[council] Action Item - GNSO/SSAC Liaison(s)

[David Cake]

I agree the SSAC/GNSO discussion should be more free-flowing, and it would probably be helpful if Council could be more consistent in putting forward specific topics for discussion. I do find some overview of what SSAC has been working on useful, but not so useful it should take up the majority of time available. 
I have been finding on the RDS PDP that active engagement with prior SSAC work is very valuable, and so I strongly agree with reinforcing the availability of SSAC work. How to leverage planned or ongoing SSAC work is something I feel there is still work to be done, and there is a lot of potential. 

I think the formal exchange of liaisons is worth considering, and might be a topic for discussion when we next meet. 

Thank you for pursuing this topic. 

Regards

David

> On 22 Apr 2016, at 4:53 PM, James M. Bladel <jbladel at godaddy.com> wrote:
> 
> Council Colleagues -
> 
> Continuing with the “spring cleaning” of our Action Item list,  here’s another item that has been in a pending state for quite some time.  
> 
> Yesterday I was able to meet with Patrik  (Chairs, SSAC) to discuss ideas to strengthen coordination between our two organizations, up to and including a formal exchange of liaisons.  As we’ve noted previously, the SSAC’s rules require that any of its members (including a potential liaison) would need to meet the general membership requirements, which include a non-disclosure agreement (NDA).
> 
> Patrik and I also discussed alternatives to a formal liaison that would keep the two groups mutually informed. We both agreed that the standard SSAC presentation/Q&A sessions at ICANN meetings had limited value, and we should revise the format to specifically address topics where either or both sides had specific questions or asks.  
> 
> Furthermore, Patrik noted that some PDPs could benefit from existing or planned SSAC research, and we should reinforce the availability of the SSAC as a resource for new PDPs.  We also observed that there is significant membership overlap between some individuals and groups, and that this should be leveraged to enhance cooperation.  Finally, ICANN Staff can help facilitate communication between the GNSO (Council & PDPs) and SSAC, if they flag topics that have potentially shared interests, and raise this with leadership of all groups.
> 
> Possible action items / paths forward:
> Continue to pursue formal exchange of liaisons between the GNSO & SSAC, noting the constraints listed above.
> Modify the SSAC/GNSO sessions at ICANN meetings to be a more free-flowing conversation about topics that share mutual interests.
> Encourage PDPs and other GNSO groups to consider the utility & applicability of SSAC research in their work.
> Ask Staff to help facilitate information exchange between the two groups.
> I look forward to your thoughts & comments on this subject.
> 
> Thanks—
> 
> J.
>  
>  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20160422/2cdec502/attachment.html>