- Gnso-improvem-impl-sc - lists.icann.org

WG: Standing Committee Drafting Team (SC-DT)
by KnobenW＠telekom.de Feb. 21, 2011

Feb. 21, 2011

Maybe you've received this mail on the other mailing list. I was advised that this list (gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org <BLOCKED::mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org> ) is the one which should be used for this group. That's why I'm resending the E-Mail attached. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich ________________________________ Von: Knoben, Wolf-Ulrich Gesendet: Freitag, 18. Februar 2011 16:30 An: ntfy-gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org Betreff: Standing Committee Drafting Team (SC-DT) All: Please find attached a short summary from the call on Tuesday. As promised a first raw charter draft shall follow before the next call. --------------------------------------- Participants on the Call, Tuesday, 15 Feb, 13:00 - 14:00 UTC: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben - ISCPC Tatiana Khramtsova - Registrar Stakeholder Group Avri Doria - Non Commercial Stakeholder Group Philip Sheppard - CBUC ICANN Staff: Glen de Saint Gery Marika Konings Gisella Gruber-White Julie Hedlund Absent apologies: Ray Fassett - Registries Stakeholder Group Mary Wong - NCUC Rudi Vanscnick - At-Large Agenda and related summary 1. Clarifying the DT mandate * DT should draft a charter for a Standing Committee and present it to the Council for approval. The term "standing" seems appropriate rather than "steering" since underlining the * Reactive character of the SC (mainly) with tasks related to subsequent review of improvements that have been implemented from the PPSC and OSC (adopted by the council) and that presents any problems. Shifting the items in question to the new SC after having finished the related document/process by the PPSC/OSC and approved by the council. SC should pick up issues after the group concerned (WG, council etc.) has gained some experience with the process implemented. Periodic (preventive) reviews may also be useful to have. * It should be acknowledged that PPSC and OSC still have to finish tasks (maybe on different timescale) whereas the new SC should start working on items already finished (s.a.). Expiry of PPSC/OSC charters in June 2011 is obviously not acceptable. * The new SC should do the work by itself, not just identify the issues and "manage" them. 2. SC charter draft * W.-U. Knoben shall come up with a first draft on the basis of this discussion * Membership should be of broad participation of all constituencies/SGs. Council members should not be excluded. Call for membership as usual. Open question, whether a council member should chair the new SC. Built in a mechanism to the charter in order that members are being reconfirmed by their respective constituencies/SGs after a certain period. 3. Timing * Present a status report in SF. Motion deadline for SF is Feb 21 which is too early for a draft charter ready to go. 4. DT chair * Since there was no objection W.-U. Knoben shall continue to chair this Drafting Team 5. Next call * Monday, 12 Feb, 13:00 UTC Best regards Wolf-Ulrich

3 5

DOODLE / Next Drafting Team for New Standing Committee
by Gisella Gruber-White Feb. 17, 2011

Feb. 17, 2011

Dear All, Further to today's call, please complete the attached Doodle poll to schedule the next call of the SC-DT. http://doodle.com/bsm4ysh2hqnfarzr This Doodle poll will close on Thursday 17 February 2011 at 1800 UTC. Thank you. Kind regards Gisella

1 1

MP3 & Transcript/ Standing Committee Drafting Team (SC-DT) 15 February 2011 at 13:00 UTC
by Gisella Gruber-White Feb. 15, 2011

Feb. 15, 2011

Dear All, Please find the MP3 recording and transcript of the Standing Committee Drafting Team (SC-DT) call held on Tuesday 15 February 2011 at 13h00 UTC: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-scdt-20110215-en.mp3 On page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#feb (transcripts and recordings are found on the calendar page) Participants on the Call: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben – ISCPC Tatiana Khramtsova - Registrar Stakeholder Group Avri Doria - Non Commercial Stakeholder Group Philip Sheppard - CBUC ICANN Staff: Glen de Saint Gery Marika Konings Gisella Gruber-White Julie Hedlund Absent apologies: Ray Fassett – Registries Stakeholder Group Mary Wong - NCUC Rudi Vanscnick - At–Large ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards Gisella ---------------------------- Gisella Gruber-White Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: gisella.gruber-white(a)icann.org<applewebdata://0A9CDCAE-FD73-4641-AD85-92DB8E77ED67/gisella.gruber-white@icann.org> Tel: +44 7545 334 360 Skype ID: gisella.gw

1 0

Confluence announcement
by Glen de Saint Géry Feb. 15, 2011

Feb. 15, 2011

Dear All, As you might be aware, ICANN is in the process of transitioning all Socialtext Wikis over to Confluence Wiki (by Atlassian). Next up are the GNSO related workspaces (WG wikis, GNSO Council wiki, etc.) We expect this to be a gradual transition with a final completion date of 30 June 2011 at which stage all Socialtext Wikis will have been migrated and will retire. What does this mean for you? In due time you will be informed by the responsible ICANN policy staff that your respective workspace has migrated and you can start using the new Confluence wiki. At that stage you will also receive your log-in details which will give you editing rights to your respective Confluence pages. All the informationthat was available on the Socialtext wiki will also be available on the newConfluence site, albeit with a different layout format. How can you lean more about Confluence? To learn more about Confluence and the new functionalities offered, please see http://confluence.atlassian.com/display/DOC/Confluence+User%27s+Guide. Attached you will also find an introduction to the basic functions of Confluence. Confluence Training Session: For those interested, a training session will be organized at the next ICANN meeting in San Francisco. If you are interested to participate, please inform the GNSO Secretariat at gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> as soon as possible. If you already want to have a look at the new ICANN Community Wiki space, please see https://community.icann.org/. Please note that for now you'll only find the ALAC wikis and access to board resolutions there. To access the existing GNSO wikis at Socialtext, please go to https://st.icann.org/st/dashboard. We hope that the transition will be smooth, without any major interruptions, and anticipate that the move to Confluencewill enhance the options for on-line collaboration as a result of the enhanced features offered. If you have any questions, please let me know. With best regards, Marika

1 0

Steering Committee - Drafting Team
by KnobenW＠telekom.de Feb. 14, 2011

Feb. 14, 2011

All: >From the Doodle poll it seems that tomorrow, Tuesday Feb 15, 13:00 UTC would be the best time for a first 1 h call (sorry, Mary). Gisella will send out the call details asap. For this call I'd like to sugest the following agenda: 1. Roll call 2. Clarifying the DT mandate 3. SC charter draft 4. DT participation 5. Timing 6. DT chair I attach a collection of - OSC and PPSC charter elements helpful - basic ideas of an SC structure - aspects regarding the composition of the SC <<Steering Committee on improvements implementation - ideas-.doc>> Looking forward to talk to you tomorrow Best regards Wolf-Ulrich

1 0

Drafting Team for New Standing Committee
by KnobenW＠telekom.de Feb. 11, 2011

Feb. 11, 2011

All: Following my enthronement as chair of this Drafting Team ("SC-DT") at the last council meeting I'd like to call for a first meeting on Tuesday or Wednesday next week. Glen will send out a Doodle to fix a 1 hour slot and will provide you with the call details. Some basic information regarding the establishment of the DT: * So far we've the following subscriptions to the DT list: Ray Fassett Tatiana Kramtsova Rudi van Snick Avri Doria Philip Sheppard Mary Wong Myself * The respective council resolution outlines for the DT: "...to draft a charter for a Standing Committee to track and coordinate implementation of those OSC, PPSC and work team recommendations already approved by the Council and adopted, as recommended by the Communications and Coordination Work Team in its final report of 9 April 2010,,," * Staff made a suggestion for DT start-up: "it may be helpful to provide preliminary guidance concerning the purpose, scope, role, composition, etc., of the Standing Committee. For example, is it the Council's intention that the Standing Committee track/follow up on adopted GNSO Improvement recommendations or should its mandate also encompass operational issues arising from the implementation of the recommendations? The GNSO Council could consider asking the DT, as its first task, to outline alternative approaches that a Standing Committee could take and submit them for Council review and discussion along with a recommendation. Following completion of that task, the Council could then select the most appropriate model, which would guide the DT's charter development work." So "SC scoping" could be one major item to be discussed next week. I'll try to put some frame ideas in writing and share with you in advance in order to fuel the exchange. Regarding the timing it would be great to have something presentable to the GNSO (council) in San Francisco which may be challenging. Does it make sense to hold a F-to-F-meeting in SF? I've already asked Glen for a placeholder slot. But it depends on how many of us will be present. Pls. let me know your physical availability in SF. Any ideas/comments in advance to the kick-off call next week would be welcome. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich

2 1

is anything happeing
by Avri Doria Sept. 28, 2010

Sept. 28, 2010

Hi, Just got back from the incredibly intense IGF weeks and am trying to catch up of my ICANN responsibilities. I remember that I signed up for this group. I was quite please we had started this group which I assumed would be responsible for oversight of the many implementation facets of the improvement effort the GNSO has been involved in. I see stuff being implemented, but saw nothing from this group and was wondering if perhaps I had just lost track. Are we on? Are we functioning? do we have a group, a charter, a structure .... Will be be reviewing the staff's implementation plans before they are actually deployed so we can be sure the meet both the letter and spirit of the policy changes the council has been approving. Also I am expecting that in the act of implementing, various inconsistencies and other anomalies will occur. At some point the OSC and PPSC will declare themselves done with the work of original policy planning and the task would fall to this group to recommend any policy changes needed to fix those anomalies (or at least that is how I understood it). I assume that is what this group will be doing and from the motion, which I supported the NCSG council members voting for, I figure that is what the council approved. But nothing has happened yet, and the implementation, like practices and forms for proxy voting, are starting to roll out without this group having taken a look at the plans to understand their conformance with the policy recommendations. As I say, maybe have has my mind was elsewhere and I not noticed, if so someone please forgive me and fill me in. thanks a.

3 8

SC starting to do its job.
by Avri Doria Sept. 28, 2010

Sept. 28, 2010

Hi, I was given, as a reason for why the GCOT needed to do some rework on the GCOT recommendation on proxy and SOI/DOI that had already been approved by council, that this group had not yet been fully formed and could not, therefore, take on work. Since I firmly beleive that once a proposal has been made by a WT, approved by the OSC or PPSc and approved by the Council that it becomes the task of this group to review it if there are any problems or issues. Certainly the chartering steering committee can send it back to the work team if they do not approve - and we have seen that happen. And certainly the Council can send it back to the steering committee if they d not approve or have questions, and we have seen that happen. But once it is approved by the council, I do not think it appropriate to hand it back to the Work Teams. And certainly it can't be handed back directly by council to WTs, but must be handed back by the appropriate steering committee. Though I would also find it inappropriate to hand it back to the steering committees, which are supposed to be blinking out of existence taking on re-work stuff that has already been approved by the council. As I understand it, that is the job of this group. But in any case, to hand work back to the steering committees would require a council motion, would it not? So, back to my question, what is preventing this group from beginning to do its job? We have members (I assume, might be good to see a list of who is subscribed). We have a mandate from the council. We have a list. All we seem to be lacking is the catalyst to start and perhaps a first meeting to elect a chair (or co-chairs) and get started. As far as I can tell, the work is beginning to pile up. Thanks a.

1 0

Re: [gnso-osc-ops] DOI
by Avri Doria Sept. 23, 2010

Sept. 23, 2010

Hi, Actually less hypothetical than I thought. Writing the DOI convinced me that I should write the article, and am using the DOI as the introduction to the article. So at this point, I am writing an article on ICANN/GNSO policy processes, their development and implementation and may gain some advantage, or perhaps disadvantage, since advantage comes in both positive and negative directions. More than anything I am exploring the rules we make, the requirements we put on people and trying to follow them to their logical conclusions. Cheers, a. On 23 Sep 2010, at 10:04, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote: > Avri, > > This is rather hypothetical. You could just as well pre-confess to the possibility of using services originating from Elbonia (Lower), an underdeveloped economy, by an NGO not yet in existence, in a script not yet encoded in Unicode, in a language you don't yet know. > > I think it unlikely that Indians will be considered economically distinct from the rest of North America, or Appalachia for that matter, and that the "developing countries" language, which appears to be suggestive, not proscriptive, in Recommendation 20, the substance of the SOAC AG, will extend to applications intending to serve the needs of North American Indians, or marginalized non-indigenous populations. Therefore, I see no _real_ "interest" to declare in the SOAC AG context. Fee reduction, ability to apply for an ASCII string, a ᎣᏏᏲ string, and a ᓂᓴᓕ string (under either (a) or (b) approaches) would be wicked useful. But as these are improbable, there is no material "interest" in advocating these as generally available to applications that do meet the eventual interpretation of the characterization in Recommendation 20. > > So I _do_not_ declare an interest that does not currently exist, nor is likely to exist. > > To pick another scab, when eligibility closed for a certain unaffiliated elected position, I asked ICANN Counsel for guidance, as my employ with CORE ended three or four days after the date at which a would-be candidate had to meet the unaffiliated condition. My non-affiliation was _certain_ at a date only days after a date certain, for an election that would not take place for months, for a responsibility or office that would not commence until 1 January, 2011. > > The guidance ICANN Counsel offered was that status at the date certain was controlling. > > Therefore, something as certain as a prospective interest a week in the future, or the prospective lack of interest, again, a mere week in the future, was not relevant to the issue of eligibility to stand for election. > > I suggest that your approach is too speculative, though I'm not entirely happy with the guidance ICANN Counsel offered me only a few weeks ago, which is at least curable by revised SOI/DOI as material interests become actual rather than prospective. > > Eric >

1 0

DOI
by Avri Doria Sept. 23, 2010

Sept. 23, 2010

As the new GNSO policy requires written notification of DOI and specifically includes academic advantages among the examples of possible advantage, I hereby make the following statement: As a part time academic it is possible that someday I may possibly chose to write an article about ICANN and GNSO internal processes, their history, their development and/or their effects. Since such an article, if it were to published in a refereed journal or included in a conference proceeding, might count as an achievement within the university system and could even resort to financial advantage for my department within the Swedish educational system, I hereby register a possible academic interest in my participation in any and all of the process Work Teams and committee currently underway in the GNSO. I also point out that I am not currently working on such an article and that the possible writing and eventual publication of such an article in no way motivate my attendance or any contributions I may or may not make to such ICANN GNSO work. Though having written the DOI, it strike me that perhaps working on such an article might be interesting, thus making the DOI itself an activity that might become the impetus to create an interest.

1 0