<div dir="ltr">Hello,<div><br></div><div>I endorse what Bill suggested <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; border-collapse: collapse; ">about ICANN and IG in general regarding the relations with ITU etc .</span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; border-collapse: collapse; "><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; border-collapse: collapse; ">Regards</span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; border-collapse: collapse; "><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; border-collapse: collapse; ">Rafik</span></div>
<div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2010/5/25 Gomes, Chuck <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:cgomes@verisign.com">cgomes@verisign.com</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<br>
Wolf,<br>
<br>
Do you suggesting the following two topics for the Board/Council dinner as well as the GAC/GNSO meeting?<br>
<br>
1. DAG 4, including morality and public order<br>
2. AoC, including A&T RT and next reviews<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
Chuck<br>
</font><div class="im"><br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> From: <a href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org">owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:owner-">owner-</a><br>
</div><div class="im">> <a href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org">council@gnso.icann.org</a>] On Behalf Of <a href="mailto:KnobenW@telekom.de">KnobenW@telekom.de</a><br>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 2:59 AM<br>
> To: <a href="mailto:jaime@corp.plugin.com.br">jaime@corp.plugin.com.br</a>; <a href="mailto:william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch">william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch</a>;<br>
> <a href="mailto:tdavis2@speakeasy.net">tdavis2@speakeasy.net</a><br>
> Cc: <a href="mailto:stephane.vangelder@indom.com">stephane.vangelder@indom.com</a>; <a href="mailto:Rita.Rodin@skadden.com">Rita.Rodin@skadden.com</a>;<br>
> <a href="mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au">Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au</a>; <a href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org">council@gnso.icann.org</a><br>
</div><div><div></div><div class="h5">> Subject: AW: [council] Joint Meeting Topics for Brussels<br>
><br>
><br>
> Colleagues,<br>
><br>
> I'm personally not in favour of discussing those general "political"<br>
> issues in meetings where we as GNSO councillors are officially involved<br>
> like bourd/council dinner or GAC/council meeting. Our main focus should<br>
> be policy rather than politics development.<br>
><br>
> So I think DAG4 and AOC offer enough substance to discuss on<br>
> board/council level.<br>
><br>
> Regarding the ccNSO/GNSO meeting I support to discuss the DNS-<br>
> CERT/security issue with the main target to highlight and optimize the<br>
> working structure.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Regards<br>
> Wolf-Ulrich<br>
><br>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----<br>
> Von: <a href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org">owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org">owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a>]<br>
> Im Auftrag von Jaime Plug In<br>
> Gesendet: Montag, 24. Mai 2010 20:56<br>
> An: 'William Drake'; 'Terry L Davis, P.E.'<br>
> Cc: '"'Stéphane Van Gelder'"'; 'Rodin Johnston, Rita';<br>
> <a href="mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au">Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au</a>; <a href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org">council@gnso.icann.org</a><br>
> Betreff: RES: [council] Joint Meeting Topics for Brussels<br>
><br>
><br>
> I think the issue of the roles of ICANN versus IGF, ITU or other UN<br>
> bodies<br>
> in the Internet governance is the single most important discussion item<br>
> both<br>
> with the Board (in the informal or semi-formal meeting) and with GAC<br>
> (in the<br>
> formal meeting).<br>
><br>
> For the rest, I endorse Bill's view of focusing in the first two issues<br>
> of<br>
> Chuck's original list:<br>
><br>
> * DAG 4, including morality and public order (could be a lively<br>
> discussion)<br>
> * AoC, including A&T RT and next reviews<br>
><br>
> Jaime Wagner<br>
><br>
> -----Mensagem original-----<br>
> De: <a href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org">owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org">owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a>]<br>
> Em<br>
> nome de William Drake<br>
> Enviada em: sábado, 22 de maio de 2010 11:11<br>
> Para: Terry L Davis, P.E.<br>
> Cc: "'Stéphane Van Gelder'"; 'Rodin Johnston, Rita';<br>
> <a href="mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au">Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au</a>; <a href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org">council@gnso.icann.org</a><br>
> Assunto: Re: [council] Joint Meeting Topics for Brussels<br>
><br>
><br>
> Hi Terry,<br>
><br>
> I think it'd be more than interesting to talk with boardies about<br>
> what's<br>
> going on in the larger international political environment. That<br>
> includes<br>
> the ITU stuff, e.g. the October Plenipotentiary Conference in<br>
> Guadalajara,<br>
> for which there are various proposals circulating that could directly<br>
> impact<br>
> ICANN and its nexus. But it goes beyond this, as demonstrated by some<br>
> of<br>
> the government statements last week in Geneva at the annual UN CSTD<br>
> meeting<br>
> (including the reactions to Nick Thorne's comments). While I sat with<br>
> Rod<br>
> at the Nairobi dinner, which was helpful, I still don't have a clear<br>
> take on<br>
> how the leadership is thinking about and positioning viz. these<br>
> developments. And while we tried to start a conversation along these<br>
> lines<br>
> at the Nairobi Council-GAC meeting, the less than 30 minutes available<br>
> were<br>
> quickly consumed by general statements from a few OECD governments,<br>
> rather<br>
> than real engagement. So trying to bridge a little the gap between the<br>
> external debate on ICANN a!<br>
> nd ICANN's internal discussions could be highly useful, methinks...<br>
><br>
> Best,<br>
><br>
> Bill<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> On May 21, 2010, at 11:30 PM, Terry L Davis, P.E. wrote:<br>
><br>
> ><br>
> > Stephane<br>
> ><br>
> > Likewise! And I'm probably not favor a formal agenda for discussions<br>
> > either.<br>
> ><br>
> > What might be interesting and could likely be interesting for most<br>
> folks<br>
> > would be discussions about ICANN and Internet governance directions.<br>
> I<br>
> > suspect the next few years will be both challenging and pivotal for<br>
> the<br>
> > Internet as we know it; you could even in toss the recent ITU<br>
> initiatives.<br>
> ><br>
> > Take care<br>
> > Terry<br>
> ><br>
> > -----Original Message-----<br>
> > From: <a href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org">owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:owner-">owner-</a><br>
> <a href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org">council@gnso.icann.org</a>]<br>
> On<br>
> > Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder<br>
> > Sent: Friday, May 21, 2010 12:22 PM<br>
> > To: Rodin Johnston, Rita<br>
> > Cc: '<a href="mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au">Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au</a>'; '<a href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org">council@gnso.icann.org</a>'<br>
> > Subject: Re: [council] Joint Meeting Topics for Brussels<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > Good to know that the majority of the Board remains in favour of the<br>
> > dinners.<br>
> ><br>
> > Thanks Rita.<br>
> ><br>
> > Stéphane<br>
> ><br>
> > Le 21 mai 2010 à 16:34, Rodin Johnston, Rita a écrit :<br>
> ><br>
> >> Stephane and all -<br>
> >><br>
> >> I very much agree with this sentiment and believe the majority of<br>
> the<br>
> > board does as well. I'm not sure where this notion began, but bruce<br>
> and I<br>
> > are in dublin and can discuss with peter. I would not be in favor of<br>
> > discontinuing dinner unless a better option for informal discussions<br>
> was<br>
> > substituted. Thanks<br>
> >><br>
> >><br>
> >> ----- Original Message -----<br>
> >> From: <a href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org">owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a> <<a href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org">owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a>><br>
> >> To: Bruce Tonkin <<a href="mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au">Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au</a>><br>
> >> Cc: GNSO Council <<a href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org">council@gnso.icann.org</a>><br>
> >> Sent: Fri May 21 10:09:27 2010<br>
> >> Subject: Re: [council] Joint Meeting Topics for Brussels<br>
> >><br>
> >><br>
> >> We are talking about the interaction between 2 of ICANN's major<br>
> > decision-making bodies.<br>
> >><br>
> >> I think it's important to keep sight of the usefulness of getting<br>
> the<br>
> > people from each body talking to each other.<br>
> >><br>
> >> Even when there's no formal agenda, this type of interaction helps<br>
> make<br>
> > organisations work.<br>
> >><br>
> >> Yes we can keep it formal, but when it's a social event it's often<br>
> easier<br>
> > for people to meet and get to know each other. That then translates<br>
> into<br>
> > real benefits for the organisation when it comes to formal work<br>
> sessions.<br>
> >><br>
> >> As a new councillor, I found the first Board dinner I attended<br>
> helped<br>
> take<br>
> > away a lot of the awe and stress I felt at both learning the Council<br>
> and<br>
> > working with the Board. From informal conversations with Board<br>
> members, I<br>
> > found them to be much more approachable and in tune with the everyday<br>
> > problems ICANN faces than I had thought. I would never have gotten<br>
> that in<br>
> a<br>
> > more formal setting.<br>
> >><br>
> >> I think our joint dinner are an investment we all make to help oil<br>
> the<br>
> > internal workings of the organisation.<br>
> >><br>
> >> Stéphane<br>
> >><br>
> >> Le 21 mai 2010 à 15:11, Bruce Tonkin a écrit :<br>
> >><br>
> >>><br>
> >>> Hello All,<br>
> >>><br>
> >>><br>
> >>><br>
> >>>>> I think the approach you suggest for the Board dinner is<br>
> excellent.<br>
> >>> To me, these dinners are crucial for us and the opportunity for<br>
> >>> interaction with Board members they bring. I would hate to see them<br>
> >>> disappear, but would like to understand why some on the Board feel<br>
> they<br>
> >>> should go.<br>
> >>><br>
> >>><br>
> >>> Well here are some issues that get raised:<br>
> >>><br>
> >>> - the dinners are at the end of a long day of workshops/meetings -<br>
> so<br>
> >>> some members are too tired to give important matters appropriate<br>
> >>> attention<br>
> >>><br>
> >>> - it is not always clear what the objective is - a general<br>
> discussion<br>
> >>> about topics, a social event, discussion about a specific issues<br>
> that<br>
> >>> the Board will be making a decision on that week?<br>
> >>><br>
> >>> - if the process is working properly - the Board will simply be<br>
> >>> endorsing the recommendations from the Council that have consensus<br>
> >>> support and should not be getting into the detail of particular<br>
> policy<br>
> >>> matters. If there is disagreement amongst the parties in the GNSO<br>
> - the<br>
> >>> GNSO should work it out together - not try to get the Board to take<br>
> >>> sides.<br>
> >>><br>
> >>> There are some that would prefer a more formal meeting - not<br>
> >>> aligned with a breakfast/lunch or dinner - where there are<br>
> materials<br>
> >>> provided in advance and the Board members can ask questions about<br>
> the<br>
> >>> particular issue.<br>
> >>><br>
> >>><br>
> >>> Personally I think a mixture of formal and informal can work. e.g<br>
> A<br>
> >>> period of time for a structured discussion with documents provided<br>
> in<br>
> >>> advance, and the ability for the Board to ask questions on the<br>
> >>> documents. An informal eating occasion can then follow that is<br>
> perhaps<br>
> >>> optional for the participants to attend to get a better<br>
> understanding of<br>
> >>> the issues. This structure used to work quite well when we were<br>
> doing<br>
> >>> the new gTLD policy development - the days were spent on policy<br>
> >>> discussions, and the dinners were an opportunity to break down some<br>
> >>> barriers in the discussions with no formal agenda, that often led<br>
> to<br>
> >>> better results the following day.<br>
> >>><br>
> >>> Regards,<br>
> >>> Bruce Tonkin<br>
> >>><br>
> >>><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>