[atrt2] URGENT: Final Draft RFP

[Alan Greenberg]

Jørgen,

Your original proposal was "whether in particular 
the views and advice provided by GAC has been 
duly taken into account given the specific tasks 
of national governments with respect to public policy."

There was a strong feeling from both Brian and 
Avri that we not call out one particular 
stakeholder. Moreover, like other parts of my 
original draft that were omitted, we need to be 
careful that the wording of the RFP does not 
direct the outcome (that is, by us identifying 
the issue of whether the GAC input is taken into 
account, we are to some extent reaching a 
conclusion ahead of time - we wouldn't ask the 
question if there were not a perceived problem).

We already have the sub-bullet: "to what extent 
process incorporates the views, advice and needs 
of all stakeholders, both those active in ICANN 
and those not typically present for ICANN deliberations (See Annex)."

In Brian's absence, we (the three vice-chairs) 
feel that the best we can do is to move the list 
of ICANN stakeholders from the Annex to the scope, replacing that bullet with:

"to what extent process incorporates the views, 
advice and needs stakeholders, ICANN Advisory 
Committees - Governmental Advisory Committee 
(GAC), At-large Advisory Committee (ALAC), 
Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC), 
Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC); 
Supporting Organizations - Generic Names 
Supporting Organization (GNSO), Country Code 
Names Supporting Organization (ccNSO), Address 
Supporting Organization (ASO); and those not 
typically present for ICANN deliberations (See Annex)."

And removing the footnotes in the Annex.

I hope that you can accept this so that we can 
issue the RFP prior to Brian's return.

Alan (on behalf of Lise and Avri)


At 28/06/2013 04:01 AM, Jørgen C Abild Andersen wrote:
>Dear Alan
>
>I am somewhat surprised about your e-mail and I 
>am not sure that I fully understand the reasons 
>for the proposed change of the approach we 
>agreed at the conference call last week. As you 
>will recall the agreement we reached also 
>included adding a sentence as proposed by me. 
>Upon your proposal it was also agreed that the 
>exact wording of the sentence should be agreed 
>between you and me bilaterally. I have not seen 
>your proposal for fine tuning of the wording yet 
>but I will urge you to send your proposal for a 
>more precise wording of the sentence to me as 
>soon as possible as I think we all agree that it 
>is very important to get the process started 
>very soon in accordance with what was agreed at 
>our conference call last week.
>
>Best regards
>Jørgen
>
>
>----------
>Fra: atrt2-bounces at icann.org 
>[mailto:atrt2-bounces at icann.org] På vegne af Alan Greenberg
>Sendt: 27. juni 2013 05:34
>Til: ATRT2
>Emne: [atrt2] URGENT: Final Draft RFP
>Prioritet: Høj
>
>Attached please find the hopefully final RFP. 
>Before disappearing for the next week, Brian 
>made some edits, one of which removed the 
>explicit reference to the GAC under scope of 
>work. Since he is not here to present his 
>rationale, I have temporarily left in his 
>comment about why he felt strongly that the 
>particular reference should not be included in the RFP.
>
>Partly in response to that, Lise and I, with 
>Avri's agreement included an explicit reference 
>to ICANN ACs and SOs in the Annex description of stakeholders.
>
>In addition to posting this RFP publicly, staff 
>has identified two potential consultants to 
>explicitly be invited to bid, One World Trust 
>and Ken Bour. With this note, I ask staff to 
>explain why they believe that they could meet our needs.
>
>If anyone on the RT has additional suggestions 
>for who to invite, please let us know quickly. 
>The list of those submitting proposals to the 
>ATRT1 competition can be found at
><http://www.icann.org/en/about/aoc-review/atrt/rfp-respondents-evaluation-19jun10-en.pdf>http://www.icann.org/en/about/aoc-review/atrt/rfp-respondents-evaluation-19jun10-en.pdf 
>.
>
>If we are to meet the target issue date of July 
>1 (next Monday!), we need to finalize everything 
>quickly, so I ask for all comments and 
>suggestions to arrive no later that 12:00 UTC on Friday, June 28.
>
>If there are any crucial edits to them RFP 
>itself, please submit them as soon as possible to allow discussion.
>
>Alan
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/atrt2/attachments/20130628/cedf1ae9/attachment.html>