IFRT kick-off call | December 3rd @ 1700 UTC
***STARTING IN 5 MINUTES*** Dear IFRT, As a follow up to Frederico’s email from November 14th, we would like to schedule the review team kick-off call for December 3rd at 1700 UTC. Please find the draft agenda below: 1. Agenda Bashing 2. Introductions Proposed Rules of Engagement: https://community.icann.org/display/ifr/Rules+of+Engagement Proposed Regular Meetings schedule Every two weeks Mandate: https://community.icann.org/display/ifr/Mandate Special attention to Sections 18.3 and 18.4 ICANN/PTI Contract: https://community.icann.org/display/ifr/IFR+Bylaws+and+IANA+Naming+Contract IANA Naming Function Contract / Amendment 1 / SLA AOB Call details: IANA Naming Function Review Team (IFRT) - Call #1 Time: Dec 3, 2019 05:00 PM Universal Time UTC Join Zoom Meeting https://icann.zoom.us/j/910601701?pwd=aEE5aE1Xeng2UHBXT09kdHlrWW10dz09 Meeting ID: 910 601 701 *Password: 135034 **Please note this added security/privacy feature. Participants will only be required to enter the password if they are joining via the application and typing in the meeting ID manually. Anyone who joins a meeting via a link in a calendar or e-mail invitation will not be required to enter the password upon joining** Find your local number: https://icann.zoom.us/u/aAAP6aGAx Wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/EZMzBw (recording, background material, attendance, etc. will be posted here as it becomes available) Additionally, as a reminder: A review of the IANA Naming Function Webinar will be offered to any interested IFRT member during the second week of Dec. Time and date will be determined according to subscribed attendees. Please RSVP to amy@creamer@icann.org<mailto:amy@creamer@icann.org> by Nov 22nd. Thank you, Kim
Hi, Sorry to miss this first meeting, for I mis-calculated the time in my time zone. Kaili On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 12:56 AM Kimberly Carlson <kimberly.carlson@icann.org> wrote:
****STARTING IN 5 MINUTES*** *
Dear IFRT,
As a follow up to Frederico’s email from November 14th, we would like to schedule the review team kick-off call for December 3rd at 1700 UTC.
Please find the *draft agenda* below:
1. Agenda Bashing 2. Introductions
Proposed Rules of Engagement: https://community.icann.org/display/ifr/Rules+of+Engagement
Proposed Regular Meetings schedule
Every two weeks
Mandate: https://community.icann.org/display/ifr/Mandate
Special attention to Sections 18.3 and 18.4
ICANN/PTI Contract: https://community.icann.org/display/ifr/IFR+Bylaws+and+IANA+Naming+Contract
IANA Naming Function Contract / Amendment 1 / SLA
AOB
*Call details: *
*IANA Naming Function Review Team (IFRT) - Call #1 *
Time: Dec 3, 2019 05:00 PM Universal Time UTC
Join Zoom Meeting
https://icann.zoom.us/j/910601701?pwd=aEE5aE1Xeng2UHBXT09kdHlrWW10dz09
Meeting ID: 910 601 701
*Password: 135034
**Please note this added security/privacy feature. Participants will only be required to enter the password if they are joining via the application and typing in the meeting ID manually. Anyone who joins a meeting via a link in a calendar or e-mail invitation will not be required to enter the password upon joining**
Find your local number: https://icann.zoom.us/u/aAAP6aGAx
Wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/EZMzBw (recording, background material, attendance, etc. will be posted here as it becomes available)
Additionally, as a reminder:
A review of the IANA Naming Function Webinar will be offered to any interested IFRT member during the second week of Dec. Time and date will be determined according to subscribed attendees. Please RSVP to amy@creamer@icann.org by Nov 22nd.
Thank you,
Kim
_______________________________________________ IFRT mailing list IFRT@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ifrt
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Sorry for missing this call for two reasons: 1. I was not aware of the name of the mailing list, so the filters did not filter appropriately. Filters are now updated. 2. I had other things to do on the 3rd, but should have let you know. Did not happen due to (1). My bad, apologies. Patrik On 3 Dec 2019, at 17:56, Kimberly Carlson wrote:
***STARTING IN 5 MINUTES***
Dear IFRT,
As a follow up to Frederico’s email from November 14th, we would like to schedule the review team kick-off call for December 3rd at 1700 UTC.
Please find the draft agenda below:
1. Agenda Bashing
2. Introductions
Proposed Rules of Engagement: https://community.icann.org/display/ifr/Rules+of+Engagement
Proposed Regular Meetings schedule
Every two weeks
Mandate: https://community.icann.org/display/ifr/Mandate
Special attention to Sections 18.3 and 18.4
ICANN/PTI Contract: https://community.icann.org/display/ifr/IFR+Bylaws+and+IANA+Naming+Contract
IANA Naming Function Contract / Amendment 1 / SLA
AOB
Call details:
IANA Naming Function Review Team (IFRT) - Call #1
Time: Dec 3, 2019 05:00 PM Universal Time UTC
Join Zoom Meeting
https://icann.zoom.us/j/910601701?pwd=aEE5aE1Xeng2UHBXT09kdHlrWW10dz09
Meeting ID: 910 601 701
*Password: 135034
**Please note this added security/privacy feature. Participants will only be required to enter the password if they are joining via the application and typing in the meeting ID manually. Anyone who joins a meeting via a link in a calendar or e-mail invitation will not be required to enter the password upon joining**
Find your local number: https://icann.zoom.us/u/aAAP6aGAx
Wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/EZMzBw (recording, background material, attendance, etc. will be posted here as it becomes available)
Additionally, as a reminder:
A review of the IANA Naming Function Webinar will be offered to any interested IFRT member during the second week of Dec. Time and date will be determined according to subscribed attendees. Please RSVP to amy@creamer@icann.org<mailto:amy@creamer@icann.org> by Nov 22nd.
Thank you,
Kim
_______________________________________________ IFRT mailing list IFRT@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ifrt
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Hi, I have a few comments on the Rules of Engagement.
Principles of Operation
3. Members are expected to communicate the views of the communities that have selected them to the IFRT, but also communicate back the information and deliberations from the IFRT to their respective communities. : : Review Team Members
4. Actively engage with relevant stakeholder groups within the ICANN community. Individual review team members are encouraged to report back to their nominating entity on the progress of the review team.
The first three are editorial issues: A. The way we operate at SSAC, I am appointed by SSAC. I also happen to be a member of SSAC, but SSAC can in theory appoint non-members to groups like these. After being appointed, SSAC suppose I will work together in the group of IFRT and that we together have the competence needed to do a good job, and deliver the correct response. B. The bullets above are slightly different. Yes, I intend to communicate with SSAC that appointed me, but of course also with other "relevant stakeholder groups" -- for example if so instructed by the IFRT or the chair. C. I will of course communicate back to IFRT whatever I hear when communicating with "the relevant team", and specifically the team that have appointed me (SSAC). The most important thing: D. Even if I am bringing back feedback from SSAC, SSAC do have a specific consensus based process for making statements. Statements for example in the form of SSAC documents. This implies that even if I am communicating and tries to bring data back to IFRT, if IFRT require formal response from SSAC that must be formally requested from me, and I will launch such a process within SSAC. It is also the case that regardless of what work I do with IFRT, SSAC always see itself be able to if needed initiate a process and send formal comments. For example during an ICANN review process which we in IFRT might launch on our findings. Or to say it differently: regardless of what I do, SSAC might still (also) say something if needed. None of these things above I find requires changes in the procedures, as I think/feel we talk about interpretations but I leave it to our chair to decide whether my interpretation above is ok, and if we can proceed without any further discussions. I think so. Patrik
On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 12:10:30AM +0100, Patrik Fältström via IFRT wrote:
Hi, I have a few comments on the Rules of Engagement.
Principles of Operation
3. Members are expected to communicate the views of the communities that have selected them to the IFRT, but also communicate back the information and deliberations from the IFRT to their respective communities. : ... The most important thing:
D. Even if I am bringing back feedback from SSAC, SSAC do have a specific consensus based process for making statements. Statements for example in the form of SSAC documents. This implies that even if I am communicating and tries to bring data back to IFRT, if IFRT require formal response from SSAC that must be formally requested from me, and I will launch such a process within SSAC. It is also the case that regardless of what work I do with IFRT, SSAC always see itself be able to if needed initiate a process and send formal comments. For example during an ICANN review process which we in IFRT might launch on our findings. Or to say it differently: regardless of what I do, SSAC might still (also) say something if needed.
I understand the formal procedures for positioning of well established bodies at ICANN but the principle we are listing are an ethical guidance for IFRT members. They definitely don't impose or preclude the other methods of input from other bodies.
None of these things above I find requires changes in the procedures, as I think/feel we talk about interpretations but I leave it to our chair to decide whether my interpretation above is ok, and if we can proceed without any further discussions.
I think so.
Your are being very specific and I agree with your view. I guess the reasoning for principle Nº 3 is to have an available hook to defend against members of review committees defending, lets conjecture for the sake of the argument, private matters and not the ones of the communities they represent.
Patrik
Fred
On 17 Dec 2019, at 16:10, Frederico A C Neves <fneves@registro.br> wrote:
On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 12:10:30AM +0100, Patrik Fältström via IFRT wrote:
Hi, I have a few comments on the Rules of Engagement.
Principles of Operation
3. Members are expected to communicate the views of the communities that have selected them to the IFRT, but also communicate back the information and deliberations from the IFRT to their respective communities. : ... The most important thing:
D. Even if I am bringing back feedback from SSAC, SSAC do have a specific consensus based process for making statements. Statements for example in the form of SSAC documents. This implies that even if I am communicating and tries to bring data back to IFRT, if IFRT require formal response from SSAC that must be formally requested from me, and I will launch such a process within SSAC. It is also the case that regardless of what work I do with IFRT, SSAC always see itself be able to if needed initiate a process and send formal comments. For example during an ICANN review process which we in IFRT might launch on our findings. Or to say it differently: regardless of what I do, SSAC might still (also) say something if needed.
I understand the formal procedures for positioning of well established bodies at ICANN but the principle we are listing are an ethical guidance for IFRT members. They definitely don't impose or preclude the other methods of input from other bodies.
Btw, SSAC have this discussion often as many groups do have the view that an appointed person (like me) can FORMALLY speak on behalf of the group. But by ssac appointed people can not do so.
None of these things above I find requires changes in the procedures, as I think/feel we talk about interpretations but I leave it to our chair to decide whether my interpretation above is ok, and if we can proceed without any further discussions.
I think so.
Your are being very specific and I agree with your view. I guess the reasoning for principle Nº 3 is to have an available hook to defend against members of review committees defending, lets conjecture for the sake of the argument, private matters and not the ones of the communities they represent.
Good! Patrik
Patrik
Fred
On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 12:03:40PM -0300, Frederico A C Neves wrote:
On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 12:10:30AM +0100, Patrik Fältström via IFRT wrote:
The most important thing:
D. Even if I am bringing back feedback from SSAC, SSAC do have a specific consensus based process for making statements. Statements for example in the form of SSAC documents. This implies that even if I am communicating and tries to bring data back to IFRT, if IFRT require formal response from SSAC that must be formally requested from me, and I will launch such a process within SSAC. It is also the case that regardless of what work I do with IFRT, SSAC always see itself be able to if needed initiate a process and send formal comments. For example during an ICANN review process which we in IFRT might launch on our findings. Or to say it differently: regardless of what I do, SSAC might still (also) say something if needed.
I understand the formal procedures for positioning of well established bodies at ICANN but the principle we are listing are an ethical guidance for IFRT members. They definitely don't impose or preclude the other methods of input from other bodies.
I believe we have an issue either with English or with English legalese. If it's ethical guidance, then that should be made more explicit. Otherwise it is important to make sure that there's neither an envoy system in place, within which the IFRT could not do it's work. Also, the sending organizations cannot be bound by what the appointees say because most of us do not speak ex cathedra. -Peter
participants (5)
-
Frederico A C Neves -
Kaili Kan -
Kimberly Carlson -
Patrik Fältström -
Peter Koch