero of ICANN65. A request for such a meeting would need to be made by 26 March at the latest and is subject to approval by ICANN Org as well as availability of facilities. If such a request is granted, this would also require funded travelers to arrive a day earlier than normally foreseen, including an additional hotel night.
We look forward to receiving your feedback. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this request further, please let me know.
Best Regards,
Rafik Dammak Interim Chair and GNSO Council liaison to the EPDP Team
_______________________________________________ Gnso-epdp-team mailing list Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team
_______________________________________________ Gnso-epdp-team mailing list Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team
Want to echo what Alex has said here…in addition to air bookings, hotel bookings will also be a challenge to update once made with availability already being an issue at the venue hotel. I understand we’re doing all of this planning without a Chair seated, but obviously the sooner we can confirm this stuff the better. Miss you all ☺ Regards, Matt From: Gnso-epdp-team <gnso-epdp-team-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alex Deacon <alex@colevalleyconsulting.com> Date: Wednesday, March 27, 2019 at 11:09 AM To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Cc: "gnso-epdp-team@icann.org" <gnso-epdp-team@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] Fwd: EPDP Team resources request Hi, Any decision to hold a day zero meeting needs to be confirmed as soon as possible to allow for proper advanced planning. Once (cheaper) airfare is booked it is often impossible/very costly to change. Alex On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 9:54 AM Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com<mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>> wrote: That is a good point, Alan. I would also note that venue space is likely to be limited, with the GNSO room (which we typically use) likely to be in use by the GNSO Council, RPM working group, and Subsequent Procedures working group, if not others, during the four day meeting. So we may not even have the space available for a full-day meeting unless it happens on Day 0. Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Wednesday, March 27, 2019 6:56 AM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>> wrote: The problem with that is some (many?) of us are also involved with other activites that fill the days. Alan -- Sent from my mobile. Please excuse brevity and typos. On March 27, 2019 2:52:18 PM GMT+09:00, Kurt Pritz <kurt@kjpritz.com<mailto:kurt@kjpritz.com>> wrote: Hi Rafik: Thanks for doing this - especially the request for release of resources in a way that enables the team to retain its momentum. I have been thinking about the June meeting in Marrakech, and it struck me that an extra day at the start of the meeting is not required. The Marrakech meeting is a Policy Forum, intended to provide extended periods to focus on specific policy initiatives. There is no opening ceremony, public forum, constituency day, etc. It seems that the policy forum was developed to address issues exactly such as the one before us. Can we not take 2 1/2 -3 days of the policy forum to have an effective face-to-face meeting (such as the ones in LA and Toronto)? It seems that this is the policy forum’s raison d’être. The cost avoidance would be significant. Hotel accommodations for 30+ (everyone would save their employers a few hundred bucks), plus ICANN support costs and facility rental. By spending 2 1/2 to 3 days in Marrakech (rather than one day) we would obviate the need for an immediate face-to-face meeting. The cost savings might go to the few without travel funding to Marrakech. Can we ask that the schedule accommodate this policy effort? Best regards, Kurt On Mar 25, 2019, at 9:15 PM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@gmail.com<mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi all, Based on our deliberations during Kobe meeting, I sent this letter with request for immediate resources for phase 2 to GNSO Council for consideration. I also included a request for pre-meeting in Marrakesh. The request needed to be made now because the deadline (26th March) for such meeting requests but I still welcome input on whether or not to go ahead with the pre-meeting. Best Regards, Rafik ---------- Forwarded message --------- De : Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@gmail.com<mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com>> Date: mar. 26 mars 2019 à 13:12 Subject: EPDP Team resources request To: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>> Cc: Council GNSO <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Dear Keith, As directed by the GNSO Council, the EPDP Team has commenced its work on phase 2 by focusing on the development of a work plan and timeline for the phase 2 deliberations. As part of these discussions, the EPDP Team is also expected to identify whether any additional resources are needed, beyond the traditional support that is provided to GNSO policy development activities, to meet the milestones and timeline proposed. The EPDP Team would like to recognize the critical importance of the additional resources provided for phase 1 in facilitating the deliberations and allowing the EPDP Team to deliver a Final Report within the timeframe provided. The EPDP Team wants to ensure that any specific resource requests are fiscally responsible by demonstrating clear alignment with the work plan and timeline, as such, some additional time will be needed to formulate any such requests. Nevertheless, there are some immediate resources that the EPDP Team considers crucial in supporting the initial stages of phase 2 and as such we would like to request that the GNSO Council petition the ICANN Board to provide immediate support for the following resources: • Continued availability of legal counsel, following the same process and approach in phase 1 (any questions are vetted through the legal committee); • Continued support for telecom services and transcriptions, but to reduce costs, transcriptions would have a 72 hour turnaround time (instead of 24 hour); • Mediation support for the EPDP Team meetings at ICANN65 in Marrakesh. Some have also requested that travel support is to be made available for ICANN65 for EPDP Team members who would otherwise not be able to attend and where no alternate is able to step in. We leave it up to the Council’s discretion to determine whether this is a reasonable request to include with the above. In order to take full advantage of the face-to-face opportunity that Marrakesh offers and minimize conflict with other meetings, we would also like to request support for organizing a one day face-to-face meeting on day zero of ICANN65. A request for such a meeting would need to be made by 26 March at the latest and is subject to approval by ICANN Org as well as availability of facilities. If such a request is granted, this would also require funded travelers to arrive a day earlier than normally foreseen, including an additional hotel night. We look forward to receiving your feedback. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this request further, please let me know. Best Regards, Rafik Dammak Interim Chair and GNSO Council liaison to the EPDP Team _______________________________________________ Gnso-epdp-team mailing list Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team _______________________________________________ Gnso-epdp-team mailing list Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team
participants (6)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Alex Deacon -
Ayden Férdeline -
Kurt Pritz -
Matt Serlin -
Rafik Dammak