[gnso-improvem-impl-sc] AW: SCI Meeting 09 August: Notes and Actions

KnobenW at telekom.de KnobenW at telekom.de
Thu Aug 9 21:17:54 UTC 2012

Thanks very much, Julie!

Best regards

Von: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] Im Auftrag von Julie Hedlund
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 9. August 2012 22:35
An: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org
Betreff: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Meeting 09 August: Notes and Actions

Dear SCI members,

Below for your consideration are the notes and actions from the chat room for today's meeting.  Please let me know if you have any questions or clarifications.

Best regards,


Julie Hedlund, Policy Director


Status update on community review -- consent agenda & the GNSO Council Voting Results

-- Initial period has closed; reply period opened 31 July and closes 20 August

-- One comment from Registries SG

ACTION: Staff will provide analysis tool and SCI will consider the comments and replies when the forum closes.

Proxy Voting Procedure

Proposed: no change to procedure, request new method for notification of both Secretariat and Council

-- Staff have confirmed that this can be done

-- SCI can recommend the change to the Council with a short explanation

ACTION: Julie to provide bullet points to Wolf-Ulrich

Deferral of Motions

Ron -- Talked about circulating a motion before it is submitted.  If a deferral arises we would allow only 1 deferral or 2.  I think we should come back and monitor it in a year.

-- Wolf-Ulrich -- Do we need criteria for monitoring?  What numbers would we use?

-- Ron -- If people are starting to abuse it then we could set a rule for 1 deferral.  Put this to a vote on the SCI: whether or not to create a rule or just monitor it for a year.

ACTION: Ron with Julie to draft a message.

Voting Thresholds for Delaying a PDP

-- Language from staff on suspention

-- Angie:  "warranting a suspension" seems too vague

-- Ron: Was it the deferral of a PDP relating to the VeriSign contract the reason for this issue being raised?  Need to clarify this.

-- James:  When we originally discussed this it was designed to be used in rare circumstances.

-- Anne:  Was the issue of suspension considered in the previous PDP?

-- James:  We weren't specific to GNSO PDPs, but were looking at the organization that initiate the PDP would have the authority to terminate it.

ACTION: Ask SCI members to comment on the language on the list and look to the wiki where comments are posted.

Raising an issue - Has this been sufficiently clarified - currently needs to come from g-council or from a WG

-- Ron: Why would we not take anyone's issue up?

-- Julie:  SCI Charter says requests can only come from the Council or an organization chartered by the Council -- need to clarify the scope.

ACTION:  Mary to draft with J Scott. a letter to the GNSO Council to ask for clarfication with respect to the meaning of hte charter (clarify the scope)

Status update on Working Group survey

-- Save for next time.

Next Meeting:  30th of August at the same time.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-improvem-impl-sc/attachments/20120809/add0205f/attachment.html>

More information about the Gnso-improvem-impl-sc mailing list