December 2013 - ispcp - lists.icann.org

REMINDER: Meeting Invitation/ ISPCP CALL
by Nathalie Peregrine Feb. 13, 2014

Feb. 13, 2014

Dear All, The next ISPCP call is scheduled on Monday 14 October 2013 at 1300 UTC. To check your local time: http://tinyurl.com/psxypoh Adobe Connect room: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/_a819976787/ispcp/?launcher=false Please find the dial-in details below: Participant Passcode: Participant: 3429 # Dial-in numbers: http://www.adigo.com/icann/ Thank you. Kind regards, Nathalie

2 8

[gTLD-delegations] string delegations
by Mike O'Connor Dec. 21, 2013

Dec. 21, 2013

hi all Mikey's list interesting strings delegated this week -- from a name-collisions standpoint. purely a gut-feel reaction, there's no science behind this list just the eye of a system admin making a guess that these names are more likely to show as names for internal resources on networks. .SUPPORT .COMPUTER .SYSTEMS .COMPANY .MANAGEMENT .CENTER here are the strings delegated last week. DATE STRING REGISTRY 18 December 2013 .BUZZ dotStrategy Co. 18 December 2013 .SUPPORT Grand Orchard, LLC 17 December 2013 .RECIPES Grand Island, LLC 17 December 2013 .COMPUTER Pine Mill, LLC 17 December 2013 .ACADEMY Half Oaks, LLC 17 December 2013 .CAREERS Wild Corner, LLC 17 December 2013 .CAB Half Sunset, LLC 17 December 2013 公益 (xn--55qw42g) – Chinese for "charity" China Organizational Name Administration Center 17 December 2013 政务 (xn--zfr164b) – Chinese for "government" China Organizational Name Administration Center 17 December 2013 .SYSTEMS Dash Cypress, LLC 17 December 2013 .DOMAINS Sugar Cross, LLCviajes 17 December 2013 .VIAJES Black Madison, LLC 17 December 2013 .COMPANY Silver Avenue, LLC 17 December 2013 .CAMP Delta Dynamite, LLC 17 December 2013 .LIMO Hidden Frostbite, LLC 17 December 2013 .MANAGEMENT John Goodbye, LLC 17 December 2013 .PHOTOS Sea Corner, LLC 17 December 2013 .SHOES Binky Galley, LLC 17 December 2013 .CENTER Tin Mill, LLC Description of the name-collision problem and link to mitigation research project -- http://www.haven2.com/index.php/archives/name-collision-research ICANN's "Name Collision Resources and Information" page - http://www.icann.org/en/help/name-collision ICANN's list of all delegated new gTLDs - http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/delegated-strings mikey

1 0

Fwd: [council] new gTLD update
by Mike O'Connor Dec. 20, 2013

Dec. 20, 2013

Begin forwarded message: > From: Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin(a)melbourneit.com.au> > Subject: [council] new gTLD update > Date: December 20, 2013 3:43:32 PM CST > To: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> > > Hello All, > > Please see attached slides from the new gTLD update webinar held on 17 Dec 2013. > > http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/announcements-and-media/webinars > > Applicant Update Webinar > > Date/Time: 17 December 2013, 23:00 - 00:30 UTC > > General information on the current status of the Program. Topics will include Evaluation, Contracting, Pre-Delegation Testing, Objections & Dispute Resolution, GAC Advice, Name Collision, Trademark Clearinghouse, etc. > > Regards, > Bruce Tonkin > PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)

1 0

Re: [council] Newcomer Open House -- transcripts of the pilot session that took place yesterday
by Mike O'Connor Dec. 18, 2013

Dec. 18, 2013

hi Gabi, that's one of the things that's clear to me from this pilot -- way too much Mikey, not nearly enough newcomer-voices. we committed the "too many topics for the time allotted" error in structuring the agenda. it's pretty clear that there is plenty of room for repeat sessions that are revised a bit to fix that problem. there was also pretty strong demand for some followup sessions that covered some of the topics in more depth (and again, leave more room for other voices on the call). these are good problems to have. ;-) i wanted to clarify one thing -- the recordings are video recordings of the Adobe chat, not just audio. so you'll get the complete experience of the session (including the chat, which was pretty lively). mikey On Dec 18, 2013, at 4:26 AM, gabrielaszlak(a)gmail.com wrote: > Thanks Mikey, > > I really wanted to participate but finally could not make it, so all of this is very useful and I will be reading and listening to the recordings and offering feedback to help improve the pilot. > > Not so long ago I was a newcomer at a gnso working group so I hope to be able to offer insights from a personal experience viewpoint. > > Also, I know other people that intended to participate and will ask for their feedback and share if it is valuable. > > Congratulatios to all who organized this! > > Gabi > Enviado desde mi BlackBerry de Movistar (http://www.movistar.com.ar) > From: "Mike O'Connor" <mike(a)haven2.com> > Sender: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org > Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2013 21:05:27 -0600 > To: ispcp(a)icann.org<ispcp(a)icann.org>; council(a)gnso.icann.org GNSO<council(a)gnso.icann.org> > Subject: [council] Newcomer Open House -- transcripts of the pilot session that took place yesterday > > hi all, > > i built a little web page on our site to introduce links to small, bite-sized pieces of the newcomer open house pilot that took place yesterday. it met with good reaction from the people who participated, but it was a pilot and we're looking for ideas on how to improve it. the whole thing is about an hour, but it's broken into small pieces so that people can select what they'd like to look at. > > thanks to Nathalie Perigrine for coming up with and driving the idea. and Marika, Lars and Glen for making it happen. i was/am honored to have been asked to be the presenter. > > mikey > > > > here's a link to the page (good for sharing with friends and colleagues) > > http://www.ispcp.info/policy-resources/gnso-working-groups-newcomer-open-ho… > > and here's the content on that page (as long as i have your attention) > > GNSO Working Groups — Newcomer Open House > > ISPCP member Mikey O’Connor moderated a pilot session of a webinar intended to provide orientation, information and resources to members of the GNSO community who are joining a GNSO PDP Working Group for the first time. > > Here’s a link to the slide deck that was presented — this PDF contains a wealth of links to written resources for working-group participants. > > Newcomers Open House.pdf > > Here are links to recordings of the session. > > Introduction, Tips and Tricks, Session Goals and Overview, Resources > > In which you will; experience how we start up every working-group call, get an introduction to some tips and tricks of the Adobe room that we use, be introduced to the ICANN policy staff, get an overview of goals and topics of the session and get your first set of helpful links. > > https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p29xh8ldqb4/ (20 minutes) > > Consensus Policy and the “Picket Fence” > > This is a discussion of the relationship between the GNSO consensus policy-making process and the contracts that bind Registries, Registrars and ICANN together. > > https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p6f5tyvjmma/ (7 minutes) > > The GNSO Policy Development Process > > An overview of the whole Policy Development Process (PDP). This section quickly introduces you to all of the steps of the PDP; requesting an Issue Report, launching a Working Group, moving that work through the approval process, implementation into policy. > > https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p64j05q58kx/ (11 minutes) – Presentation > > https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p9fzftl3rar/ (12 minutes) – Questions and Answers > > PDP Working Group Guidelines > > A brief introduction to the documentation that describes the PDP work processes, rules and responsibilities. Special attention is paid to a discussion of the Standard Methodology for Making Decisions (also known as the level of consensus). > > https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p8qtevealwa/ (7 minutes) > > Question and Answer Session > > A brief Q&A session that focused on the social media aspects of working groups. > > https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p2lml89ip4g/ (3 minutes) > > PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.) > PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)

1 0

Newcomer Open House -- transcripts of the pilot session that took place yesterday
by Mike O'Connor Dec. 18, 2013

Dec. 18, 2013

hi all, i built a little web page on our site to introduce links to small, bite-sized pieces of the newcomer open house pilot that took place yesterday. it met with good reaction from the people who participated, but it was a pilot and we're looking for ideas on how to improve it. the whole thing is about an hour, but it's broken into small pieces so that people can select what they'd like to look at. thanks to Nathalie Perigrine for coming up with and driving the idea. and Marika, Lars and Glen for making it happen. i was/am honored to have been asked to be the presenter. mikey here's a link to the page (good for sharing with friends and colleagues) http://www.ispcp.info/policy-resources/gnso-working-groups-newcomer-open-ho… and here's the content on that page (as long as i have your attention) GNSO Working Groups — Newcomer Open House ISPCP member Mikey O’Connor moderated a pilot session of a webinar intended to provide orientation, information and resources to members of the GNSO community who are joining a GNSO PDP Working Group for the first time. Here’s a link to the slide deck that was presented — this PDF contains a wealth of links to written resources for working-group participants. Newcomers Open House.pdf Here are links to recordings of the session. Introduction, Tips and Tricks, Session Goals and Overview, Resources In which you will; experience how we start up every working-group call, get an introduction to some tips and tricks of the Adobe room that we use, be introduced to the ICANN policy staff, get an overview of goals and topics of the session and get your first set of helpful links. https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p29xh8ldqb4/ (20 minutes) Consensus Policy and the “Picket Fence” This is a discussion of the relationship between the GNSO consensus policy-making process and the contracts that bind Registries, Registrars and ICANN together. https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p6f5tyvjmma/ (7 minutes) The GNSO Policy Development Process An overview of the whole Policy Development Process (PDP). This section quickly introduces you to all of the steps of the PDP; requesting an Issue Report, launching a Working Group, moving that work through the approval process, implementation into policy. https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p64j05q58kx/ (11 minutes) – Presentation https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p9fzftl3rar/ (12 minutes) – Questions and Answers PDP Working Group Guidelines A brief introduction to the documentation that describes the PDP work processes, rules and responsibilities. Special attention is paid to a discussion of the Standard Methodology for Making Decisions (also known as the level of consensus). https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p8qtevealwa/ (7 minutes) Question and Answer Session A brief Q&A session that focused on the social media aspects of working groups. https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p2lml89ip4g/ (3 minutes) PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)

1 0

Fw: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Consensus Call by 08 Jan 2014 on Resubmitting a Motion
by WUKnoben Dec. 17, 2013

Dec. 17, 2013

All, from my point of view the language can be accepted. Please let me know any comments/amendments/questions. Merry Christmas Wolf-Ulrich From: Julie Hedlund Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 10:22 PM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Consensus Call by 08 Jan 2014 on Resubmitting a Motion Dear SCI members, Note that per the SCI Charter, "Unless otherwise determined by the SCI members, committee decisions will be made by “full consensus” process as described in the GNSO Working Group Guidelines (see section 3.6)." Thus, as agreed at the SCI meeting today, staff is requesting a consensus call on the language provided by Greg Shatan concerning changes to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures on resubmitting a motion. Please see the attached redlined and clean versions of the language. Please review this language in your Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups if you have not already done so. If there are no objections or changes to the language received by Wednesday, 08 January 2014, the language will be presumed to be accepted by full consensus. If the language is approved the next step will be for staff to prepare a redlined version of the GNSO Council Operating Procedures that will be put out for public comment for 21 days. However, as noted on today's call this may be combined with changes to the GNSO Working Group Guidelines relating to the working group self-assessment survey (as being prepared by Ken Bour). Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director

1 0

[council] Public Comment Period: New gTLD Auction Rules
by Glen de Saint Géry Dec. 17, 2013

Dec. 17, 2013

http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-17dec13-en.htm New gTLD Auction Rules Comment / Reply Periods (*) Comment Open Date: 17 December 2013 Comment Close Date: 14 January 2014 - 23:59 UTC Reply Open Date: 15 January 2014 Reply Close Date: 4 February 2014 - 23:59 UTC Important Information Links Public Comment Announcement To Submit Your Comments (Forum) View Comments Submitted Brief Overview Originating Organization: Global Domains Division Categories/Tags: New gTLD Auctions Purpose (Brief): To gather community input regarding the detailed rules and processes for Auctions to resolve string contention sets in the New gTLD Program. Current Status: The Auction Rules (version 2013.12.12) have been updated since the publication of the Preliminary Auction Rules on 1 Nov 2013 based on community feedback, including feedback received in Webinars and sessions at the ICANN 48 meeting in Buenos Aires. Additionally the Bidder’s Agreement, Bidder forms, and a Draft Auction Schedule have been published for community input. Next Steps: Based on public comment feedback, a final set of Auction Rules and Bidder’s Agreement will be published and New gTLD Auctions to resolve string contention sets will be implemented and executed per the rules. Staff Contact: Russ Weinstein Email Staff Contact Detailed Information Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose: ICANN is pleased to announce the publication of an updated version (2013.12.12) of the Auction Rules, the Bidder Agreement, the Bidder Forms, and a Draft Auction Schedule for community review. The Auction Rules have been updated since the initial release of the Preliminary Auction Rules on 1 Nov 2013 based on feedback received including during the Auctions Webinar on 7 November 2013 and the ICANN 48 Meeting in Buenos Aires. The documents being published for comment are: · Auction Rules version 2013.12.12 – provides a detailed insight into all facets of the Auctions program, including eligibility, scheduling considerations, preparation procedures, deposits, bidding limits, bidding procedures, the conclusion of auctions, payments and refunds. This version of the Auction Rules only addresses Contention Sets with direct contention relationships; an update or addendum will be published at later time to address Contention Sets with both direct and indirect contention relationships. · Bidder Forms – allows an applicant to designate itself or another entity to act as the bidder on its behalf. These forms will be used by ICANN and Power Auctions (the Auction Manager) to perform due diligence, set up a bank subaccount and a user account on the Auction Site. The bidder forms must be completed for each application participating in an Auction. · Bidder Agreement – an agreement between the Applicant and/or Bidder and Power Auctions, detailing the roles and responsibilities of each of these parties in the Auction process. The Bidder Agreement must be executed at least one time for each Applicant, and if an applicant utilizes a Designated Bidder, the agreement must be executed for each unique configuration of Applicant and Designated Bidder. · Draft Auction Schedule – Using the preliminary contention sets which do not include the effect any objection determinations may have, a Draft Auction Schedule has been created. This schedule utilizes the scheduling criteria defined in the Auction Rules but, due to the dynamic nature of application status, does not take into account the eligibility requirements for a contention set to be sent to Auction by ICANN as defined in the Applicant Guide Book and the Auction Rules. Should contention sets either resolve prior to their scheduled Auction or not yet be eligible for an Auction, ICANN will adjust the schedule in attempt to maintain approximately 20 contention sets per Auction. ICANN intends to publish a Master Escrow agreement between ICANN, Power Auctions and the Escrow Provider for informational purposes prior to the conclusion of the public comment period. It is not envisioned that Bidders will execute an agreement with the Escrow Provider; rather the Bidder's Agreement will create a relationship where the Bidder will be a third party beneficiary to the Escrow Agreement. The Escrow provider will establish accounts by Bidder to securely hold deposits, issue refunds to Bidders based on the Auction Results, and collect winning fees on behalf of ICANN. All feedback will be taken into account, but community feedback on the following topics will be especially helpful. The pace and schedule of auctions to resolve all outstanding contention sets The duration of auction rounds and recesses between rounds The effects of the Name Collision issues on the eligibility for auction of a contention set With the input from the community in this public comment period, ICANN will complete and publish the Auction Rules, Bidder's Agreement, Bidder Forms and move forward to administer Auctions to resolve string contention sets on the new gTLD program. Section II: Background: Section 4.3 of the Applicant Guidebook describes auctions as the last resort method to resolve string contention sets. This section provides for an Ascending Clock Auction methodology and provides an overview of the process and simplified illustrations of the execution of a contention set auction. On 1 November 2013, a preliminary version of the Auction rules was published. The Auction Rules were published as preliminary because there were several aspects related to scheduling that would benefit from community feedback prior to finalization and execution of the Auction program. The Auction Rules have since been updated to provide more details of the Auction processes and procedures as well as to incorporate community feedback received since the initial publication. Section III: Document and Resource Links: Applicant Guide Book section 4.3 [PDF, 429 KB] New gTLD Auction Rules 2013.12.12 [PDF, 323 KB] New gTLD Auction Rules_1Nov13 [PDF, 235 KB] (Preliminary) Redline of Auction Rules 2013.12.12 to 2013.11.01 [PDF, 352 KB] (Comparison of current version to preliminary) Draft Auction Schedule 2013.12.16 [PDF, 308 KB] New gTLD Auction Bidder Agreement [PDF, 171 KB] New gTLD Auction Bidder Forms [PDF, 241 KB] Section IV: Additional Information: N/A (*) Comments submitted after the posted Close Date/Time are not guaranteed to be considered in any final summary, analysis, reporting, or decision-making that takes place once this period lapses. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

string delegations
by Mike O'Connor Dec. 14, 2013

Dec. 14, 2013

hi all ANNOUNCEMENT: a major research project aimed at developing tools and techniques to identify and mitigate name-collision risks was announced yesterday by Verisign. i wrote a blog post that describes the name-collision problem and encourages researchers to get involved with that research effort. please promote that project to your colleagues. i've added the link to the "handy links" at the bottom of this note. here are the strings delegated last week DATE STRING REGISTRY 10 December 2013 .RUHR Regiodot GmbH & Co. KG Description of the name-collision problem and link to mitigation research project -- http://www.haven2.com/index.php/archives/name-collision-research ICANN's "Name Collision Resources and Information" page - http://www.icann.org/en/help/name-collision ICANN's list of all delegated new gTLDs - http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/delegated-strings mikey

1 0

Michele Neylon and Blacknight on name-collision
by Mike O'Connor Dec. 12, 2013

Dec. 12, 2013

hi all, here's an example of an outreach item that we could use as a model. mikey http://www.prweb.com/releases/2013/12/prweb11412696.htm Blacknight Advises IT Professionals to Take Steps to Mitigate Potential Name Collision Issues Leading Irish registrar joins ICANN in public education campaign to promote DNS stability. We want to get the message out to all IT professionals to change these internal names to FQDNs to get ahead of the problem. Carlow,Ireland (PRWEB) December 11, 2013 Leading Irish domain registrar and hosting company, Blacknight joins ICANN in urging IT professionals to correct potential Name Collision issues before they become a critical problem. A report released by ICANN on December 6, 2013, titled “Name Collision Identification and Mitigation for IT Professionals”, explains the nature and causes of name collision and proposes a range of possible solutions. Domain Name Collision happens when a name used by an individual or organisation for their private networks matches a new TLD that has entered the DNS. For instance if a company were using an internal name called “company.printer.office” this unqualified domain could “collide” with the .office TLD and cause network confusion. However, according to ICANN, the report shows that private networks will consistently, stably, and reliably perform name resolution when they use Fully Qualified Domain Names (FQDNs) and resolve them from the global DNS. “The Collision reports on individual new TLDs are staggering,” Blacknight CEO Michele Neylon explains. “In some cases there are thousands of “internal names” and private name spaces causing collision for a single TLD as private query results show up in the global DNS. We want to get the message out to all IT professionals to change these internal names to FQDNs to get ahead of the problem.” To mitigate the problem, ICANN recommends that users not already using FQDNs from the public DNS should consider the following strategy: Monitor name services, compile a list of private TLDs or short unqualified names you use internally, and compare the list you create against the list of new TLD strings. (You can see all applications on http://www.dotwhat.co) Formulate a plan to mitigate causes of leakage. Prepare users for the impending change in name usage by notifying them in advance or providing training Implement your plan to mitigate the potential collision Neylon continues: “If these potential issues go uncorrected, it will become a problem for both the global DNS and internal networks using the names that are causing collision. At Blacknight we pride ourselves on providing our customers with a pain free online experience and will continue to update and educate the community on any related developments to stay far ahead of this problem.” ICANN’s Name Collision resources, including the Name Collision Identification and Mitigation for IT Professionals report can be found at http://www.icann.org/en/help/name-collision. For more information on Blacknight’s suite of services please visit http://www.blacknight.com. About Blacknight: Blacknight are an Irish based, ICANN accredited domain registrar and hosting company. Recipients of several awards for their revolutionary use of social media, Blacknight are one of Europe’s most cutting edge Internet companies. Blacknight constantly seek to lead the way by introducing innovative solutions for its client base and provide dedicated servers and colocation as well as a comprehensive range of Microsoft Windows and Linux based hosting plans and domain name registration services to business globally. PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)

1 0

FW: ccwg-internet-governance Digest, Vol 1, Issue 19
by Tony Holmes Dec. 11, 2013

Dec. 11, 2013

All Draft Charter for the ccwg Internet Governance is below Tony -------------------------------------------------------------- *Problem Statement* What is the problem to be solved? Prepare for ICANN-community participation in the upcoming meeting in Brazil How does not solving this problem get in the way of achieving the organisation's objectives? The ICANN community might miss opportunities to contribute to the dialog and outcomes of the meeting. Also, not involving the ICANN community in the preparation of this meeting will make it impossible for this to be a community-led, bottom up preparation process. What value does the organization gain from solving this problem? Engage in a bottom-up led conversation to advance the agenda articulated in the Montevideo Statement What is the chronology of the situation - how did we get here? http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-07oct13-en.htmMontev ideo Statement Idea of CCWG floated in the early-morning community meeting at ICANN48 On Thursday, ALAC and NCSG create a working group which the whole ICANN community is invited to join. What alternatives to doing this project have we explored? The alternative is to NOT get involved as a community in the Brazil meeting nor the 1net coordination. This risks having parts of the community involved in an unstructured way thus bringing an imbalance to the input provided by the ICANN community in the 1net process. Stakeholders All Stakeholders at ICANN. Who will be affected by the problem? Absolutely everyone. ICANN's model is at risk. Which employees? ICANN policy staff - from two perspectives: support and policy-input ICANN senior staff - from two perspectives: strategy and goal alignment, and funding/logistics Stakeholders? All ICANN AC/SO's and stakeholders group/constituencies within them may have an interest. Others? Potential for including groups that are not part of ICANN. Suggestion that the different SO/AC/SGs should reach out to their respective communities outside ICANN and let them know this work is taking place, channeling any of their concerns via them as their representative. Have they been involved sufficiently up to this point? There is a sense of being left in the dark that is quite prevalent in the community right now. This effort presents an opportunity to broaden engagement and make the process more transparent. Should they be brought in to the project? When? While there is a small risk of too many voices causing confusion, the posture of this effort is that broad engagement and participation are welcome. Smaller groups can be formed if things become unwieldy example :a kind of pyramidal structure where there will indeed be splinter groups or sub-working groups that will come back to the wider group to report. To what degree do they share the belief that this is a problem that needs to be solved? Broad agreement that the ICANN community needs to participate effectively in the Brazil meeting Who ought to 'champion' this project? As this is a cross-community effort, AC/SO/Constituency leadership should champion To whom should the project team report? Facilitators who will help with the communication of information between the various groups & the Board & Staff. Co-Chairs who will direct the work itself. Do we need a Steering Committee to provide resources and resolve disputes? Yes -- include AC/SO/Constituency chairs and staff leaders (at least one from policy staff and one from senior staff). The goals are speedy formation, infrequent interventions and nimble/helpful response when needed. Scope, Size and Perspective What written definition clearly distinguishes between what is inside this project, and what is outside? In scope: Discuss logistical questions related to attending and participating in the Brazil meeting Identify representatives to attend the meeting Develop mechanisms whereby in-person participants can inform, and obtain guidance from, remote participants during the course of the meeting In scope? start creating position papers & put them on a WIKI & then from these position papers, see what commonality the different writers have. Provide a point of contact between ICANN and the broader 1Net initiative? Out of scope Provide input to the Internet Governance Strategic Panel What is the level of detail and precision involved in this effort - is this a sweeping global effort (like a vision or strategy) or is this a project to produce specific outcomes (like install a system, or build a house)? This is a narrowly-focused effort to prepare the ICANN community for a new meeting that is a few months away. this group should spend most of its time on the content -- certainly not finding answers, but certainly finding the right questions to launch into the debate that will take place in Brazil. Goals & Objectives What tangible, deliverable things do we want to see when this project is completed? To convey message from the ICANN community to Brazil meeting about common positions and also diverse opinions from ICANN groups regarding the issues to be covered by the meeting This project will provide ICANN with clear positions that it will be able to hold at the Brazil Summit thus parrying attacks on the multi-stakeholder model How do we know when the project is done? This effort will conclude shortly after the end of the Brazil meeting Critical Success Factors What things do we need to do well in order for this project to succeed? Remain focused on the narrow scope of preparing for Brazil Try to put aside historic rivalries and mistrust Focus more on the message and less on positions/logistics/politics. Work to a short-interval schedule Focus the work on email lists, wikis and other asynchronous tools. Use periodic teleconferences sparingly and wisely Build relationships and trust, both inside and outside of ICANN Preferred Problem-Solving Approach These questions are the socket into which a work plan is inserted. Revisit them once the broad outlines of the charter are agreed. Who will do what tasks, with whom, by what date? What are the intermediate milestone events and deliverables that we can use as checkpoints to monitor the progress of the project? Are they more than 1 or 2 weeks apart? Do we need more (or fewer) tasks and milestones to keep the project under a reasonable level of control? What's the mechanism for getting things back on track if the project is missing key dates? setting a roadmap Write a comment...

1 0