[Gnso-review-wg] Actions/Discussion Notes for GNSO Review WG Meeting on 23 February

[Julie Hedlund]

Dear GNSO Review Working Group members,

 

Please see below the action items and discussion notes captured by staff from the meeting on 23 February.  These high-level notes are designed to help WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not meant to be a substitute for the recording or transcript.  Please also see the recording on the meetings page at: https://community.icann.org/display/GRWG/2017-02-23+GNSO+Review+WG+Kick-Off+Meeting. 

 

Best regards,

Julie

 

Julie Hedlund, Policy Director

 

 

Action Items/Discussion Notes 23 February

 

Action Items:

1.       Staff will do a doodle poll for recurring meetings to be held every other week, beginning the week of 27 March.

2.       Staff will complete the charters for the recommendations and send them to the WG list to review as soon as each one is completed.

3.       The next meeting is at ICANN58 on Wednesday, 15 March from 15:15 to 16:56: https://schedule.icann.org/event/9nmr/gnso-review-working-group.  Secretariat staff will send the meeting notice. 

 

Discussion Notes:

 

-- Next meeting at ICANN58 on 15 March at 15:15 to 16:45

-- Plan is for staff to complete charters for the recommendations for the WG to consider.

-- Staff will do a doodle poll for meetings to be held every other week.  Aim for week of 27 March.

-- For Phase 3 hope to move faster than the suggested timeline.

-- Staff will complete the charters and distribute them one at a time (rather than batched) and for substantive work at ICANN58.

 

>From the chat:

Heath Dixon: COMMENT: For all of these, we need to answer the question: "What else needs to be done after the proposed solution is implemented?"  Presumably we should not need to do anything else, but the GNSO may need to monitor, report, periodically review and decide whether to make changes, etc.  For ones where work is being done elsewhere, the question is: Do we trust those WGs to include follow-up?  Or do we want to interject our own follow-up?

Heath Dixon: COMMENT: On the time-to-review point, I would be happy to see these roll out as ICANN Staff completes the first drafts, rather than waiting to get them in a batch.  It will be easier for me to review them one at a time.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-review-wg/attachments/20170223/20d498e1/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4630 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-review-wg/attachments/20170223/20d498e1/smime.p7s>