I agree

Regards

Jorge

Von: s18-bounces@icann.org [mailto:s18-bounces@icann.org] Im Auftrag von Megan.Richards@ec.europa.eu
Gesendet: Montag, 16. November 2015 16:33
An: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com; mathieu.weill@afnic.fr; s18@icann.org
Betreff: Re: [S18] Agenda and document for ST18 call - Nov 16 16UTC

Sorry but this is an unfortunate misinterpretation – nothing in the revised version sent by Julia (DK) or in the previous version from Pedro (BR) was intended to suggest that the ICANN Board can never reject GAC advice. As with so many other similar cases I suspect that the legal drafters can improve the final version to reflect even more accurately

megan

From: s18-bounces@icann.org [mailto:s18-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Paul Rosenzweig
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2015 3:47 PM
To: 'Mathieu Weill'; s18@icann.org
Subject: Re: [S18] Agenda and document for ST18 call - Nov 16 16UTC

Mathieu

I think there is one error in your summary chart (one that is “fixed” by the common ground proposal from Julia). Under “the Board has the ability to disagree with GAC advice after trying to find a mutually acceptable solution” you list “OK” under the Brazilian and amended Brazilian proposal. I think that is wrong (or at least it is wrong as I read the proposal). What I (and others) have objected to is the language “requires finding mutually agreed solutions” which suggests that the Board may not in the end disagree with GAC consensus advice. That issue is ameliorated by Julia’s “seek” agreed solutions language or by the current “try to find” but as written the Brazilian proposal reads, to me, as if it is a mandate that the Board MUST find (“require”) an agreed solution.

Other than that, I think your summary is an accurate statement of where we are.

Cheers

Paul

Paul Rosenzweig

paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com

O: +1 (202) 547-0660

M: +1 (202) 329-9650

VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739

Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066

Link to my PGP Key

From: Mathieu Weill [mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr]
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2015 2:35 AM
To: s18@icann.org
Subject: [S18] Agenda and document for ST18 call - Nov 16 16UTC

Dear Colleagues,

With apologies about the late communication of the documents, please find below an agenda for our subgroup call, taking place in a few hours.

Attached is an attempt to recap discussions and laying out the options being discussed. The document is an attempt to structure our discussions, will be displayed and discussed during the call. Apologies if there are some inaccuracies in there, we’ve been trying to recap things but may have misinterpreted. You can hold the co chairs accountable for that ;-)

Looking forward to talking to you all in a few hours.

Best

Mathieu

AGENDA

1. Welcome, Roll call (5')

2. Scope of the subgroup : (10')

Exchange to establish a common understanding of the purpose of the subgroup which was defined in call #67 as :

- Assess existing options, areas of agreement / disagreement

- Provide full CCWG with short, clear summary of views and options

- Report to the CCWG so that consensus can be assessed around the ST18 proposal

3. Review of options that have been considered so far (10')

Determine which options have been documented and should be assessed by the subgroup. Identify source of description of the options for documentation.

4. Requirements (20')

Based on discussions on the lists and at the IGF, establish a list of agreed requirements and areas of disagreement. A proposal to that effect was mentioned in CCWG call #67 and in the attached document.

5. Initial comparison of proposals in relation with requirements (10')

Introduce tool to compare how proposals meet requirements and areas of disagreement. Participants will be requested to provide comments after the call.

6. Conclusion and next steps (5')

--
*****************************
Mathieu WEILL
AFNIC - directeur général
Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06
mathieu.weill@afnic.fr
Twitter : @mathieuweill
*****************************