[AT-Review] suggested questions for the GAC meeting

[Peter Dengate Thrush]

Thanks Becky
 A minor suggestion in relation to this bullet
§    Do members of the GAC think there is a shared understanding between the GAC and Board on the circumstances in which ICANN is obligated to affirmatively notify the GAC of a pending matter raising public policy issues? 


The way the Board has always "affirmatively" notified the GAC is by having the GAC chair as liaison, plus the fact that liaisons are treated as board members in all ways bar voting. In particular, they are provided with all board papers and participate in all board decision making discussions.

The question might raise differents if it asked about "formal" notification.


regards


Peter


On May 27, 2010, at 9:17 AM, Burr, Becky wrote:

> Please provide input on the attached questions. 
>  
> Also, any other input on the previously circulated methodology?
>  
> Becky
>  
> J. Beckwith Burr | WilmerHale
> 1875 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
> Washington, DC 20006 USA
> +1 202 663 6695 (t)
> +1 202 663 6363 (f)
> becky.burr at wilmerhale.com
> 
> Please consider the environment before printing this email.
> This email message and any attachments are being sent by Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, are confidential, and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately—by replying to this message or by sending an email to postmaster at wilmerhale.com—and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments. Thank you.
> 
> For more information about WilmerHale, please visit us at http://www.wilmerhale.com.
> <7555284_1.DOC>_______________________________________________
> AT-Review mailing list
> AT-Review at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-review

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/at-review/attachments/20100528/3ae53019/attachment.html