[Internal-cg] Plan for side meetings / ICANN 51

Milton L Mueller mueller at syr.edu
Tue Sep 23 18:57:14 UTC 2014

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lynn St.Amour [mailto:Lynn at LStAmour.org]
> With respect to meeting with the CCWG and the ccNSO, I think many of the
> ICG would welcome that opportunity.  It was suggested that we make the
> GAC and ALAC meetings known and make it clear that we are available to
> meet with other groups as they think necessary.  Do you think we should
> make a different or additional overture to the CCWG and the ccNSO?

I do. I will follow up on it if I get a green light from Alissa/vice chairs, though Martin Boyle and Keith Davidson are in a better position than me to make such an overture to the ccNSO. OTOH, a properly organized interface with the CCWG would involve key people from both GNSO and ccNSO. 

The need for such a meeting is one reason why I am a bit worried about the open-ended "we will meet with anybody and everybody" approach, because as a veteran of ICANN meetings I foresee highly crowded schedules which may require careful prioritization. I don't think our priorities should be driven by the order in which we receive invitations or expressions of interest. 

My take on the priorities is pretty clear:
 - Top: public meeting
 - 2nd: CCWG
 - 3rd: GNSO and ccNSO if CCWG is not possible
 - 4th: GAC and ALAC
 - 5th: anyone else

I hope this is not interpreted as diminishing the importance of GAC or ALAC. Far from it. My concern is that separate meetings tend to reinforce the silo mentality and all of them need to come together in the CCWG if they want to actually develop a consensus proposal by Jan 15.

More information about the Internal-cg mailing list