Dear Tony, just for the record I would like to ask to to make one correction. You stated:
On financial stability, Thomas proposed that needy applicants should only be required to demonstrate financial stability for 6–12 months or the barrier to entry would be too high, and that ICANN needed to offer support to needy applicants if they faced bankruptcy in order to ensure operational and technical stability.
I did not propose that needy applicants should only be provided to demonstrate financial stability for 6-12 months. I quoted this from the JAS report. It is correct that I suggested that ICANN should reserve funds to help out if needy applicants face bankruptcy to ensure operational and technical stability, Thanks and regards, Thomas Am 18.07.2011 um 16:23 schrieb Tony Holmes:
The following represents a summary of the main discussion points and actions from the ISPCP conference call held on 13 July 2011
· New Constituencies Attention was focused on ICANN’s approval of the NPOC constituency which was now part of the NCSG. It was noted that discussions were taking place within the NCSG with regard to future elections of GNSO Councillors and that the current rules would see that result decided by a single vote majority of all NCSG members. That approach facilitates capture by a Constituency with the highest number of members and has the potential to block access to Council by representatives from smaller Constituencies, in this case the NPOC. The opinion of the ISPCP is that no single Constituency should hold more than a set level of seats. Tony Holmes was requested to raise this issue with the CSG Executive. Note: This action has been followed up and the CSG are now discussing whether/how to pursue this. · ATRT Update As a member of the ATRT Committee, Olivier Muron reported that he was not aware of any recent developments with regard to the ATRT since the Singapore meeting. Attention was drawn to the discussions led by the ISPCP on ATRT progress which had taken place during the CSG session with the ICANN Board in Singapore. The ISPCP had raised concern over the perceived lack of action. In particular the ISPCP was concerned over the lack of precise details showing how the community would be able to interact as staff progressed improvements on ‘public comment periods’ as this had the ability to impact the work of the Constituency. As nothing appeared to have changed since the Singapore meeting, Tony Holmes was requested to follow-up this issue with Denise Michelle. Note: Since the ISPCP call ICANN staff has notified the community they are setting in place a focus group to facilitate input. For the CSG representatives on this group will be Marilyn Cade and Jonathan Zuck, with feedback to the ISPCP agreed. · GNSO toolkit The ISPCP concluded their key preferences from the GNSO toolkit list as; · Providing grants/Funding for Constituencies to provide their own administrative support · Web site hosting and content maintenance · Assisting in conducting elections for Officers Tony Holmes was requested to inform Rob Hoggarth. In addition its was requested that Rob Hoggarth is invited to attend the ISPCP meeting in Senegal in order to discuss ISPCP web site requirements in more detail. Note: This action has since been completed. · Budget Following the discussion between the CSG and the ICANN Board on budget issues in Singapore the CSG decided to set in place a small team (2 per Constituency) to consider the budget and operational plan in more detail. This will form an on-going task within the CSG. For the ISPCP Tony Holmes and Jaime Wagner will represent the Constituency. Note: The CSG have been informed and this work is expected to commence shortly. Whilst the GNSO Council are also due to discuss budget issues the ISPCP will only support their consideration of issues that are specific to the policy work of the Council. · GNSO outreach task force Olga Carvelli will be leading the GNSO Outreach Task Force and has requested volunteers from all Constituencies. Tony Harris has volunteered to cover this for the ISPCP and Thomas Rickert will be the alternate. Note: The Chair of this group has since been advised. · JAS Council delegates advised that the report from the JAS wg has still to be agreed by the GNSO despite its submission to the Board. Thomas Rickert reported that he had reviewed the JAS proposals on behalf of the ISPCP (as agreed in Singapore) and had sent a message to the ISPCP mailing list, advising the Constituency should generally support the ideas set out within the report, but additionally state the IPv6 requirements should not be waived. The JAS report currently takes no position on this. ISPs will be involved with back-end providers that would use IPv6 and this needs to be encouraged to ensure operational stability. On financial stability, Thomas proposed that needy applicants should only be required to demonstrate financial stability for 6–12 months or the barrier to entry would be too high, and that ICANN needed to offer support to needy applicants if they faced bankruptcy in order to ensure operational and technical stability. In addition ICANN could also assist with the provision of legal advice, but any such action should be undertaken by 3rd parties. · GNSO Council meetings The next GNSO Council meeting is planned for July 25. At the date of this call no meeting was planned for August. · Elections Election are required to be held for the ISPCP Council seats prior to Senegal In addition the ISPCP needs to appoint a new delegate to the 2011-2012 Nominating Committee and reappoint CSG Executive officers. Following Senegal an election will take place for the Constituency Chair Secretary to arrange. · IANA contract Alain Bidron introduce a draft response to be submitted by the ISPCP on the recent announcement regarding the IANA contract. Comments should be submitted to the list (copied direct to Alain) by 20th July to enable submission by the 29th July deadline. · Date of next Constituency call was agreed as Wednesday 17 August at 14.00 UTC
____________________________________________________________ Thomas Rickert, Rechtsanwalt Schollmeyer & Rickert Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft m.b.H. (i.e. law firm) Geschäftsführer / CEO: Torsten Schollmeyer, Thomas Rickert HRB 9262, AG Bonn Büro / Office Bonn: Kaiserplatz 7-9, 53113 Bonn, Germany Phone: +49 (0)228 74 898 - 0 Büro / Office Frankfurt a.M.: Friedrichstrasse 63, 60323 Frankfurt, Germany Phone: +49 (0)69 714 021 - 56 Zentralfax: +49 (0)228 74 898 - 66 mailto: rickert@anwaelte.de skype-id: trickert web: www.anwaelte.de