[Gac-gnso-cg] Notes and action items from today's GAC-GNSO CG meeting

[Marika Konings]

Dear All,

Please find below the notes from today's GAC-GNSO Consultation Group meeting. Please take note of the action items and look out for the doodle poll that will be circulated shortly in order to schedule a next meeting on Tuesday 22 or 23 September.

Best regards,

Marika

Notes 8 September 2015

Apologies: Suzanne Radell
Roll call: Jonathan Robinson, Amr Elsadr, Avri Doria, Mason Cole, Brian Winterfeldt (joined late), Manal Ismail, Ana Neves, Mark Carvell, Olga Cavalli
Absent no apologies: David Cake, , Carlos Gutierrez, Gema Campillos

1. GNSO Review of the GAC Communique

  *   See letter and review shared on the CG mailing list.
  *   Objective to review GAC communique for any policy implications - identify whether there has been gTLD policy work or gTLD policy work is planned on topics that are identified in the GAC communique to help inform the Board in its deliberations.
  *   Letter has been submitted to the ICANN Board with cc to the GAC but no feedback has been received to date.
  *   Has been well received based on comments from several GAC colleagues, might be worth seeking Board feedback?
  *   Consider highlighting those issues that may require further conversation or explanation (e.g. in the intro to the matrix). Could then be included as  a topic for conversation between GNSO and GAC Leadership as part of their regular calls.
  *   How does this link to the work of the CG? Does the group expect that it will support the goals of the CG, even though it is a separate effort?
  *   Feedback on the GAC Communique may also be welcome (e.g. is it clear enough, are sufficient details provided)

Action: GNSO to consider following up with ICANN Board to request feedback on this initiative
Action: Olof to send reminder to the GAC concerning the GNSO Review of the GAC Communique and solicit feedback (e.g. is this helpful, is there other information that should be provided)
Action: Provide feedback on the clarity and effectiveness of the GAC Communique (all)

3. Review of implementation of Early Engagement recommendations ('Quick Look Mechanism') to date

  *   Staff has identified a number of areas that may benefit from streamlining / enhancements such as the timing, means of communication. Formal review is expected to be conducted after 5 Issue Reports.
  *   It has now been used for two Issue Reports (next generation RDS, new gTLD Subsequent Procedures)

Action: CG members to start thinking of issues that will need to be considered as part of the review and how review should be undertaken..
Action: GAC secretariat to circulate a paper on QLM implementation to date and what is live at time of Dublin, also include further information on the role of the GNSO liaison to the GAC to date.

4. Review of GNSO Liaison to the GAC pilot project (timing, mechanism)

  *   At some point work will need to be undertaken to review the GNSO liaison to the GAC pilot project and make a recommendation to GNSO and GAC on whether to continue or not, including possible modifications.
  *   GNSO Council indicated it would be receptive to the CG.evaluting the role and providing recommendations.
  *   Consider reviewing different aspects of the role, also linked to QLM and consider whether there is any need for changes / enhancements.
  *   With regards to timing, FY17 budget planning should be taken into account.
  *   Evaluate role within different phases of the work that is being undertaken in the context of other CG recommendations.
  *   Also include feedback from Mason.

How can GAC WGs that are working on new gTLD related topics best provide input to the GNSO?

  *   Preliminary Issue Report is currently out for public comment (see https://www.icann.org/public-comments/new-gtld-subsequent-prelim-2015-08-31-en - focus should be on identifying any topics that may be missing or where additional information is required. Substantive input concerning proposed changes or new policy are best submitted to the PDP WG (if/when the PDP is initiated by the GNSO Council)
  *   With regards to geographic names / country and territory names, ccNSO and GNSO Chairs have requested co-ordination with GAC to ensure better understanding of the different initiatives that are currently ongoing in relation to this topic (CWG and GAC internal WG). Focus of work may be different, but probably still important to ensure that this is understood.

Action: Add this topic to the agenda for conversation between GAC and GNSO leadership.

5. Ongoing communication & co-ordination - are current mechanisms like GNSO Liaison to the GAC and GNSO-GAC Leadership calls prior to every ICANN meeting sufficient or do other mechanisms need to be considered.

  *   Need to be further institutionalised - proposal to have one intersessional call which is in preparation for F2F meeting.

6. Discuss possible recommendations for other phases of GNSO PDP (see first draft of the Initiation and WG phase attached - page 3 and 4);

Action: all encouraged to review flow charts and share feedback / suggestions with the mailing list

7. AOB / Next steps / Confirm time of next meeting

Action: Schedule next meeting for Tuesday 22 September or 23 September (Doodle poll to follow)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gac-gnso-cg/attachments/20150908/6de7ab6b/attachment.html>