[Gac-gnso-cg] Meeting Agenda - October 7th 2014

[Manal Ismail]

Many thanks Suzanne ..

As you may have noticed, following our last call, the slides have been
significantly reduced ..

May I ask if you can share the below important questions through an
intervention .. We can agree on a point where we can pass you the floor
to share the below ..

Does this sound reasonable?

 

Kind Regards

--Manal

 

 

From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org
[mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Suzanne Radell
Sent: Thursday, October 9, 2014 8:08 PM
To: Jonathan Robinson; GAC-GNSO-CG at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Meeting Agenda - October 7th 2014

 

Hi all, I've inserted some comments in the slide deck for LA for your
consideration.  In connection with them, I've drafted the following
questions to be put to the GAC membership in LA as well; please let me
know if they are in line with your recent discussions, which I have
regrettably not been able to join.  My sense is that the questions could
be raised either during or after the three slides labeled "Early
Awareness" and I'd be happy to handle this if you haven't already
determined a lead.  Thanks in advance for your feedback and see you
soon, Suz

 

1.        Based on the GAC-GNSO Consultation Group's assessment of the
survey results, it seems clear that more information is needed from the
GAC membership as to the type and frequency of material that would
assist the GAC in arriving at an early and better understanding of what
issues pending before the GNSO require GAC attention.  The GAC-GNSO
Consultation Group would ask GAC members to share their thoughts
regarding the specific suggestions outlined in the slide deck:  do they
provide a good starting point?

2.       Noting that two of the concerns raised in the survey relate to
both the volume of work and confusion as to the timeframe for
contributions, would it make sense to experiment with an approach that
identifies those issues that are just at the beginning stage in the GNSO
(e.g. the initial Issues Report)?

3.       If the GAC were to create some form of "quick look" mechanism,
what is the best way to do that?  Should we implement the suggestions
proposed and determine, by the next ICANN/GAC meeting, whether
implementing these suggestions meets the GAC's needs?  

4.       Or should we consider creating a GAC-GNSO working group that
would help share the responsibility for monitoring GNSO developments
among a larger number of GAC members?

 

 

Suzanne Murray Radell

Senior Policy Advisor, NTIA/OIA

sradell at ntia.doc.gov

202-482-3167

 

 

 

 

 

From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org
[mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2014 7:14 AM
To: GAC-GNSO-CG at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] Meeting Agenda - October 7th 2014

 

Please see attached for a draft of the presentation for 2a

 

Jonathan

 

From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson at ipracon.com] 
Sent: 07 October 2014 12:13
To: GAC-GNSO-CG at icann.org
Subject: Meeting Agenda - October 7th 2014

 

All,

 

Having talked with Manal, Marika & Olof, it seems we need to cover the
following:

 

1.       Review Agenda

2.       Content of the GNSO / GAC Meeting

a.       Presentation - Structure, content & objectives

b.      Input from Mason Cole

3.       Agenda for the face to face meeting of the CG

4.       AOB

 

Look forward to seeing you at 13h00 UTC today.

 

 

Jonathan

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gac-gnso-cg/attachments/20141012/e8e431a1/attachment.html>