February 2014 - Gnso-subteam0b-policyimpl

MP3 Policy and Implementation Principles Sub Team - Thursday 06 February 2014
by Nathalie Peregrine Feb. 6, 2014

Feb. 6, 2014

Dear All, Please find the MP3 recording for the Policy and Implementation Working Principles Sub-Team call held on Thursday 6 February 2014 at 21:00 UTC: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-policy-implementation-20140206-en.mp3 Attendees: Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC Chuck Gomes- RySG Alan Greenberg - At-Large Avri Doria - NCSG Tom Barrett - RrSG Greg Shatan - IPC Michael Graham - IPC Nic Steinbach- RrSG Apologies: Mary Wong ICANN staff: Marika Konings Nathalie Peregrine ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Wiki page:https://community.icann.org/x/y1V-Ag Thank you. Kind regards, Nathalie Peregrine For GNSO Secretariat Adobe Chat Transcript for Thursday 06 February 2014: Nathalie Peregrine:Welcome to the PI Principles Sub-Team meeting of 6 February 2014 Nathalie Peregrine:Alan Greenberg has joined the room Nathalie Peregrine:Avri is not on the audio bridge Cheryl Langdon-Orr:include it as a principal Nathalie Peregrine:Michael graham has joined the AC roon Michael Graham:And calling in shortly. Michael Graham:In re: "Impact" analysis -- whether a process suggestion or a principle (and I would question whether it is a principle) could we say instead of "should be conducted" write "should be addressed in Policy Development and Implementation"? Michael Graham:P.S. I have audio but not mic Michael Graham:Is a) not the same as b) except as applied to implementation portion of equation? Avri Doria:i think it is really premature to accuse impact analysis of being dog whistle words. Greg Shatan:I hope that is true -- but I remember how "impact" was being used around Durban-time. Happy to keep it from being freighted with implicit meanings.... Greg Shatan:I actually agree with Alan. Michael Graham:I would agree with Alan. While the first sentence in a is fine, the second is a description how that principle should be implemented -- and should be left for discussion by WG. Avri Doria:NOT a BUZZ WORD Alan Greenberg:breaking up Cheryl Langdon-Orr:+++from me @avri Michael Graham:The PRINCIPLE is that the impact of Policy on stakeholders should be assessed. Marika 2:@Michael - I agree. How that is done should be for the WG to discuss (in my opinion) Alan Greenberg:@Michael, I agree Avri Doria:i cn liv with calling it an analysis of the impact it the term is so bothersone. but it has to be more that a consideration. Marika 2:What if we change a to 'Assessing the impact on stakeholders is an essential part of the policy development process' Marika 2:and leave it at that for now? Michael Graham:@Marika I would agree. Greg Shatan:New ICANN title: "Default Chair" Avri Doria:I prefer "an analysis of the impact ... Michael Graham:But it's not Chuck's default. Avri Doria:why is it not a principle? Michael Graham:Because it is a policy putting into effect the policy. Michael Graham:To clarify: I was referring to b) and c), not a) Avri Doria:i supported deconstructing the term. Alan Greenberg:Can't trust cunning lawyers! Michael Graham:@ Alan ;-) Cheryl Langdon-Orr:what about the non cunning sub species :-) Michael Graham:I would keep "all" insofar as this is an aspirational principle. Alan Greenberg:I like all, but accept Avri's comments and can live without it. Michael Graham:Either is good. Avri Doria:i can live with it. just think it doesn't add much. i cant even aspire to all. Nic Steinbach:strongly okay with either Tom Barrett - EnCirca:on hold Tom Barrett - EnCirca:my concern is that "all" will be an excuse to study the impact with no end Michael Graham:FYI -- IPC is now considering response to our Request for Input. Avri Doria:we can put the word fascilitate somewhere in the sentence. Avri Doria:of course spelled correctly: facilitate (?) Michael Graham:Have to drop off. Will listen to recording of rest of discussion. Tom Barrett - EnCirca:I read this as incorporating a requirement for checkpoints during the implementation where impact-related questions are asked. Tom Barrett - EnCirca:by the way, the 'conference call center' appears to be on break. I can't get through. Alan Greenberg:ok Alan Greenberg:litmus test Avri Doria:a non maskable interupt Alan Greenberg:Yup! Alan Greenberg:And I am old enoughto remember when they were called "traps". Which adds another connotation. Avri Doria:i tend to remember as nmi Nic Steinbach:i will have to setup away just for a second Nic Steinbach:step* Avri Doria:but i recognize trap Tom Barrett - EnCirca:bingo! Marika 2:Tom, could you please type your proposed wording in the chat? Alan Greenberg:I gather that this is a 90 minute call... Really wish the announcement would make it clear. Tom Barrett - EnCirca:there should be a mechanism to flag unanticipated outcomes that impact the community Avri Doria:2 sentences is ALWAYS better than one run on sentence. Avri Doria:alerted? Avri Doria:mechanismm to alert ... Tom Barrett - EnCirca: there should be a mechanism to flag and address unanticipated outcomes that impact the community Marika 2:Can you please mute your lines when not speaking Nathalie Peregrine 2:The operator has muted Tom's line as it was causing disturbance Nathalie Peregrine 2:*6 on the phone to unmute Tom Barrett - EnCirca:ok. i muted too Tom Barrett - EnCirca:i think it was me typing Avri Doria:But the flagging still may need work. Marika 2:@Avri - correct. The PDP Manual currently doesn't prescribe how an IRT would flag (e.g. does that need to be a consensus decision, if one member sees an issue it goes to the council, etc.) Marika 2:and what if an SO/AC wants to flag? Marika 2:all questions for the WG to address ;-) Avri Doria:the whole doc will need continuity testing. Alan Greenberg:Very productive meeting! Alan Greenberg:Thanks all Cheryl Langdon-Orr:good progress... thanks. bye Avri Doria:bye bye all

1 0

Revised Working Principles document for review and further discussion
by Mary Wong Feb. 6, 2014

Feb. 6, 2014

Dear all, Attached is the Working Principles document, revised to reflect the sub-team meeting earlier today. The latest revisions show up in green, but I've also kept last week's edits (in red and dark blue) to reflect the changes that have been made over the last two weeks. I have, however, removed comments that were dealt with and resolved by today's discussion as well as sidebars relating to formatting, to make the document easier to read. As noted on the call today, Avri will provide suggested language for what is now Proposed Policy Principle 2(b) relating to diversity of participation including the possibility of adding this as a footnote to the Overarching Principle rather than as a separate principle in this section before the meeting next week. It is expected that this next meeting will focus on discussion of the Proposed Principles relating to Implementation. Thanks and cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 Email: mary.wong(a)icann.org * One World. One Internet. *

2 1

Edits to Core Value 4 Principle
by Gomes, Chuck Feb. 6, 2014

Feb. 6, 2014

Avri, I don't think I have seen the edits you said you would send to the last principle under 'Policy and the Community'. It was item c. Core Value 4 in the previous version and is item b) in the latest version that was distribution after last week's Principles Sub-team call. Chuck "This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is non-public, proprietary, privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law or may be constituted as attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, notify sender immediately and delete this message immediately."

1 0