I think Michael’s suggestion is a good one. Assigning liaisons to this or other groups seems like it would be overly cumbersome and would result in creating more work with little added value. To a point Jeff made (I think on a different iteration of this thread), I agree that we can continue to rely on WG participants to report back to their respective stakeholder groups and constituencies and keep them informed. Responding to the RySG discussion group and letting them know exactly what areas the PDP WG would like input on would be a great way to streamline future communications and help avoid duplicating work. Having people who participate in both the discussion group and the PDP WG will also help with this, and I know we have a handful of engaged folks already doing so. A further suggestion would be to include in our response a request for the timeline on which the discussion group plans to cover the PDP WG’s topics of interest, to help the PDP WG leadership continue to keep this group’s schedules up to date. Thanks, Samantha From: <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Michael Flemming <flemming@brightsconsulting.com> Date: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 at 1:33 AM To: Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> Cc: "gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Fwd: Letter from the RySG's RSP Discussion Group I agree that these efforts can be done in parallel with one another and while there are objectives in common, the underlying objectives are different. Rather than establishing liaisons to work between groups, it may help if we send a formal reply back to the RSP DG. Within the reply we could outline the relevant work tracks where specific developments of the RSP DG may feed into further policy discussion within our group. I believe that would serve as a valid thank you and response. Regards, Michael Flemming On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 6:35 AM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com<mailto:carlton.samuels@gmail.com>> wrote: As I understand it the RSP DG offered to analyze and forward to the SubPro WG a "precis" of the analyzed outputs from their work streams. That on its face would be a good thing. However, looking at the work areas as described, I do not see all six (6) as relevant to the work of this SubPro WG. The RSP DG would be well advised to not only send the summary of their analysis but - assuming there is not one already embedded - a body to the WG for a deep dive of their summary, as relevant. -Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799<tel:(876)%20818-1799> Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround ============================= On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 7:46 AM, Vanda Scartezini <vanda@scartezini.org<mailto:vanda@scartezini.org>> wrote: Thank you jeff. Some groups from this discussion group will certainly be aligned with for instance, our track 1. May be the best way to go forward with this alignment is to have “liaisons” working in both groups to guarantee real exchange of ideas and avoid duplication of effort. Best to all Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253<tel:+55%2011%203266-6253> Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464<tel:+55%2011%2098181-1464> Sorry for any typos. From: <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman@comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com>> Date: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 at 08:56 To: "gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org>" <gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org>> Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Fwd: Letter from the RySG's RSP Discussion Group Forwarding this on to the entire New gTLD Working Group as an FYI. This most likely affects both Work Tracks 1 and 2, but I thought everyone should see it. Best regards, Jeffrey J. Neuman Senior Vice President Com Laude USA / Valideus USA 1751 Pinnacle Dr., Suite 600 McLean, VA 22102 Jeff.Neuman@comlaude.com<mailto:Jeff.Neuman@comlaude.com> +1 (202) 549-5079<tel:(202)%20549-5079> Begin forwarded message: From: "svg@milathan.ltd<mailto:svg@milathan.ltd>" <svg@milathan.ltd<mailto:svg@milathan.ltd>> Date: July 18, 2017 at 6:21:48 AM EDT To: Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman@comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com>>, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org<mailto:avri@acm.org>> Cc: "rsp-program-discussion@googlegroups.com<mailto:rsp-program-discussion@googlegroups.com>" <rsp-program-discussion@googlegroups.com<mailto:rsp-program-discussion@googlegroups.com>>, Graeme Bunton <gbunton@tucows.com<mailto:gbunton@tucows.com>> Subject: Letter from the RySG's RSP Discussion Group Avril, Jeff, Please find attached a correspondance from the Registry Service Provider’s Discussion Group. Graeme, please share this letter with the registrars as you see fit. Best, Stéphane Van Gelder Chairman and Managing Director Milathan LTD "Internet Intelligence - Strategic Advice" ———————— Discover The Milathan Post on http://post.milathan.com<http://post.milathan.com/> Follow me on Twitter: @stephvg ———————— _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg _______________________________________________ Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg