Dear David/Rob The ISPCP very much appreciate the efforts undertaken by the ICANN staff to facilitate and actively engage in the recent Intercessional NCPH meeting at the ICANN office in LA. We discussed the meeting during our recent conference call and offer the following feedback. Without doubt the meeting proved to be a positive experience, facilitating more detailed discussion and interaction between all involved parties than its possible to achieve at full ICANN meetings where pressure on time and key personnel tends to prohibit that. Whilst our constituency offer full support for meetings of this type to continue, as with most new approaches we would look to build on this initial experience and capitalise on lessons learnt. There were many positives; - The opportunity to spend quality time in discussion with Fadi where we focused on some of the key issues for ICANN was very much appreciated. The frank and open nature of those discussions established a firm base for future dialogue. We welcome and embrace this new spirit of co-operation that Fadi has brought to ICANN, both within the organisation itself and externally where ICANN continue to face so many difficult challenges. - Being able to discuss key policy issues with ICANN staff responsible for those areas with a reduced number of participants enabled far more qualitative debate. - The opportunity to meet and get to know better other members of the NCPH, thereby identifying previously less well understood areas of agreement as well as understanding far better area's where we currently hold differing views. Again, the intensity of full ICANN meetings tends to prevent that happening to the same degree. - Facilitation of face to face dialogue between constituency, stakeholder group members and ICANN staff of which there can never be too much. Particularly where members are actively engaged in a number of diverse working groups which often accounts for much of their time at full ICANN meetings. The more relaxed and informal environment of the intercessional meeting provided the ideal platform. There are also areas where basic changes to the initial approach could rapidly improve the effectiveness of future meetings. - The provision of short briefing papers in advance that would ensure all involved parties have a basic level of understanding at the start of each session. - More detailed planning at the session level prior to the meeting, involving both staff and participants. It would be helpful to seek input on key points/questions that require specific focus during the session. - Sessions clearly segregated to facilitate briefings and clarifying questions followed by adequate opportunity to contribute and exchange views. There were a few sessions during the intercessional which failed to facilitate adequate debate, normally due to lengthy presentations that eroded much of the available time. - Increased opportunity to seek and exchange views on key issues between different parties. The opportunity to get below the veneer of some issues and actively debate contentious points that underpin opposing views (both within the NCPH and broader) wasn't fully realised. It's the view of the ISPCP that debate at that detailed level often offers the only way to achieving consensus policy. - An informal record of key points and issues raised from discussions. This would also assist in ensuring that participants of all involved groups who are unable to attend these meetings receive a common understanding of what took place. - A feedback session at the end of the meeting to highlight what worked really well/what could be improved. We hope the points raised above prove helpful when considering possible future meetings. Submitted on behalf of the ISPCP Constituency. Tony Holmes Chairman ISPCP