[Gac-gnso-cg] Notes from today's GAC-GNSO CG meeting

[Marika Konings]

Dear All,

Please find below the notes from today's GAC-GNSO Consultation Group meeting. Please take particular note of the action items listed below.

Best regards,

Marika

Notes 01/10:

3. Review other phases of GNSO PDP and discuss possible other opportunities for GAC early engagement (see first draft of the Initiation and WG phase attached - page 3 and 4)

  *   Overview of Issue Scoping and WG phase provided by Marika, including possible suggestions for early engagement
  *   Makes sense to invite requestor of Preliminary Issue Report to participate. Specific invitation to participate in DT if AC requested Issue Report (if a DT is formed to develop a charter)
  *   Consider what other suggested mechanisms can be used at this step (consider list / inventory)
  *   Informal mechanisms are always available (e.g. communication to GNSO chair if there are certain concerns relating to the charter)
  *   Should the Quick Look Mechanism expand into this phase with regards to input that is provided at an early stage to a WG or is a separate mechanism needed? Should the CG have a role in this? GAC to further consider how to operationalise this aspect. Consider exploring further as part of the joint meeting in Dublin.
  *   What if after all early engagement, there is still disagreement between GAC and GNSO - part of further stages of the process. It is foreseen in the charter that the CG would also consider what mechanisms could be put in place to deal with a situation in which the GNSO Policy Recommendations do not align with GAC Advice. Hope is that through early engagement mechanisms those situations would be rare, but should nevertheless be considered.
  *   Should there be a mechanism to facilitate / encourage dialogue if GAC input is not supported by WG in Initial Report? If so, how, what form should that take? Liaison role could be important to ensure effective meetingn of minds between GNSO and GAC and correcting any misunderstanding. Committee that is formed as part of quick look mechanism (which is still under consideration by the GAC, could also play a role.
  *   Should further consideration be given to a GAC 'liaison' / rep to a PDP WG which would allow for regular info sharing with the GAC, noting that such a liaison / rep could not speak on behaf of the GAC unless authorised to do so.

Action item: Everyone encouraged to provide further input and suggestions both on initiation and WG phase.

4. Plan for review of implementation of Early Engagement recommendations ('Quick Look Mechanism')

  *   Quick look mechanisms has been used for two PDPs to date (next generation RDS and new gTLD Subsequent Procedures)
  *   Quick look input was received earlier than anticipated - is that something that needs to be modified or is it actually  helpful?
  *   Need to formally record communications
  *   Consider requesting feedback as a result of joint session in Dublin

Action item: Staff to provide an overview of PDPs for which quick look mechanism has been used to date and provide feedback from a staff perspective

5. Plan for review of GNSO Liaison to the GAC pilot project

  *   Consider asking GAC/GNSO for initial assessment of whether this role should continue beyond this fiscal year
  *   Work with Mason on review and identification of possible improvements (are there opportunities for enhanced effectiveness

Action item: staff to review original 'job' description and put together table format to facilitate review.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gac-gnso-cg/attachments/20151001/8fef647b/attachment.html>