[council] Regarding Briefing and Discussion on New gTLDs
Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au
Sat Apr 5 23:36:11 UTC 2008
> Also I understood that there were questions which the Board
> wished the
> staff to consult with the GNSO council about. Is this not
> the case?
> Or will there be questions that the members of the council and the
> constituencies should be considering prior to the meeting?
My recollection of the discussion in New Delhi at the Board level was as
(1) The Board has asked the staff to determine whether all the GNSO
recommendations can be implemented, and to provide an implementation
report before the Board approves the recommendations.
(2) The staff briefed the Board on work done so far on implementation.
A similar staff briefing was also provided to the GNSO Council.
(3) In the staff briefing to the Board, the staff noted that with
respect to some recommendations that the community may have different
views with respect to the detailed implementation. It was expected that
these views would reflect the different views within the GNSO when a
particular recommendation was being discussed. For example - with
respect to the recommendations on confusingly similar - some would want
the implementation to be as narrow as possible, and some may want the
implementation to be wider. The same would apply to recommendations on
topics such as morality.
(4) The Board requested staff to continue to discuss implementation
details of the recommendations with the GNSO. Where possible the
implementation suggestions from staff should closely align with the
intent of the GNSO. Where it is difficult to get widespread agreement
on the implementation of a recommendation, the staff have been asked to
summarise the different views for the Board.
I would assume from the timing of the Los Angeles meeting, that the
staff will attempt to report the GNSO Council views on implementation to
the Board at its meeting in Riga.
In terms of my personal discussions amongst Board members (rather than a
formal Board meeting discussion) I haven't heard any new concerns about
the more controversial recommendations that haven't already been
discussed within the new gTLD committee, and at the public forums. The
concerns that are more specific to the Board will be the impact on
ICANN's budget - including ensuring that any fees cover the cost of
implementation, and the impact on ICANN from a risk management
perspective (e.g not exposing ICANN to extensive legal litigation).
More information about the council