Dev Teelucksingh: So just before we start, because I’m seeing in the chat room, and I see them on the call. Well I heard Cheryl, I heard Olivier, Chris Grundemann, and Dev Kissoondoyal, are you all also on the call?
Chris Grundemann: Hi, this is Chris Grundemann.
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay, great. Dev may be on mute so I will see if Dev Kissoondoyal is also on the call. Alright, ten minutes past the hour. Thanks, everyone, for joining this call. Let's just go through role call again. Chris Grundemann, Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Dev Kissoondoyal, Olivier Leblond, Rudi Vansnick, and from ICANN staff Heidi and Seth Greene, and myself, Dev Anand Teelucksingh. I can't believe it's two weeks already.
Okay. Let's review the action items from the last call and I’ll open up my meeting page, alright. Okay, action items. Seth to arrange with Matthias for me to present the new (inaudible 0:01:24) flowchart to APRALO. That's done. Yes, I will join the call on the 25th at 600 UTC, that will be fine. So that's done.
Beau and Heidi to work on the outline of the consolidated consumer documents. Heidi, do you want to talk about to (crosstalk)?
Heidi Ullrich: Yes, Seth reminded Beau and myself about this. On my part I have to send my apologies that I have not been able to do this. I will in the new few weeks make it a priority to move on this. Beau did send earlier today a revised consumers’ constituency charter, but I don't believe that that is actually what we're looking at.
My thoughts were that we were going to be reviewing other documents that would be more general in terms of that At-Large could use them as outreach or information for consumer groups. And we've seen those documents. Seth has posted them on the Work Team D Wiki, so those are the ones that we actually need to work on.
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay. Well, I believe you do have to really work on that, because it's the 28th of January and a week again, a week again, we'll be right into the San Francisco.
Heidi Ullrich: Exactly -- no, again I'll make it a priority.
Dev Teelucksingh: No, and well I think that we should do that. Okay, alright, going back. Yes, okay, and Seth to arrange for the Doodle Poll for a new Work Team D call time, and yes, that was done. Although the results wasn't as I thought as straightforward as regarding any possible new Work Team D call time, because essentially we're back at the same call time for this week. We probably could look at that towards the end when we have to schedule our next meeting. Great.
And I’m seeing also in the chat, yes, Seth in the chat says that Seth can also help with the docs. And actually I would also like to help with that as well. So if there’s some shared documents that need to go around and needs for us to edit then that would be great I think. So Rudi is going to be joining the call from his fixed phone shortly, excellent. Okay. So those are the action items.
They still have to get used to when I lose myself in this- Alright, sorry about that. Agenda items for discussion… Well on the ALAC call on the 25th, we have to make a presentation to ALAC and on what Work Team D has done. Seth, can we put the links to the various presentations that are meant for Cartagena? Does anybody have any thoughts about what else? We can just use those presentations as is or do we need to add additional stuff or take out stuff or-
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: No it's fine.
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay, I see Seth has raised his hand go ahead.
Seth Greene: Thanks, Dev. I actually just wanted to clarify something. Yes. There is the co-chair of the improvement team’s presentation to the ALAC. What I actually was thinking of as a discussion topic was more that as the Work Team starts to look toward the end of its work, organizing the various proposals that it would, the actual proposals that it would like to make to the ALAC for their consideration, rather than just the status report being given in the next ALAC meeting. So the two- I was not thinking of the two as one in the same, just so you know that.
Dev Teelucksingh: Oh, okay. Well, okay. So the actual policy recommendations, you know “Because of Recommendation 6, the following policy recommendations are being made: point A, point whatever the recommendations are.” Is that what's supposed to be happening on the 25th?
Seth Greene: No, Dev. The 25th is just the status reports from all of the co-chairs that did not, were not able to happen in Cartagena. And then each Work Team can arrange with Olivier and me and the ALAC, when they're going to propose or how they're going to make their final proposal to the ALAC for consideration of the various changes that they're recommending.
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay, alright, okay. That's a discussion that will take place during the ALAC call, just making clear on that, or is it something that we the Work Team would then come back after that call? Because the reason why I'm thinking after the ALAC presentation on the 25th is because there may be feedback and suggestions and possible improvements and new ideas. And I'm thinking after that we have to then take that information, you know, integrate that what, take into account those comments and then come up with the proper recommendations to ALAC: “Okay, after hearing comments, this is what our final set of recommendations.”
Am I understanding that as the process? I'm taking silence as “Yes, I believe that is the process.” Okay. Well, okay, well I think I heard Cheryl saying that yes, that the actual documents of the presentation is fine. Is that correct, Cheryl?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: As far as I'm concerned, yes.
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay. Well, I don't know if you try and insert something now at this stage regarding this Cross-Constituency Working Group that we had discussed last week, sorry last two weeks - sorry, it felt like last week - regarding and probably putting some sort of detail into our flow chart whereby this Work Team would have two persons from each region, at least two persons from each region looking at the various policy documents, the policy schedule in terms of comments coming off of public comment, deciding whether “This is important, this is not important from our region's perspective,” etc.
And then the ALAC and then working with the ALAC liaison which was recommended to be Carlton, since he’s the rapporteur, who would then bring that to ALAC's attention. Do you want to try to include that as a part of the proposal at this point? And I hope I'm summarizing the Working Group from the last two meetings, from the last meeting, sorry.
Yes, no, maybe so? I see Seth, sorry, I see your hand is up. Sorry?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I said that wasn't really a question.
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay, well no, I mean do you want to try to incorporate that in a flow chart or something like that in time for the presentation on the 25th? That was, I think that's going to be my question. Because we have it partially there already in the policy public schedule. We could just simply expand on that a little bit with some details.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: What's Carlton's take on that?
Dev Teelucksingh: Oh, I've not had a chance to chat with him, unfortunately he's been busy at a conference this week.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay, alright.
Dev Teelucksingh: So I have not really had a chance to discuss this with him as such.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: No problem. I mean my gut reaction is if it is possible to include it then yes. But we're all volunteers, even your Carlton.
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay. I'll run it by- I'll see if I can get in touch with Carlton, probably after the LACRALO call and probably I’ll chat with him on that.
Okay. Let's see. This is going to be a very short meeting which is probably quite good. Sorry, Heidi --
Heidi Ullrich: Sorry, I have my hand raised.
Dev Teelucksingh: Sorry Heidi, I was looking at the agenda page again. Sorry, go ahead.
Heidi Ullrich: Just a really quick comment on the presentations for all of the Work Teams, which Seth I'm sure will spread the word, is that given the heavy schedule, the very full schedule that we have for this month's ALAC calls, if all work teams could present only three to five minutes during that call. Now, they can send more information that the ALAC can look at, but in terms of the presentation, if we could just limit that to a very short three to five minutes with just the key points being made, that would be really useful.
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay.
Heidi Ullrich: Thank you.
Dev Teelucksingh: Thanks, Heidi. Okay, and Olivier, I see you've raised your hand, go ahead.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you Dev, and I just wanted to say that I will enforce that three to five minute rule. So I will ask Heidi to be finger on the buzzer with Adigo. The great fun of having Adigo there, thanks
Dev Teelucksingh: Alright you could do it with Adigo, just slowly mute, the volume goes down and that will do it, yes.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Give them a three-second warning and then mute.
Dev Teelucksingh: Very well, I'll make sure and try to keep that within three minutes then, three to five minutes then. Very well.
So Working Team D's next steps. Well, I think the work has to be on the consolidated consumer documents and get some documentation for all of us to look at and edit, that's the first step. And then I guess- And I'm really not sure how do you approach the actual final reporting. Is it going to be- I mean I imagine it's going to be like a document, correct? When I say a document, meaning we will look at Recommendation 8 and then we- “Okay, we looked at this recommendation 8 and we said this, this, this. We've come up with this document with this flow chart and these ideas and, here are our final recommendations for achieving that recommendation.”
Am I correct? That's essentially what we have to do for each of the few recommendations we're looking at; correct?
Heidi Ullrich: Yes. What I would imagine and obviously this is up to Seth and to the various Work Teams, but I would imagine similar to what we did for the SIC and the Board at the beginning of the whole project; it would be a relatively short report that might have annexes for each of the Work Teams on what their achievements in terms of implementation have been.
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay. Well, let's just review something then, because I think in policy advice we're kind of (inaudible 0:14:18) that we haven't really looked at, tackled or looked at. So if you look at, we'll look at the simplified implementation outline. Recommendation 8 we have, I think we have done a lot of work on that, and Recommendation 12, we have to then come up with the consolidated consumer outreach document, so that work is on- We have to do work on that.
And then Recommendation 13, while we’ve done some of these- Recommendation 13 ties to recommendation 8 in terms of reviewing the At-Large internal processes and identifying barriers and proposed measures, such as the first Constituency Working Group, or Cross-RALO Working Group, sorry. What we haven't done is like at the bottom of the Recommendation 13, a review of the GNSO PDP process. I'm just looking at 13.4 and 13.5 and 13.6. I think those we have not really done as such.
So I think work then has to really look at addressing, at least reviewing the GNSO PDP, ccNSO PDP and the ASO PDP process. And Seth and I see -- well I see Seth then Cheryl. Seth, go ahead quickly.
Seth Greene: I believe Cheryl had her hand up first, please.
Dev Teelucksingh: Very well. Cheryl, please go ahead.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I'm just jumping at the GNSO PDP review opportunity of course. That is one that is currently on. What we probably need to realize is the review of the ccNSO PDP process, where they are in their review implementation stage, is not up to that yet. And indeed the ASO are only just coming to terms with the fact that they should have one.
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay. So, I was- The way it’s worded is that the ASO PDP was already out there and it was just that we haven't had the chance to look at it.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well again, they've got to have- What they've realized is it is not interactive, it is not open, it is not allowing for even a match up to where the ccNSO and existing GNSO one is. So what I would like to suggest is that we recommend that the ALAC, i.e., the Chair of the ALAC write for use of the liaisons where we have them with those organizations to ensure that we are interacting not so much by our endpoint of reporting in San Francisco, because that's just not practical. But as those things change that ALAC interaction-
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: -part of that changes. With the GNSO one however, that should be very much almost completable if not practically completable by the San Francisco meeting because the final report on the GNSO PDP draft should be out. And I believe, Heidi, correct me if I'm wrong, that the call for public comment has gone out.
Heidi Ullrich: Yes, two days ago.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That's right, so we're tracking on that one, and we've only had the opportunity to do that. That said, this Work Team probably needs to jump in and get onto that draft and that public comment as other work teams have for other activities.
Dev Teelucksingh: Right, yeah because I remember seeing that coming off for comment two days ago as well. Okay, I guess so we definitely do need to look at the GNSO and the PDP process, review that with a view of some if any comments, and also we've got to start our recommendation to the team.
And okay, I still see Heidi has to leave for another meeting. And well thanks so much, Heidi, for attending the call.
Heidi Ullrich: Okay, thank you.
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay, well regards to the ccNSO. I don't know Rudi, I think you're back in the call. Do you have any thoughts regarding the ccNSO PDP process and-?
Rudi Vansnick: Well, I don't have it under hand here as I am not in my office and not at home, I'm just jumping in at some place. I have seen some of the ccNSO PDP, and last year I think that they have been working on. And I have to go back to that Work Group to see what came out of that.
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay, but I think then definitely, in fact for the next meeting definitely or on the mailing list as well, just find out if there has been any changes or any possible links that we can review. And as I say, does the ccNSO PDP have any method or measure that will take into account any comments from the ALAC? So --
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: At the moment, as I understand it, if I may.
Dev Teelucksingh: Sure.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: As I understand it, there are two mechanisms that At-Large if not ALAC has for direct input. One is in response like anyone else including Mr. Jones of Smith Street to respond in any course of public comment that goes out. The other is where we have, and in the last three years we have increasingly been written into work groups; in other words, there has been in the chartering of various work groups that the ccNSO believes has beyond country code administrator interest - they had written in representatives from the ALAC.
So for example the presence of Carlton and I on the Geographic Reviews Team is an example there, the presence of me and our IDN liaisons, because they were serious often during the time on the IDN PDP ccTLD fast track, I'm sorry on fast track and then on the current PDP process. So at the moment there is an improvement in our own review which we can report on.
Since our own ALAC review, ALAC as an entity is being advised informally into more and more deemed relevant by the ccNSO, ccNSO work groups. So that's sort of a tick-tock group thing. And the other one of course is the public comment.
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay. Well, I think that that should also go into our report then to see like including information such as that, that now have been invited to join ccNSO, we have the liaison from ALAC in the ccNSO and those points there. Okay. But regarding the ASO, what do you think for the ASO there, that's nowhere near- They have a PDP process for looking at getting mechanisms (crosstalk)?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: …and the mechanism for their own- I mean these are the numbering organizations and of course-
Dev Teelucksingh: Yes.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: …external to ICANN there is a well-known mechanism, which is open as much as you know if you want to go fiddle in your RIR and your regional TLD organization you can do. But in a formal sense, unless the ASO puts out a call for public comment, we have no, at the moment to my knowledge, formal interaction other than if and when a Cross-Community Working Group would be called for.
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay. Alright.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: But that's something I would suggest we recommend ALAC write to ASO and ask them about: “How can we further strengthen…” For example, one mechanism would be we do not have a liaison with the ASO. We could instigate that as a mechanism, and there's more than one way to skin a cat here.
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay, yes. Okay, that sounds like a- I don't see why we should not write them and ask them. But should there be an ALAC liaison? I mean, well I guess-
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That's the only thing that has the capability of having a liaison.
Dev Teelucksingh: Yes, that's right.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Because we have the bylaw mandated into, which is the Advisory Committees. That said, ALAC liaisons do not have to be members of the ALAC.
Dev Teelucksingh: That's right, but they have to be nominated by the ALAC.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Correct.
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay, okay. So we do have, alright. So a part of Recommendation 12 is, we really have to work on. And again if, everyone, if you have a need to, I suggest going to the flow chart again, seeing where they could be improved and so forth. Then of course I'll take them all, the suggestions and update them as soon as possible. I’ll probably go through them myself over the weekend, but to look at ensuring that I'm within three minutes, three to five minutes of for the ALAC call. So, okay. So item- Seth, I see your hand is raised, go ahead.
Seth Greene: Dev, thank you, just a quick question. You just said that you would like everyone to go to the flow chart and take a look. Were you referring to the policy flow chart that you have put together?
Dev Teelucksingh: Yes.
Seth Greene: Or were you referring to the simplified outlines?
Dev Teelucksingh: I was, well actually I would say both, but I should have said both. But I mean just so you’ve viewed the Cartagena presentation because there hasn't been any updates to the flow charts since then. So I mean I invite anyone to review that and see if there is anything that we do need to either change or add more detail or whatever, not necessarily for this 25th ALAC call, but for our final report obviously. That's what I meant, Seth.
Seth Greene: Thank you Dev.
Dev Teelucksingh: Sure. Okay, Work Team D Doodle Poll around possible scheduling of call time. Well, the Doodle did go out; unfortunately there was apparently a misunderstanding with Hong and possibly Charles regarding the timing of the call. Hong didn't respond initially because she thought the call was just meant for just this day and time, and she said she was unavailable because she was traveling.
So the end result was then the majority of persons expressed, still said this time, which is- Oh, I don't have the UTC time yet, 1900 UTC time. So I don't know whether if we need to- How should I put it, if we need to redo this Doodle or this is- Since we asked everybody and this was one of the popular times, to keep it, or should we try to just do another, try to reach out again to Hong and Charles and trying to ask them to suggest different times that they would want? And then we issue a new Doodle with a (inaudible 0:27:08)?
Thoughts? And I'm flexible whatever time you all want to do it; if you want to do it, you know, whatever 1:00, 1:00 a.m. my time that's find by me. So it's not an issue for me, but I mean I really want to ensure that we have everybody involved. And another way you can also do it is if you want to alternate different times between meetings, so that one meeting will happen at this time and another call in the next two weeks will be at another time.
But I don't- Personally, well unless the group wants that, I think changing times for me is difficult, just from a time management perspective. Cheryl, you have your hand raised?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thank you Dev. It's also a challenge for the macro view on all of the calls that need to be managed by our staff. If we shift it, if we do go to a shift around, it has to be an absolutely predictable shift around. We did do that with the BCEC calls where they alternated between the two times that meant that Hong could make one call and Veronica in Moldova could make the other call, (inaudible 0:28:39) both of them.
As it turned out we ended up predominately using the one call time anyway when things changed. So you just need to be really, really predictable about those things. Can I suggest rather than expose us all to yet another Doodle poll, you need to get the Doodle (inaudible 0:29:02) changed, by the way. I'm having a visceral response when I see a Doodle poll come out from work teams these days, that someone, I don't care who, just privately reach out to Charles and Hong and see if we can clarify and get one or other of them to make a choice on time.
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay. I noted that there was another popular time that was picked up in the Doodle, which was four hours later I believe.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, I mean, ask them on those two options. I mean for example four hours later would probably suit Hong, because of where she is. I can't guess at what Charles would say, we need to ask.
Dev Teelucksingh: I believe Charles if I'm reading the times correctly did select the four hours later than this call. And I think yes, and so that was also a very popular time. So I guess the thing will be to definitely reach out to Hong and just confirm with her that “Okay, is this time okay or iss either this time or this time?”
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And I also -- can I just remind you, we're actually about to wind down soon.
Dev Teelucksingh: Sure. So we don’t have much meetings left anyway.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Exactly. Should we still be bending backwards to try and get one person's feelings? Especially if you let Charles in which can, as Vice-Chair, as I see RALOs should be able to bring the voice of APRALO very effectively in.
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay, yeah. I guess you can't please everybody, because I mean moving to the later time, I know Dev has indicated in his Doodle that he can't make that time. So there's always, yeah.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Do you really want to sacrifice people who have been consistently involved to hopefully get someone into the last five minutes? Well, I guess it might work if we were running a relay race.
Dev Teelucksingh: Well I guess if it was at the very beginning. I mean when we were at the very beginning in September, gosh was it that long? September when we started these calls. Yeah.
Okay. Any thoughts, are there any suggestions or comments on from Chris, Dave, Olivier?
Chris Grundemann: This is Chris. I just say that either one of those times works for me. This time is fine, but four hours later is as good as well.
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay. Well, I guess the thing would be to- Alright, I’ll reach out. I'll work with that and communicate with Hong and find out if she really wants to come in on the four hours later, but otherwise it probably might just simply, just continue with this time and- Because again, we don't have much more meetings and we probably have about three more meetings, literally, before San Francisco.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I would think so.
Dev Teelucksingh: Yes, so it's not much time really, okay. Very well. I'm thinking there are more people typing on here, so I'm just waiting on that.
Rudi Vansnick: Yes, I just got out of the Adobe Connect because the log-in was in error, it was a strange message. I had to open it in another browser, otherwise it wouldn't work.
Dev Teelucksingh: Well, okay, well it worked, because that's strange, because your text did get through. Okay. Well, so, actually then there’s another question. Like I said there will be a few meetings after San Francisco. Okay, well just refresh me of the time line here for this, because I thought the submissions, the main bulk of the submissions have to be by San Francisco. Either Seth or anybody else wants to elaborate on that.
Seth Greene: Dev, I'm happy to answer that. I think while the main bulk of the work will be done by San Francisco it all won't be complete, and in fact the final report almost certainly won't be complete. So there will be a few meetings after San Francisco. The timeline initially was set to end during March, so at the very least there will likely be one meeting in March; and I'm frankly assuming like with so many things it will run over, the work will run over a little bit, so perhaps one extra month.
I don't know if that's something we even want to think about right now, or certainly condone right now, but you know, I'm just trying to be realistic in my own mind.
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay. Well then, well, okay. Just to clarify then Seth, I mean and that maybe Cheryl and Olivier could confirm because I was under-Alright, well first of all, is this time published first of all, where this entire At-Large improvements is scheduled to be finished? Because I was under the impression San Francisco would be when most of the recommendations, most of the policy stuff will be happening, and- Yes, okay, I see Olivier has raised his hand.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you, Chair. Yes, I think the aim is to have all of the recommendations resolved and discussed at the San Francisco meeting, however, I think that some groups might be lagging a bit behind and might not be ready by that time for specific purposes. But as far as I understand the deadline was, in the process the deadline was to be in San Francisco meeting.
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay. But I mean ultimately is there any particular- Alright, well the At-Large improvements which came out of the ICANN Board review, I can't remember the acronym at this point now, and that led to the At-Large improvements report, and this is now how we are tackling this report: we've broken up into different work teams, looked at them, broken out the recommendations into the spreadsheet and so forth. Is there a particular deadline for that action?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: This was all detailed in the document which is in the At-Large improvements --
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay. Maybe I have to go back to that document.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Yes.
Dev Teelucksingh: Okay.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It's actually derived from self-imposed deadlines. The only time-critical deadline that was actively an issue for the Structural Improvements Committee and/or ICANN Board was of course the outcome of Recommendation 2 and that has been completed.
Dev Teelucksingh: Right, that was the key one for them, yes. Okay, for the ICANN Board, sorry. Okay, very well.
Seth Greene: Dev, if you don't mind, I can just add also that the self-imposed deadline that we've been citing has simply been the end of March.
Dev Teelucksingh: Right, okay. Well, so going back to the point then, so we really only have three effective meetings, possibly four before San Francisco. So I will confirm with Hong whether you know the 7:00 p.m., I'm sorry I'm using my time zone - four hours ahead of this would work or not, and if not, we'll just keep it at this time, moving forward, because there's only three meetings left now at this stage.
Okay, going back to the agenda, is there anything else, we might finish early. If so, any other business? Or anybody want to, any questions, thoughts, concerns about this work team or what work we have done so far? Going once, going twice, very well there being no other business.
Okay, confirmation on the next meeting, that will be the 3rd of February, I'm tempted to say let's leave it at that time (inaudible 0:38:20).
And yeah, 3rd of February, 2011 at 19:00 hours unless there has been some change after talking to Hong and Charles. And I'm waiting to see what people are typing in the chat here before I close the meeting.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Dev, if I may say, or what I usually say if anyone has to say it, say it, don't type it.
Dev Teelucksingh: Very well, good. Okay, if it falls later, then so be it. Okay, excellent, okay. Then well, as I say you’ll have time to get a cup of tea and relax until the top of the hour, excellent. Okay, with that I will now close the meeting then, and thanks for everybody for attending the call.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thanks Dev, bye all.
Dev Teelucksingh: Very well, take care.
[End of Transcript]
