<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 14px; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; "><div>Dear All,</div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><div><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 14px; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; "><div><br></div><div>Following Suzanne's suggestion that staff could possibly put some ideas together in relation to the concept of a reverse liaison, Olof and I had a little brainstorm and came up with the attached which as a first step tries to identify what the respective objectives and expectations are. Fleshing out that part of the conversation further may assist in determining whether or not a 'reverse liaison' would be the best mechanism to achieve the expectations. We also tried to identify a number of questions that would need to be addressed should it be determined that a liaison is the way to go, as well as some possible alternatives that could be considered should it be decided that a liaison is not the most effective mechanism to achieve these objectives.</div><div><br></div><div>As the issue of funding of a possible liaison has come up on various occasions, Olof and I have also discussed whether it would be an idea to submit a special budget request on behalf of the GNSO and GAC that would foresee for funding for a liaison to attend the ICANN meetings in FY15. This could be presented as a pilot project which would allow the GNSO-GAC to experiment with this position and consider at the end of FY15 whether this should be continued as a pilot, transformed into a fixed funded slot or discarded. Obviously, we are still in the early phases of determining whether a liaison is the way to go and the nature of that role, but unfortunately, the deadline for special budget requests is 7 March. If you all think this would be a helpful approach, Olof and I could go ahead and complete the required forms for your review, noting that at any point the GNSO-GAC could decide to withdraw the request should a different approach be pursued. </div></div></div></span><div><br></div><div>As noted by Mikey, the group is still looking for topic leads to address this issue, so hopefully this may encourage some of you to come forward. </div><div><br></div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><div><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 14px; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; "><div>We look forward to receiving your feedback.</div></div></div></span><div><br></div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><div><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 14px; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; "><div>Olof & Marika</div></div></div></span></body></html>