[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Proposed Agenda - CCWG Auction Proceeds Meeting on 19 October at 14.00 UTC
Daniel Dardailler
danield at w3.org
Thu Oct 19 12:41:23 UTC 2017
Hello all
(I'll most probably be late on the phone today, I have long standing
medical appointment I can't miss 20min before our call starts).
Regarding the draft conclusions, I agree with most of them, but I'm not
sure what "directly related to the ICANN mission" really means at this
point, since the document also uses "in service of", or "consistent
with" as a constraint elsewhere. Is there a sense of priority or
distance to ICANN implied between all those terms ?
In the case of Open Internet standards, what are the criteria for being
"directly related" to the mission ? For instance, would the development
of a new http protocol considered in scope based on this criteria ? What
about the URL specification, or HTML ? This applies to IETF as well as
W3C.
My preference goes for saying that Open Internet Standards, whether they
are from IETF or W3C, or any other compliant Internet SDO (i.e. that
follows the operating principles are interoperability, openness,
decentralization, and scalability), are consistent as long as they are
done in service of the ICANN mission, which is to say that their
successes (as standard: pervasive deployment, adoption, interoperability
achieved), will directly benefit the ICANN community (e.g. by growing IP
and DNS numberp in the future, as they've done in the past).
I think that this sort of criteria: will the success of the project
benefit ICANN in the end, is better described by "in service of" rather
than by "related to", which could end up supporting competing IP or DNS
sub-systems (e.g. DOI, which is clearly "related to" ICANN, but
certainly not "in service of" it).
On 2017-10-18 18:03, Marika Konings wrote:
> In relation to agenda item 4, please find attached an updated version
> of the document which now includes a column labelled ‘draft CCWG
> conclusion’. This draft conclusion is based on the input that was
> received by COB yesterday from Daniel, Sylvia, Vanda and Erika. Note
> that the draft conclusion is based on the input of a relatively small
> number of CCWG members and participants, but you now have the ability
> to review the draft conclusion to see if it aligns with your
> perspectives. Based on the discussions with the leadership team, the
> idea would be to next share this with the Board and staff liaisons to
> the CCWG to confirm whether these conclusions align with their
> perspectives.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Marika
>
> FROM: <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Marika
> Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>
> DATE: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 at 13:56
> TO: "ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>
> SUBJECT: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Proposed Agenda - CCWG Auction
> Proceeds Meeting on 19 October at 14.00 UTC
>
> Dear All,
>
> Please find below the proposed agenda for the next new gTLD Auction
> Proceeds CCWG meeting which has been scheduled for Thursday 19 October
> at 14.00 UTC. Call details have been distributed separately. If you
> did not receive the call details and/or require a dial-out, please
> contact gnso-secs at icann.org.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Marika
>
> PROPOSED AGENDA – NEW GTLD AUCTION PROCEEDS CCWG MEETING – 19
> OCTOBER 2017
>
> * Roll Call
> * Welcome
> * Review of open and interoperable Internet description (to be
> distributed shortly)
> * Review of examples (see
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zQ66hCxrboAJPKeuU6nHwzHQwmU6g_3kS0JUSSC_tSk/edit[docs.google.com]
> [1])
> * Next steps in relation to charter question 7 ‘(‘Should ICANN
> oversee the solicitation and evaluation of proposals, or delegate to
> or coordinate with another entity, including, for example, a
> foundation created for this purpose?’)
> * Planning for ICANN60
> * Confirm next steps and next meetings (Thursday 02 November 2017 -
> 8:45– 10:15 Working Group F2F Meeting in Hall B Section B/C and
> 13:30 – 15:00 Working Group F2F Meeting in Hall B Section B/C)
>
> _MARIKA KONINGS_
>
> _Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet
> Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) _
>
> _Email: marika.konings at icann.org _
>
> _ _
>
> _Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO_
>
> _Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive
> courses[learn.icann.org] [2] and visiting the GNSO Newcomer
> pages[gnso.icann.org] [3]. _
>
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1]
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_document_d_1zQ66hCxrboAJPKeuU6nHwzHQwmU6g-5F3kS0JUSSC-5FtSk_edit&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=jjRPM9h4j8u3njNLZQX6Ek5RLjXVeMp141Siul-Qz_c&s=yr1mOja7tIn_AWTAlo_4YQD4R-NhOFFQiGp-g9oaMoI&e=
> [2]
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses_gnso&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=jjRPM9h4j8u3njNLZQX6Ek5RLjXVeMp141Siul-Qz_c&s=hB0JO9rBBt408yQu-X_Eq0-Cxz0tQEbwufpZ7CnpE6w&e=
> [3]
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gnso.icann.org_files_gnso_presentations_policy-2Defforts.htm-23newcomers&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=jjRPM9h4j8u3njNLZQX6Ek5RLjXVeMp141Siul-Qz_c&s=qU2r3S--aI-xjZsQc39JraXy7QGvGn_DWxZSUtj2l6o&e=
> _______________________________________________
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
More information about the Ccwg-auctionproceeds
mailing list