<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Councillors,<div><br></div><div>Following on from our discussions today, please find below a refined list of topics.</div><div><br></div><div>Please come back with comments and proposed edits asap. As a reminder, our session with the Board is today from 17:30 to 19:00.</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div><br></div><div>Stéphane</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><!--StartFragment--><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;
text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;mso-bidi-font-family:
Helvetica;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB">AoC<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;
text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;mso-bidi-font-family:
Helvetica;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB">i) The AoC process & outputs to date,
and the broader progress of transparency & accountability across the range
of ICANN processes.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;
text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;mso-bidi-font-family:
Helvetica;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;
text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;mso-bidi-font-family:
Helvetica;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB">ii) The AoC's repeatedly stated requirement
that ICANN act in the public interest. While there've been some
preliminary discussions on such matters, the AoC is now almost 2 years old. Are
we able to have a more probing and structured discussion with the benefit of
this experience?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;
text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;mso-bidi-font-family:
Helvetica;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;
text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;mso-bidi-font-family:
Helvetica;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;
text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;mso-bidi-font-family:
Helvetica;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB">CWG<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;
text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;mso-bidi-font-family:
Helvetica;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB">The GNSO Council has spent a lot of time
recently discussing Community Working Groups (CWGs), to the point that we have
a drafting team looking at this topic. Recent experiences with a couple of CWGs
that the GNSO is involved in have shown that it would be useful to have a
better-defined process for them. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;
text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;mso-bidi-font-family:
Helvetica;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;
text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;mso-bidi-font-family:
Helvetica;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;
text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;mso-bidi-font-family:
Helvetica;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB">GNSO/Board interact.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;
text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;mso-bidi-font-family:
Helvetica;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB">At the Board's initiative, our interaction
with the Board seems to be changing. The Council's always found our social
interaction with the Board, more specifically the dinners we used to have with
the Board, to be extremely useful.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;
text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;mso-bidi-font-family:
Helvetica;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;
text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;mso-bidi-font-family:
Helvetica;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;
text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;mso-bidi-font-family:
Helvetica;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB">Revolving door.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;
text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;mso-bidi-font-family:
Helvetica;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB">In light of the DNS becoming a function more
visible to, and scrutinized by governments and business on a global basis, and
the size of the market about to be created by the new gTLD program, has the
Board begun to assess how this might require changes to ICANN ethics policies,
e.g., the introduction of an anti revolving door policy?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<!--EndFragment-->
</div></body></html>