[IOT] IRP IOT teleconference agenda and notes - call March 23rd at 19:00 UTC

[McAuley, David]

Dear members of the IRP IOT:



This is a reminder that we have a teleconference scheduled Thursday of this week (March 23rd) at 19:00 UTC.



Here is the agenda for the call:



1.       Introduction/Admin/SOI;



2.       Work timeline/need for revised "Staff Report" date (see discussion below);



3.       Notice to/working with SOs/ACs toward establishment of "Standing Panel" (see discussion below);



4.       Public comments review:



a.       Need for volunteers (per issue/comment). Rather than asking us to pick issues at this point it will make sense for us to triage the list in search of those comments that (1) may be resolved by reference to the ICDR's existing rules and (2) are ones we generally agree on - we can send these two groups to Sidley for a legal check and focus our remaining attention on the rest and we can begin this process this week.



b.       Time for filing claim wrap-up (Malcolm Hutty);



c.       Joinder/Consensus policy reviews (David McAuley);



5.       AOB.

Discussion - need for revised timeline for staff report:



The current timeline for a staff report on our work to address the public comments is March 29 (see: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/irp-supp-procedures-2016-11-28-en).



We cannot realistically meet that date and so we need to decide on this call what a revised date should be - and we should do our best to set a date that we will not miss. We need to do this on Thursday's call so staff can announce the new date before we hit the current date of March 29.



I discussed this with Bernie at ICANN58 last week with a view toward recommending a new date to our group. Bernie and I feel that given the complexities of the issues/comments we face the new date should be May 29th - about a two-month delay - but very possibly a date we may beat.



That will give us time to comprehensively consider all comments; decide the best approach for handling them; write up our thoughts (in a manner that will be helpful for staff to do their report); and seek input from Sidley as to the viability of our approach and to seek their drafting of the revised Supplementary Rules.



The revised period will unfold while efforts are underway to establish the standing panel and so this timing will still allow for new rules to be in place when the standing panel is formed. The good news is that if we can get more volunteers to pick up the lead on comments (even one per member would help) we can finish the rules earlier than the new target date.



Discussion - notice to/working with SOs/ACs to establish a standing panel:



At ICANN58  I briefed the plenary CCWG as well as the ccNSO and GNSO on the roles the SOs and ACs play in nominating a standing panel of qualified personnel for the IRP (see Bylaw 4.3(j). I offered to make the same presentation to the GAC (and should hear back soon on that). And of course we wrote as the IOT to all SOs and ACs in this respect. I will make the offer to the ASO, SSAC, and RSSAC this week.



Let's briefly discuss the helping role we may undertake to support these groups as the time approaches to nominate panelists.



Best regards - and I hope to chat with you on Thursday.



David



David McAuley

International Policy Manager

Verisign Inc.

703-948-4154



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/iot/attachments/20170321/24886b63/attachment.html>