[Gac-gnso-cg] Work Plan for and at Singapore ..
Manal Ismail
manal at tra.gov.eg
Tue Mar 4 09:55:10 UTC 2014
Thanks Jonathan ..
I take your below points, in addition to the time constraint .. so, if I've interpreted the below discussion right, the question now is, where should our work presentation stop:
- For the day-to-day work track, do we have time to work out the pros and cons of each option, or present the current version as is mentioning our intention to do so and to share an updated version online ..
- For the PDP work track, I take it that we will be presenting the current version as is and maybe also mentioning our intention to share later, online, a list of issues/questions (whether answered or not remains to be seen)..
I just have one more question, how do we intend to utilize the time of our consultation group face-to-face meeting .. in wrapping and agreeing on the way forward or also getting into substance (for example, looking at the pros & cons if not yet completed or going through the list of issues/questions,...)?
Kind regards
--Manal
-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson at ipracon.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 11:15 AM
To: Manal Ismail; 'Mike O'Connor'; 'Suzanne Radell'
Cc: gac-gnso-cg at icann.org
Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Work Plan for and at Singapore ..
Manal and colleagues,
No need to apologise for the long email. In my view, you are doing great
job of keeping us focussed on the issues a hand and how to make forward
progress.
Regarding our joint meeting in Singapore, I have a couple of additional
points for consideration:
1. We should possibly not assume that members of either the GAC or the GNSO
are familiar with the background and progress to date and therefore some of
our session may need to be educational.
2. Even if some are well prepared, going into the detail of the questions
may be counter-productive in such a large forum.
So, whilst I am strongly in favour of explaining our work and seeking input
and feedback, I think we need to handle it with some care as it is a very
sizeable group in a somewhat formal setting
Thanks.
Jonathan
-----Original Message-----
From: Manal Ismail [mailto:manal at tra.gov.eg]
Sent: 04 March 2014 07:28
To: Jonathan Robinson; Mike O'Connor; Suzanne Radell
Cc: gac-gnso-cg at icann.org
Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] Work Plan for and at Singapore ..
Thank you all for your valuable responses ..
@Ana,
Although I see the merit behind your suggestion for grasping the opportunity
and holding 2 meetings in Singapore, yet practically speaking I believe this
may be difficult to schedule .. but I'm flexible if all agree and schedule
allows .. I also see your point in, if having one meeting, holding it after
our GAC-GNSO joint meeting and personally do not have a problem ..
@Suzanne,
You did not miss much as the conference call was cancelled, and instead I
thought we might continue our discussion through 4 messages each on one of
the proposed agenda items .. On your first question, there's already an
unsettled discussion on the list whether we should get into the long list of
questions or not given the limited time we have .. and frankly I sympathize
both views the practical reasons for suggesting not to as well as the
importance of the questions which are basically a main aspect of our work ..
Having said that I was going to suggest that maybe we can consolidate those
questions and come up with a smaller set, like 5 or 6 main points, to
discuss for and at Singapore .. Not sure what others think ..
On your second point, my initial thinking of our joint meeting was partially
reporting back and partially interactive discussion .. I was thinking that
first we can bring again to the attention of GAC-GNSO attendees accomplished
tasks, namely the Charter & the request for funding, both of which, by the
way, were already shared online; then focus the rest of the meeting on
having an interactive discussion on the work of both work tracks .. and here
I was thinking that GAC-GNSO should now where we stand, how we have reached
that point as well as where we're heading .. I think it's a good opportunity
to explain our work then seek feedback whether at the meeting or later
online in response to sharing our work documents, hopefully within an agreed
timeframe .. Not sure if this makes sense but we can discuss during our call
today ..
@Mikey,
I'm a bit unclear as to whether you are concerned 'about the level of
detail' or the number of questions? In any case I fully agree with you that
we should have this discussed and agreed on today's call ..
@Jonathan,
On the formal confirmation from the GAC chair regarding the community
funding application (for "reverse liaison"), I recall that Olof had already
shared with Heather .. (Olof, would you be able to kindly follow-up with
Heather on this?) As to the 4 objectives you mentioned for Singapore
meeting, I fully agree to all 4 .. I was just thinking that points 1-3
should not take long and that point 4 should be the focus of our meeting,
keeping it as interactive as possible by walking through our working
documents, highlighting points agreed by the consultation group, points
still under discussion as well as points indicated as important but not yet
discussed .. and at the end seeking their feedback whether immediate, at the
meeting, or later, online .. but I'm flexible if you and the group agree on
otherwise ..
Apologies for yet another long email .. Looking forward to further
discussing and concluding during today's call ..
Kind Regards
--Manal
-----Original Message-----
From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org]
On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2014 7:58 PM
To: 'Mike O'Connor'; 'Suzanne Radell'
Cc: gac-gnso-cg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Work Plan for and at Singapore ..
All,
My sense of the objective for Singapore is:
1. Indicate a productive and co-operative approach 2. Illustrate a charter
governing the scope of the work of the group 3. Illustrate two work tracks
and an overall systematic method 4. Illustrate progress to date within each
of the work tracks
I think that's in line with what Mikey (and possibly others) is (are)
suggesting and doesn't lead us into the "trap" of trying to do too much
analysis or otherwise and not succeeding.
I think we are succeeding at a time when we are all exceptionally busy and
it would be good (for all of us) to convey that effectively.
Best wishes,
Jonathan
-----Original Message-----
From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org]
On Behalf Of Mike O'Connor
Sent: 03 March 2014 15:51
To: Suzanne Radell
Cc: gac-gnso-cg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Work Plan for and at Singapore ..
hi all,
i think we have a little bit of a puzzler about the level of detail we want
to go into when answering that series of questions. i'm inclined towards
"less detail" so that we don't accidentally launch a 6-month analysis
effort. but even a high level analysis is going to be hard to complete
during the 2 calls that remain between now and Singapore.
maybe we could focus our call this week on on that which we already
completed and ready for presentation in Singapore? we have quite a lot -
charter, ideas, some pictures... then we could tidy up the (short)
presentation by our next call?
mikey
On Mar 3, 2014, at 9:00 AM, Suzanne Radell <SRadell at ntia.doc.gov> wrote:
> I too want to thank Manal for laying out our agenda not only for
tomorrow's call but for Singapore as well. I will apologize in advance for
not having had sufficient time to devote to this last week, due to the press
of prep work with USG agencies for Singapore. But as I consider Manal's
and Ana's email messages, I'm mindful of the need to bring myself up to
speed quickly and be better informed as to work load requirements for this
project leading into the Singapore meeting.
>
> So my first question is whether we are seeking to draft answers to all
> of
the questions our materials are posing? If so, is it our intention to then
present both questions and proposed answers to the GAC and the GNSO?
>
> I'd also like to share a slight hesitation about how much material we
intend to present to our colleagues (including the BGRI, presumably?) in
Singapore; there's a lot of information and proposed forward action for
people to digest. Do we want to develop a timeline or some milestones to
ensure that we don't get out too far ahead of our respective communities?
In raising these questions, it's not my intention to appear to be
questioning the direction or scope of work at all; just taking note of a
broad range of activities that the ICANN community is grappling with and
wanting to be sure we can manage both progress and expectations while also
drawing more of our GAC and GNSO colleagues into the work itself.
>
> Thanks in advance for your guidance, Suz
>
>
> Suzanne Murray Radell
> Senior Policy Advisor
> NTIA/Office of International Affairs
> PH: 202-482-3167
> FX: 202-482-1865
> ________________________________________
> From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org [gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org] On
Behalf Of Ana Neves [Ana.Neves at fct.pt]
> Sent: Monday, March 03, 2014 9:43 AM
> To: Manal Ismail; gac-gnso-cg at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Work Plan for and at Singapore ..
>
> Dear Manal,
>
> Thank you so much for your email, which made me to re-think about this
important matter and as you rightly say the draft agenda can work as a
brainstorming as well.
>
> Just would like to highlight at this stage that maybe it would be
> useful
to have two F2F meetings in Singapore, 1 previous and the other after the
GAC-GNSO joint meeting. If the 1st one might not be feasible due to the
scheduling, I don't see it as problematic as we are working on that through
conf call, yet we should use the opportunity to be all in Singapore to a
debrief/f2f meeting after the GAC-GNSO joint meeting - and not to wait to
the next conf call post Singapore.
>
> Looking forward to hearing from all of you tomorrow,
>
> Ana
>
> From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org
> [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org]
On Behalf Of Manal Ismail
> Sent: terça-feira, 25 de Fevereiro de 2014 17:52
> To: gac-gnso-cg at icann.org
> Subject: [Gac-gnso-cg] Work Plan for and at Singapore ..
>
> Dear All ..
>
> Apologies to keep bombarding you with more messages, hopefully my last
> for
today ..
> Although the fourth agenda item was to agree on our deliverables for
> next
call .. I have quickly discussed with Jonathan and we thought it would be
better if we extend this discussion to agree on an overall plan for and at
Singapore ..
>
> Pre-Singapore we have:
>
> 1. 3 weeks remaining
>
> 2. 2 conference calls scheduled for Mar. 4th & 18th
>
> At Singapore:
>
> 1. We have a GAC-GNSO joint meeting (slot under discussion is Sun.
at 15h00 or 15h30 for approximately 1 hour)
>
> 2. We believe the group would also benefit from a face-to-face
meeting in Singapore, even if for a quick ½ hr
>
> Material:
>
> 1. The Charter (done - we can just report it exists and provide
reference)
>
> 2. The request for funding a GNSO liaison to the GAC (done - we can
just report it exists, provide reference and status)
>
> 3. Progress of PDP work track (ongoing - to be presented and
discussed at the meeting)
>
> 4. Progress of day-to-day cooperation work track (ongoing - to be
presented and discussed at the meeting)
>
> Given the above, my initial suggestion is to target the following for
Singapore:
>
> 1. We should have completed an agreed initial version of filled PDP
table(s)
>
> 2. We should have completed an agreed initial version of filled
day-to-day table(s)
>
> 3. Highlight questions/issues we particularly need answers for at
the meeting
>
> 4. Know the status of the request for funding a GNSO liaison to the
GAC, just in case
>
> Please consider this as an initial brainstorming .. I have to admit
> that I
did not even have the chance to fully discuss everything with Jonathan ..
> Looking forward to receiving your feedback ..
>
> Kind Regards
> --Manal
>
> From:
> gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org>
[mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Manal Ismail
> Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 8:07 PM
> To: gac-gnso-cg at icann.org<mailto:gac-gnso-cg at icann.org>
> Subject: [Gac-gnso-cg] Agenda for Tues. Feb. 25th cc ..
>
> Dear All ..
>
> Please find below the suggested agenda for tomorrow's conference call ..
>
>
> 1. Day-to-day work track
>
> (Working document prepared by Marika and Olof - Version circulated by
Marika on Feb. 20th, 2014)
>
>
> 2. PDP work track
>
> (Working document prepared by Mikey and Suzanne - Version circulated
> by
Mikey on Feb. 20th, 2014)
>
>
> 3. Agree on material ready to be shared in preparation for Singapore
>
> o Active GNSO WGs (attached)
>
> o Mechanism for day-to-day co-operation (attached version - with
unpopulated table)
>
>
> 4. Agree on expectations from both work tracks for the following
call
> (Note: Next call scheduled for 11 March 2014, 14h00 UTC)
>
>
> 5. AOB
>
> All referenced documents are attached for your convenience ..
>
> Kind Regards
> --Manal
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gac-gnso-cg mailing list
> Gac-gnso-cg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gac-gnso-cg
PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE:
OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)
_______________________________________________
Gac-gnso-cg mailing list
Gac-gnso-cg at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gac-gnso-cg
_______________________________________________
Gac-gnso-cg mailing list
Gac-gnso-cg at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gac-gnso-cg
More information about the Gac-gnso-cg
mailing list