[ccwg-internet-governance] Fwd: [council] AMENDMENT - Motion on Conditional Participation of the GNSO as a Chartering Organization for CCWG-IG

Greg Shatan gregshatanipc at gmail.com
Wed Dec 14 19:21:09 UTC 2016


I did not think it needed to start as a GNSO effort, since it will be
everyone's charter at the end.

But the important thing is to start.

Greg

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 12:13 PM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com>
wrote:

> I think we should just do this, and I hope that Olivier and Nigel are
> joining,  as well... but also gathering inputs and participants from all of
> the GNSO constituencies. .
>
>
> Yes, we need some geo diversity. Perhaps Jimson/BC - Africa ICT Alliance,
> and some others from non WEOG can contribute. Someone from ISPs? Someone
> from each other Constituency?
>
>
> Are we inviting others from other SGs or ACs, or first drafting as GNSO?
> Sorry to ask but I can also reach out to CCTLDS and GAC if you are seeking
> broader drafting partners in this but I thought it was first GNSO?
>
> M
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org <
> ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Greg Shatan <
> gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 14, 2016 11:53 AM
> *To:* farzaneh badii
> *Cc:* ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [ccwg-internet-governance] Fwd: [council] AMENDMENT -
> Motion on Conditional Participation of the GNSO as a Chartering
> Organization for CCWG-IG
>
> I suggest we assemble a (Re-)Drafting Team and get on with it.
>
> Marilyn has volunteered.
> It might be a fair assumption that Keith and Farzi have "volunteered" as
> well, by replying to this email.  (Which probably means I have volunteered
> too).
> Whether or not that's a fair assumption, I think we need some non-GNSO
> participation in the drafting team to round things out (Marilyn, Keith,
> Farzi and I are all similarly afflicted, though with different strains of
> the GNSO virus).  A preponderance of GNSO folk is fine (especially since
> the GNSO is the "inspiration" for this project), but we should be somewhat
> more diverse than that....  (Farzi no longer even gives us geographic
> diversity, since she's now a North American Georgia Peach, or Georgia Tech
> Yellow Jacket, or something like that...)
>
> Let's not wait until the meeting next week to get this going.  Wouldn't it
> be nice to have a progress report at next week's meeting instead?
>
> Any other volunteers?
>
> Anyone volunteering to chair?  (Not I, with apologies, I'm chaired-out at
> the moment.)
>
> Greg
>
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 11:15 AM, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>> Thanks Keith for bringing this up again. I think we need to start doing
>> something about it and we have to start soon.
>>
>> On 14 December 2016 at 11:10, Drazek, Keith <kdrazek at verisign.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Is there a plan to get this process started? Copenhagen will be here
>>> before we know it.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Keith
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Keith Drazek
>>>
>>> Vice President
>>>
>>> Public Policy & Government Relations
>>>
>>> Verisign, Inc.
>>>
>>> +1-571-377-9182 <+1%20571-377-9182>
>>>
>>> kdrazek at verisign.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org [mailto:
>>> ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Rafik Dammak
>>> *Sent:* Monday, November 07, 2016 4:10 AM
>>> *To:* ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
>>> *Subject:* [ccwg-internet-governance] Fwd: [council] AMENDMENT - Motion
>>> on Conditional Participation of the GNSO as a Chartering Organization for
>>> CCWG-IG
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> GNSO council just approved unanimously this motion. It is still
>>> chartering organization but we got work to do by Copenhagen meeting.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>> ---
>>> >
>>> > 2.         MOTION – Conditional participation of the GNSO as a
>>> Chartering Organization for the Cross Community Working Group to discuss
>>> Internet governance (CWG-IG) issues affecting ICANN
>>> >
>>> > Made by: Darcy Southwell
>>> >
>>> > Seconded by:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > WHEREAS:
>>> >
>>> > a)      The GNSO Council adopted the charter for a Cross Community
>>> Working Group to discuss Internet governance (CWG-IG) issues affecting
>>> ICANN and make recommendations to the chartering organization on these
>>> issues on 15 October 2014, and as such became a Chartering Organization.
>>> >
>>> > b)      The Charter foresees that “At each ICANN Annual General
>>> Meeting, starting 2014, the Charter and deliverables of the WG shall be
>>> reviewed by the participating SO’s and AC’s to determine whether the WG
>>> should continue, or, close and be dissolved. Consistent with ICANN
>>> community practices, the WG will continue if at least two of the
>>> participating SO’s or AC’s extend the Charter of the WG and notify the
>>> other participating SO’s and AC’s accordingly one month after the annual
>>> review date”.
>>> >
>>> > c)      The CWG-IG provided its first written status update on 23 June
>>> 2016 (see https://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/ccwg-internet-governance-23
>>> jun16-en.pdf).
>>> >
>>> > d)      The GNSO Council recently adopted the “Uniform Framework of
>>> Principles and Recommendations for Cross Community Working Groups” (CWG
>>> Framework) which details the lifecycle of a CCWG including initiation,
>>> formation, operation, decision-making, adoption of Final Report by
>>> Chartering Organizations and closure of CCWG, and post-closure of CCWG.
>>> >
>>> > e)      The GNSO Council has observed that the CWG-IG does not follow
>>> this lifecycle, nor has it established or adopted an initial work plan and
>>> associated schedule as foreseen in its Charter.
>>> >
>>> > f)       The GNSO Council recognizes the importance of a continued
>>> dialogue and discussion in relation to the topic of Internet Governance
>>> within an ICANN context.
>>> >
>>> > g)      The GNSO Council has shared its concerns with the ccNSO
>>> Council and representatives of other SO/ACs on the subject of this CWG and
>>> its future.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > RESOLVED:
>>> >
>>> > a)      The GNSO Council will continue to participate as a Chartering
>>> Organization for the CWG-IG. However, this participation is conditioned
>>> upon a comprehensive review of the CWG-IG Charter by the CWG-IG, in
>>> accordance with the CWG Framework (http://gnso.icann.org/en/draf
>>> ts/uniform-framework-principles-recommendations-16sep16-en.pdf). In
>>> particular, the GNSO Council expects future work to be subject to a clear
>>> work plan, with regular updates and clear deliverables.
>>> >
>>> > b)      The GNSO Council expects that the CWG-IG will present by
>>> ICANN58 a report on its findings, which may include a revised charter or a
>>> recommendation to reconstitute the group under a new structure.
>>> >
>>> > c)      Following the submission of the CWG-IG report, the GNSO
>>> Council will consider the recommendations and decide whether or not it will
>>> continue as a Chartering Organization.
>>> >
>>> > d)      The GNSO Secretariat will communicate this decision to the
>>> CWG-IG Chairs as well as the other Chartering Organizations.
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
>>> ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Farzaneh
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
>> ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-internet-governance/attachments/20161214/dd2ef11d/attachment.html>


More information about the ccwg-internet-governance mailing list