[council] Fwd: Follow-up to the second JAS WG report
Jeff.Neuman at neustar.us
Fri May 27 16:40:53 UTC 2011
How is it that the ALAC has the opportunity to vote on this before the gnso even finds out about the concept?
I am also hearing that there is a third version of the JAS report coming out, so should we get a copy of that before voting to send anything to the Board?
Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq.
Vice President, Law & Policy
Jeff.Neuman at neustar.biz
From: Rosette, Kristina [mailto:krosette at cov.com]
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 12:35 PM
To: GNSO Council List <council at gnso.icann.org>
Subject: RE: [council] Fwd: Follow-up to the second JAS WG report
Anyone want to take odds on the likelihood that the referenced multistakeholder meeting is scheduled at the same time as our Council meeting?
From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 12:20 PM
To: GNSO Council List
Subject: [council] Fwd: Follow-up to the second JAS WG report
FYI, see the message below from the ALAC Chair to Katim.
Début du message réexpédié :
De : Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com<mailto:ocl at gih.com>>
Date : 27 mai 2011 16:15:27 HAEC
À : "Katim S. Touray" <kstouray at gmail.com<mailto:kstouray at gmail.com>>
Cc : Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com<mailto:ocl at gih.com>>, Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder at indom.com<mailto:stephane.vangelder at indom.com>>, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels at gmail.com<mailto:carlton.samuels at gmail.com>>, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com<mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>>, ICANN AtLarge Staff <staff at atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff at atlarge.icann.org>>, Glen de Saint Géry <Glen at icann.org<mailto:Glen at icann.org>>, Karla Valente <karla.valente at icann.org<mailto:karla.valente at icann.org>>, Gisella Gruber-White <gisella.gruber-white at icann.org<mailto:gisella.gruber-white at icann.org>>, diane.schroeder at icann.org<mailto:diane.schroeder at icann.org>
Objet : Rép : Follow-up to the second JAS WG report
thank you for your kind email and your suggestion which was received very positively by members of the JAS working group when the discussion came up.
Both the GNSO and the ALAC charters for this working group include the following sentence:
"4. All communication to the ICANN Board regarding the work of this Working Group shall be through the respective SO/AC unless expressly approved by the respective SO/AC."
However, a direct interaction between the various ICANN communities and the JAS working group participants has always been very welcome by the ALAC. After all, the JAS working group is open to all participants, GAC and Board members included.
Your suggestion was therefore discussed during the ALAC monthly call on 24 May 2011.
A motion for an invitation of interested parties was presented and voted on by the committee, as follows:
--- cut here ---
The ALAC is pleased to note interest from the Board and other stakeholders towards the second Milestone Report of the Cross-community Joint Applicant Support Working Group (JAS WG). To this extent, the ALAC therefore welcomes the organisation of a conference call -- for interested members of the JAS WG, ICANN Board, GNSO, GAC, At-Large and other interested community members -- to discuss the status and way forward for the JAS WG. We also request the creation of a multi-stakeholder meeting on this issue to be held at the ICANN meeting in Singapore.
--- cut here ---
A vote was performed with 13 out of 15 ALAC members being present on the call.
It resulted in a unanimous 13 yes, 0 objections and 0 abstentions.
I therefore can give you the green light from the ALAC to proceed forward with setting up such a call, and to consider the request for the creation of a multi-stakeholder meeting on the JAS issue to be held at the ICANN meeting in Singapore.
I understand that the current standard call times for the JAS working group are Tuesday 13:00 UTC and Friday 13:00 UTC. May I therefore suggest the consideration of any of those future times:
- Tuesday 31 May 2011 - 13:00 UTC
- Friday 3 June 2011 - 13:00 UTC
- Tuesday 7 June 2011 - 13:00 UTC
- Friday 10 June 2011 - 13:00 UTC
In the interest of swift synchronization, I am CC'ing this message to Gisella and Karla who will be able to coordinate call participants, but I would kindly ask you that you coordinate the Board's participant list as well as the GAC's participant list.
While thanking you again for your suggestion, I look forward to hearing from you soon.
On 23/05/2011 09:50, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond wrote :
thank you very much for your kind message. From discussions that have taken place in the JAS working group, I am aware that the group would be very interested indeed in such an interaction. As far as the ALAC is concerned, I will ask for this question to be added to the agenda of our forthcoming monthly call, tomorrow Tuesday. I'll get back to you in due course.
On 23/05/2011 03:13, Katim S. Touray wrote :
Dear Olivier and Stéphane,
First, let me congratulate you and your teams, as well as the JAS WG on their second report. I've had the opportunity to go through it, and it's quality work.
To follow on the second JAS WG report, I would like to ask if you'd be interested in organizing a conference call for interested board members and the GNSO, GAC, and At-Large reps to discuss the status and way forward for the recently released JAS WG report. The idea was presented at the recently concluded board retreat in Istanbul that a public meeting on the JAS WG report (with the participation of the board and GAC) will be helpful, and toward this end, it would be useful to have a conference call. Please let me know if this makes sense to you and let me know when you want to have the call, if indeed you want to have it.
Again, thanks to all of you and your teams for the great work you're doing on the issue! I hope we'll all be able to come together to have a useful program we all can be proud of. Have a great week, and best wishes!
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the council