Estimados, mañana tengo una reunión (SO-AC-SG-C-RALO Leaders and CCWG Co-Chairs) sobre este tema. Sería muy conveniente que tuviéramos alguna opinión adicional.
Por ello reenvío este mail de Rinalia.
Justamente hoy 16 y mañana 17 habrá dos sesiones informativas idénticas al respecto:
• Wednesday 16 December 2015 at 22:00 UTC for 120 minutes
For other times: http://tinyurl.com/jqn6awh
The agenda and call details are available at: https://community.icann.org/x/JI1lAw
• Thursday 17 December 2015 at 11:00 UTC for 120 minutes
For other times: http://tinyurl.com/qhn8hfr
The agenda and call details are available at: https://community.icann.org/x/kI1lAw
Adobe Connect: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/atlarge-briefing-session/
Saludos cordiales
Alberto Soto
De: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] En nombre de Rinalia Abdul Rahim
Enviado el: martes, 15 de diciembre de 2015 8:05 p. m.
Para: ALAC Working List <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org>
CC: iana-issues@atlarge.icann.org
Asunto: [ALAC] Board Comments on CCWG 3rd Draft Proposal
Dear ALAC and RALO Chairs,
I had shared the attached presentation slides outlining Board Comments on CCWG 3rd Draft Proposal during the At-Large IANA Issues Working Group Call on Tue UTC2030. Please review the full Board comments as there is more information and detail there (also attached together with cover letter from Steve Crocker on behalf of the Board). The concerns, rationale and suggestions in the full Board Comments document are important to understand. Please note that the Board is open to alternative solutions on how to address the concerns.
Some points that I highlighted during the call:
The Board comments dated 14 Dec 2015 are directed at the SOs/ACs for consideration in their capacity as chartering organizations of the accountability initiative as well as at the CCWG on Accountability. The comments represent the_full_consensus view of the Board. The Board expresses support and agreement for nearly all the recommendations. However, there are remaining concerns and these concerns are consistent with concerns that the Board had raised in the past. For concerns that are considered as “serious” for the Board, if they are not sufficiently addressed in the CCWG’s Final Report, the Board would follow the principles and procedure laid out in its Resolution of 16 October 2014 (I pasted the text of that resolution below so that you are aware of what the process entails). In my view, if we end up with a situation where there is no Board and CCWG agreement, there is the possibility that we may miss the political window for the transition. We need to work to bridge the gap constructively and in a timely manner. My understanding is that the Board wants to have a Transition, but it has duties and responsibilities that require it to consider carefully the impact of CCWG recommendations on ICANN before agreeing to them. In principle, the Board is not able to agree to recommendations that in its opinion and judgment would endanger, weaken or destabilize ICANN. Within the 3rd Draft Proposal, some recommendations are too broad and/or too vague. This opens the door for unintended consequences or exploitation, which may unbalance or interrupt the operation of ICANN. In principle, anything that creates open-ended obligations would destabilize ICANN and would undermine ICANN’s ability to do its job. A stable and functioning ICANN is a prerequisite for ICANN to carry out its mission and this is the yardstick for what is considered to be in the global public interest. Board Resolution 2014.10.16.17 (emphasis in red and underlined text is mine) Resolved (2014.10.16.17), the Board commits to following the following principles when considering the Cross Community Working Group Recommendations on Enhancing ICANN Accountability and Governance:
Best regards, Rinalia |
|
El software de antivirus Avast ha analizado este correo electrónico en busca de virus.
|