[Rt4-whois] [renames] Meeting in Cartagena and London

Sat Nov 6 18:41:47 UTC 2010

Classification: [ NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED ]

All of this is fine by me~sorry for loss of comms past few days, BB lost signal in NZ.

Sharon

----- Original Message -----
From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org <rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org>
To: Susan Kawaguchi <skawaguchi at facebook.com>; rt4-whois at icann.org <rt4-whois at icann.org>
Sent: Sat Nov 06 16:07:38 2010
Subject: [Rt4-whois] [renames] Meeting in Cartagena and London

On a related note, I like Susan's movement forward on our Cartagena issues.  I see it in three parts:

1. Is it acceptable to everyone to have a two-hour meeting in Cartagena (Sunday, 12/6) with remote participation? We should find the best 2-hour slot for maximum remote participation.

2. Does anyone oppose a public "meet and greet" session in Cartagena? Denise and Olof, is there a time available when Wilfried could join us? I truly don't see much that we can do at this session other than introduce ourselves and the Affirmation of Commitments. Susan and I were discussing that half an hour might be more than sufficient.

3. Has anyone changed their mind about a meeting in London?  If not, we will start planning this as a major F2F meeting for the group.

Best,

Kathy Kleiman
Director of Policy
.ORG The Public Interest Registry
Direct: +1 703 889-5756  Mobile: +1 703 371-6846

Visit us online!
Check out events & blogs at .ORG Buzz!
Find us on Facebook | dotorg
See the .ORG Buzz! Photo Gallery on Flickr
See our video library on YouTube

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE:
Proprietary and confidential to .ORG, The Public Interest Registry.  If received in error, please inform sender and then delete.

-----Original Message-----
From: Susan Kawaguchi [mailto:skawaguchi at facebook.com] 
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2010 3:18 PM
To: Kathy Kleiman; rt4-whois at icann.org
Subject: RE: Vote on Meeting in Cartagena

Hello All, 

I have broken out the Scope of Work and the proposed Drafting Team language from the original document I sent a couple hours ago at Kathy's suggestion.  

Hopefully, this will make it easier to read and we can come to agreement on the process as we move forward.  

I still think we should take advantage of the time many members are together in Cartegena and would propose we schedule a two hour meeting that includes remote participates on Sunday December 5th.  If we have not come to agreement on the guidelines or Scope of Work by that time we could devote the time to an in depth discussion. 

Susan 

-----Original Message-----
From: Kathy Kleiman [mailto:kKleiman at pir.org]
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2010 9:35 AM
To: Susan Kawaguchi; rt4-whois at icann.org
Subject: Vote on Meeting in Cartagena

Hi All,
I think we should take a vote on holding a one-day meeting in Cartagena -- on Sunday, 12/5. We learned on 11/1, in Olof's message, that there are facilities available for such a meeting. 

Given the lateness of the notice for those not already planning to be in Cartagena, I proposed an alternative for January in London. (I personally find remote participation for long periods of time very difficult.)

Mostly,  I feel we should not be split for our first meeting.

So let me put out the vote:  all in favor of a full-day meeting in Cartagena -- please vote YES.  Opposed, please vote NO.

Best,

Kathy Kleiman
Director of Policy
.ORG The Public Interest Registry
Direct: +1 703 889-5756  Mobile: +1 703 371-6846

Visit us online!
Check out events & blogs at .ORG Buzz!
Find us on Facebook | dotorg
See the .ORG Buzz! Photo Gallery on Flickr See our video library on YouTube

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE:
Proprietary and confidential to .ORG, The Public Interest Registry.  If received in error, please inform sender and then delete.

-----Original Message-----
From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Susan Kawaguchi
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2010 12:23 PM
To: rt4-whois at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] First Face to Face Meetings - updated table

Hello All,

I agree with Wilfired that we should use the Sunday that ICANN has already scheduled for a constructive meeting.  By waiting until January for the full team to meet we will lose time in gaining momentum with the team.   ICANN has drastically improved the remote participation tools and since we have at least half of the team already committed to the meeting we could have a fruitful discussion.   If it is expenses alone that is limiting participation we have a  budget for travel  and we should use it.     

I have attached proposed guidelines for the team.  I spent time reviewing other group's guidelines or rules on the ICANN website and have incorporated some of that into this document.  I have also  included Bill's Scope of Work and some of the issues brought up in the email threads.    Please take a  moment to review it and provide comment as I am sure I have not hit on all the details we need to think about.    This is a starting point and by tracking it in a document I think we can work through the details and bring clarity to many issues quickly.

Susan
-----Original Message-----
From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2010 7:09 AM
To: Kathy Kleiman
Cc: rt4-whois at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] First Face to Face Meetings - updated table

Hi Kathy, all,

just a couple of thoughts.....

Kathy Kleiman wrote:

> Thanks All,
> 
> I appreciate all the email, and we have a much more complete table!
> While half our team will be in Cartagena, all of us are available in 
> mid-January for a meeting. To hold a solid, substantive, face-to-face 
> meeting, our time is January.

fine with me, but *please* could wew start the process of agreeing on a date (or maybe 1 or 2 alternatives) *right now*?

There's quite a bit of competition for timeslots, for some of us, and the more things which linger around, the more difficult it becomes to schedule the competing requests :-(

> I'll circulate some ideas and a request for a planning  committee for 
> the January meeting shortly (please feel free to send initial thoughts 
> and ideas to me).
> 
>  
> 
> I would also like to recommend that, for those of us who are attending 
> the Cartagena meeting, we have a short social hour to introduce
> ourselves-- no agenda, no substantive discussion.

While I agree, that we should not go for a full-blown "formal" meeting if we plan to hold that in January, I'd like to put a bit more flesh onto the bones.

In particular, I'd like to have the relevant/involved ICANN individuals join in (assuming that most of them will be in Cartagena anyway, but not necessarily able to join us in January!?).

As an additional idea, we could try to work with ICANN staff on discussing our communcation infrastructure and maybe even agree on the next steps.
I'd really like to have that available (stable, test-driven,...) *before* the January meeting.

> Would anyone not
> attending the Cartagena meeting object or feel excluded by this type 
> of get together?

If(!) the team agrees on this suggested "upgrade", could we have a show of hands, (Kathy - can you collect that, too?) from those NOT going to Colombia, whether they would be able and willing to join in remotely?

> Please find the table attached. 

I presume we should let the people in ICANN, doing the planning right know, asap what type and level of support we'd like to get in Cartagena, e.g a room and remote access,...

> All the best,
> 
> Kathy

Regards,
Wilfried
_______________________________________________
Rt4-whois mailing list
Rt4-whois at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois

_______________________________________________
Rt4-whois mailing list
Rt4-whois at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois

All E-Mail sent and received by SOCA is scanned and subject to assessment. Messages sent or received by SOCA staff are not private and may be the subject of lawful business monitoring.  E-Mail may be passed at any time and without notice to an appropriate branch within SOCA, on authority from the Director General or his Deputy for analysis. This E-Mail and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender as soon as possible.

This information is supplied in confidence by SOCA, and is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. It may also be subject to exemption under other UK legislation. Onward disclosure may be unlawful, for example, under the Data Protection Act 1998. Requests for disclosure to the public must be referred to the SOCA FOI single point of contact, by email on PICUEnquiries at soca.x.gsi.gov.uk or by telephoning 0870 268 8677.

All E-Mail sent and received by SOCA is scanned and subject to assessment. Messages sent or received by SOCA staff are not private and may be the subject of lawful business monitoring.  E-Mail may be passed at any time and without notice to an appropriate branch within SOCA, on authority from the Director General or his Deputy for analysis. This E-Mail and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender as soon as possible.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Cable&Wireless Worldwide in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.