You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 14 Next »

Attendees: 

Members:    Alan Greenberg, Alice Munyua, Athina Fragkouli, Becky Burr, Bruce Tonkin, Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Fiona Asonga, Izumi Okutani, Jordan Carter, Jorge Villa, Julia Wolman, Julie Hammer

Participants:  Aarti Bhavana, Alain Bidron, Andrew Sullivan, Avri Doria, Brett Schaefer, Chris Disspain, David McAuley, Edward Morris, Erika Mann, Farzaneh Badii, Finn Petersen, George Sadowsky, Jorge Cancio,

Observers and Guests:   Abdelmajid Daoufa, Ahmed Amine Naji, Amine, Amy Stathos, Annaliese Williams, Asha Hemrajani, Ayden Férdeline, Bobby Chombo, Brad, Brian Sun, Bruno Lanvin, Calabar City Hub, Cheryl Miller, Craig Ng, Fiona Aw, Gaolingli, Gordon Chillcott, Hassan, HS, Imane, Ismail Derrazi, Jan Scholte, Jim Prendergast, Joan Kerr, Joyce Chen, 

Staff:  Alice Jansen, Bernie Turcotte, Berry Cobb, Brenda Brewer, Glen de Saint Gery, Grace Abuhamad, Hillary Jett, Karen Mulberry, Laena Rahim, Larisa Gurnick, Margie Milam,

Apologies:  Barrack Otieno

**Please let Brenda know if your name has been left off the list (attendees or apologies).**

Transcript

  • AM Session
  • PM Session 

Recording

Agenda

08:00 - 08:30 – Welcome:

      • Roll call and SOI updates; 

      • Opening remarks and housekeeping;

      • Define meeting goals, outcomes.

08:30 -09:30 – WS1 recommendation: preparing engagement session and update on consideration by SO/ACs 

09:30 -10:30 – Planning for WS1 implementation

      • Overall approach with legal counsel, implementation oversight team, and other subgroups

      • Call for volunteers

10:30-10:45 – Coffee break

10:45-12:00 – WS2 Kick-off 

      • Discussion on general approach

      • Plenary approval on scope, requirements, recommendations for public comments

      • Call for volunteers to Chartering Organizations

12:00-13:00 Lunch break

13:00-15:00 – Exchange of views regarding WS2 items scopes 

      • Staff overview presentation 

      • Diversity

      • SO/AC Accountability

      • Staff Accountability

      • Transparency 

      • Human Rights Framework

      • Jurisdiction 

      • Ombudsman

15:00-15:30 – Coffee break

15:30-16:30 – Resources and facilitation for WS2 

      • Meeting and travel support requests

      • External legal counsel 

16:30-17:00 – AOB and Closing Remarks

Notes

Action Items

Documents

Adobe Chat

  Brenda Brewer: (3/4/2016 07:44)           Welcome to the CCWG Accountability Face to Face Meeting on Friday, 4   March!  My name is Brenda Brewer and I will be monitoring this chat room.  In this role, I am the voice for the remote participants, ensuring that they are heard equally with those who are “in-room” participants.          When submitting a question that you want me to read out loud on the microphone in this session, please provide your name and affiliation if you are representing one, start your sentence with <QUESTION> and end it with <QUESTION>. When submitting a comment that you want me to read out loud on the microphone, once again provide your name and affiliation if you have one then start your sentence with a <COMMENT> and end it with <COMMENT>.  Text outside these quotes will be considered as part of “chat” and will not be read out loud on the mic.

  Steward Lafayette: (07:56) Is it also possible to connect to the session via skype?

  RP -  Tech 3: (07:57) no sorry, only via adboe connect or the streams

  Steward Lafayette: (07:58) Thanks for the quick reply

  Alice Jansen: (08:07) Hi all - the session has not started yet - we will begin shortly.

  Steward Lafayette: (08:09) Excited to be here! And Thanks for the high quality #VOIP

  Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (08:10) Hello

  Peter Van Roste (CENTR): (08:11) I am hearing an echo, is it just me?

  David McAuley (RySG): (08:12) no echo here Peter

  Jordan Carter: (08:12) hello

  Steward Lafayette: (08:12) #VOIP with no echo

  David McAuley (RySG): (08:12) Hello all

  Jordan Carter: (08:12) https://icann.adobeconnect.com/rak55-cristal/

  Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (08:16) Hi everyone!

  Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair ALAC): (08:16) We didn't manage to make everyone happy but at least we did everyone (evenly) unhappy

  Steward Lafayette: (08:16) <QUESTION>Your host is also not transparent. The Moroccan government is banning #VOIP to citizens. But it is enabling this live meeting.</QUESTION>

  Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (08:16) We have windows with open curtains, so I'm quite happy atm :D

  Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair ALAC): (08:17) @Steward thanks for your question. However this question falls out of the scope of this group and we are not in a position to provide an answer to it

  Asha Hemrajani: (08:21) Greetings all

  Calabar City Hub: (08:25) Greetings from Calabar - Nigeria.

  Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (08:25) Greetings Calabar !

  Keith Drazek: (08:31) There will be ample opportunity for all Chartering Organizations to engage on implementation. The vote on the CCWG report really needs to be *not* conditional. The domino effect of conditional statements would be extremely unhelpful at this stage.

  nigel hickson: (08:34) good morning

  Farzaneh Badii: (08:34) Hi

  Calabar City Hub: (08:36) <Qeustion> How can we raise more awareness among governments to follow up on all discussion, because does charge with such responsibilities are not very knowledgeable about the subject matter?<Qeustion>

  Amine: (08:36) Hello Everybody

  Steward Lafayette: (08:39) hello Amine

  Calabar City Hub: (08:40)  <Question> How can we raise more awareness among governments to follow up on all discussion, because those charge with such responsibilities are not very knowledgeable about the subject matter?<Question>

  Calabar City Hub: (08:40) Sorry for the typo in the first q

  Brenda Brewer: (08:40) Thank you for your question Calabar City Hub, one moment please

  Olga Cavalli - GAC Argentina: (08:41) @Calabar this is one of the greatest challenges of ICANN and the GAC

  Jordan Carter: (08:42) two workstreams if you like

  Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (08:42) Thanks Calabar, lots of outreach has to be conducted. We can all contribute to this. The co chairs did some remote of F2F outreach during local events over the course of this group. Icann also does that and I think P. dandjinou would be your contact

  Calabar City Hub: (08:44) @Mathieu can you send P. Dandjinou contact?

  Calabar City Hub: (08:46) Sub-National government can help improve engagement if ICANN considers including local participation

  Becky Burr: (08:46) right now we are talking about Work Stream 1 implementation

  Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (08:47) I think PIerre.Dandjinou (at) icann.org

  nigel hickson: (08:47) @Calabar - happy to coverse off line; but regional VP for Africa is    Pierre Dandjinou <pierre.dandjinou@icann.org>

  Jordan Carter: (08:48) all of this work has to be open

  Jordan Carter: (08:48) and I don't think the phrase "implementation oversight" is quite right to be honest in a sense - the key task the Group has to do is make sure the bylaws framework matches the report

  Jordan Carter: (08:49) if the "Group" just has a role to help assure the first draft of those bylaws is largely right before CCWG as a whole reviews and can scrutinise and add changes, all good

  Andrew Sullivan: (08:49) re: what Alan just said -- I think that this is the reason for the 1st/2d/3d reading approach, no?

  Keith Drazek: (08:49) Agree with both Jordan and Andrew

  Matthew Shears: (08:50) + 1 on openess and transparency of process, etc.

  Becky Burr: (08:50) yes Andrew, exactly

  Avri Doria: (08:52) so this discussion is just WS1 implementation.  Thanks, I was getting confused.

  Alan Greenberg: (08:53) @Andrew, my experience is that once the "words" are presented, it can be amazingly hard for one ot two voices to get a change, even if that change would have been intuitively obvious if the "reminder" had come earlier.

  Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (08:53) Yes Avri

  Alan Greenberg: (08:53) It is alot like the advantage that the drafting party gets in a two-party contract.

  Avri Doria: (08:54) so the IRP implementation team remains alive and is a third part of this plan?

  Jordan Carter: (08:54) it's the second

  Jordan Carter: (08:54) IRP, and the broader bylaws

  Matthew Shears: (08:54) how will an issue be addressed if it is found that for whatever reason it requires further elaboration or reconsideration by the CCWG (although hopefuly this won't be the case)

  Bruce Tonkin: (08:54) @Jordan -0 I certainly think the subgroup is to make sure that the bylaws are consistent with teh report.   That is the purpose of the Board's bylaws team as well.   The community as a whole needs to be able to review before anything is finalized.   I think you do want a smaller group though to get the first pass right - so at least on face value the bylaws are consistent with the report.

  Jordan Carter: (08:55) just two threads

  Andrew Sullivan: (08:55) @Alan: I get your concern, but the remedy for that problem is surely not for 130 people to participate in drafting.  The draft will never happen in that case.

  Bruce Tonkin: (08:56) @Malcom - agree the CCWG group as a whole does have a role in review.   The review though is whtehr the byklaws is consistnet with the rport - rather than re-opening the issues.

  Alan Greenberg: (08:56) Andrew, no argument there...

  Avri Doria: (08:58) i am so confused at the moment. 2 groups, 3 groups, ...

  Thomas Rickert, CCWG Co-Chair: (08:59) two groups, Avri

  Thomas Rickert, CCWG Co-Chair: (08:59) IOT and IRP

  Matthew Shears: (08:59) + 1 Jordan

  Avri Doria: (08:59) so there is only IRP implementation oversight, other stuff does not need such oversight?

  Jordan Carter: (08:59) it's the cochiars helping with the first draft review for "IOT", and the existing IRP implementation team

  Jordan Carter: (09:00) well, it seems like we are all going to do that Avri - because such a wide array of interests are interested in such different parts in detail, it has to be open

  Jordan Carter: (09:00) so the idea of a first filter is just to reduce the error rate of the first draft, is how I see it

  David McAuley (RySG): (09:01) remote audio and video lost

  Jordan Carter: (09:01) it's come back now

  David McAuley (RySG): (09:02) Just back, thanks

  Avri Doria: (09:03) I guess my confusion had to do with my understanding of the orignal proposal.  i thought you were proposing a general implementation review team, not just affirming the existence of the IRP implementation review team.

  Jordan Carter: (09:05) Avri: I think that's what Leon said, but all that "general review team" would do is help make sure the bylaws drafts that come to the CCWG are accurate

  Jordan Carter: (09:06) at least, that's how I understand it

  Seun Ojedeji: (09:06) OIT means?

  Sébastien (ALAC): (09:06) Organisation Internationale du Travail ;)

  Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (09:07) I tihnkn it's ILO in English

  Sabine Meyer (GAC - Germany): (09:07) International Labour Organisation

  Bruce Tonkin: (09:08) Good suggestion from @Eberhard.

  Avri Doria: (09:08) Jordan, I understand a split between bylaw review and new structure implementation review, my question is whether the IRP the only thing that needs structural implementation review

  Imane: (09:09) How do you guys feel hosting ICANN in a country where VOIP isi blocked, furious nation out there is not being able to connect with their loved ones and families in Morocco. We need somebody to represent us and escalate this unfortunate decision.

  Bruce Tonkin: (09:09) T@Chris - yes the key to to properly articular the requirements.   Hopefully that is the roile of the CCWG propsola.   Wher the lawyers are unclear then they can go to a smaller group to help clarify.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) AALAC APRegional Member: (09:10) Yes Chris the prep and effectve brifing is essential as a step pre dafting ... I gree

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) AALAC APRegional Member: (09:10) Agree  ;-)

  Malcolm Hutty: (09:10) Complete unwillingness to challenge lawyers is very dangerous, and consistent with Board's seeming excessive deference to Jones Day. CCWG MUST be satisfied that the Bylaws adequately and correctly implement the points of principle that it decided

  Chris Disspain: (09:10) absolutely CLO...proper brifing :-)

  Jordan Carter: (09:12) I think the idea is that we should avoid redlining the lawyer drafts

  Jordan Carter: (09:13) if we think something is wrong we describe what we think is wrong, and why

  Jordan Carter: (09:13) we don't try and "Fix It"

  Andrew Sullivan: (09:13) It strikes me that the level of detail in the disucssion here illustrates somewhat why having too many people engaging directly with the  lawyers won't work

  Jordan Carter: (09:16) +

  Jordan Carter: (09:16) +1

  guoyongan: (09:17) where can i find chinese transcript？

  Seun Ojedeji: (09:17) makes sense @Andrew. However a "read only" access on their status/activity may not hurt. I think we've done this before within the CWG and it worked well

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) ALAC AP-Regional Member: (09:18) CONFEDANT THT CN BE THE WAY THINGS ARE DONE @Seun / Alan

  Jordan Carter: (09:18) and also, of course, if people see stuff on that list they don't agree with, the normal list remains to raise it

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) ALAC AP-Regional Member: (09:19) Sorry Caps was on.. not  shouting ;-)

  Andrew Sullivan: (09:19) @Seun: I have no objection to people being able to read things as they go along

  Andrew Sullivan: (09:19) I think that's wise

  RP -  Tech: (09:19) @guoyongan: unfortunately, there is only English availabe for this particular session

  Avri Doria: (09:19) it is good the bylaws group include some non lawyers as a legal construct is not necessarily a workable construct.

  Jordan Carter: (09:20) I am not a lawyer

  Avri Doria: (09:20) drive by lawyers can give a very legal structure that does not work when the reality of the multistakeholder bottom-up  hubbub is taken into account.

  Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair ALAC): (09:20) Well Jordan, nobody is perfect :P

  Jordan Carter: (09:21) thank god for that

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) ALAC AP-Regional Member: (09:21) LOL

  Avri Doria: (09:21) ok, then we are covered., thanks Jordan.

  Jordan Carter: (09:21) and neither is Steve I think

  Jordan Carter: (09:21) nor Mathieu

  Avri Doria: (09:21) did not knwo we knew who was on it yet.

  Avri Doria: (09:21) i was not clear on that.

  Izumi Okutani(ASO): (09:22) Thank you Mathieu for the summary and the taking stock on this topic makes sense to me

  Becky Burr: (09:22) @Avri - love the "drive by lawyers" concept

  Sébastien (ALAC): (09:22) @Avri it is IOT

  Jordan Carter: (09:23) as per what Mathieu just said, the voluntolding has no end

  Seun Ojedeji: (09:23) Whats the composition of laywers? is it CCWG council and ICANN's?

  Jordan Carter: (09:23) Seun, yep, CCWG counsel doing drafting, ICANN lawyers review

  Seun Ojedeji: (09:24) Okay thanks jordan. That makes sense and hopefully will save us some time at board approval level

  Alice Jansen: (09:24) https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/WP-IOT+-+IRP+Implementation+Oversight+Team

  Jordan Carter: (09:25) Seun -------- here's hoping!

  Becky Burr: (09:25) yes, both CCWG attorneys and ICANN counsel from Jones Day participated in the first call

  Avri Doria: (09:27) thanks for the IOT victims list.  is there also a bylaws victims list?

  seun ojedeji 2: (09:31) @Avri i thought the bylaw oversight will also be done by the IOT? although i agree it makes sense splitting to reduce wirkload on IOT

  Jordan Carter: (09:32) I think the idea was that the "IOT" with that limited role would be the cochairs and rapporteurs

  Jordan Carter: (09:32) working through an open email list

  Jordan Carter: (09:32) that's what I took from Mathieu's sum up, anyhow

  Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (09:32) Yes Jordan

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) ALAC AP-Regional Member: (09:33) and then acting as a "first filter" only before material goes to CCWG as a committee of the whole of course...

  Calabar City Hub: (09:34) +1 @Cheryl

  seun ojedeji 2: (09:35) Okay @Jordan although i note that the composition in the url shared does not seem to be just the co-chairs and rapporteurs

  Jordan Carter: (09:35) the URL was for the IRP implementation group, Seun

  Jordan Carter: (09:36) (this one, anyhow: https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/WP-IOT+-+IRP+Implementation+Oversight+Team)

  seun ojedeji 2: (09:36) okay fine. it says IOT-WP -IRP an that confused me

  Jordan Carter: (09:36) yeah

  Jordan Carter: (09:36) the lingo is a bit confusing

  seun ojedeji 2: (09:38) Re: groups does it mean we have 7 groups by the presentation in front of us? can't diversity and transparency be under a group for instance

  Olga Cavalli - GAC Argentina: (09:38) Cannot lower my hand :(

  Jordan Carter: (09:39) that's the discussion we are just starting Seun - the slide identifies the threads of work that need to be done

  Jordan Carter: (09:40) by the end of today we should all have decided how to structure the work

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) ALAC AP-Regional Member: (09:40) Yes Sebastien with this list of topics, therr will be *plenty* of work to go around...

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) ALAC AP-Regional Member: (09:40) agree Jordan

  Calabar City Hub: (09:41) I think the work stream as display is good for easy of work.

  seun ojedeji 2: (09:41) Yeah and that was a comment/suggestion from me ;-) on a lighter note, i also sent a few comments on the mailing list and i hope they will also be considered. Will soon leave the AC for my next conecting flight

  Calabar City Hub: (09:41) Safe trip Seun.

  amine: (09:45) the video quality is pretty good, we can view the conference as if we are attending, however, thousands of mothers can't see their sons/daughters living abroad, #freeVOIP ofr internal users

  Athina Fragkouli (ASO) 2: (09:47) FYI - the ASO just sent through their approval of the Final Report on WS1 Recommendation

  seun ojedeji 2: (09:47) Yay! @ASO

  Jordan Carter: (09:51) awesome Athina!

  Bruce Tonkin: (09:52) Agree with @Eberhad's points.   THere is a finite amount f activity that the community can do at once - there is also real policy work to be done in the GNSO, ccNSO etc.   It we need to look at the totality of work that ICNAN is trying to pwork on and the actual volunteer resources available.

  Malcolm Hutty: (09:53) Congrats Athina, ASO

  Andrew Sullivan: (09:53) I think I agree completely with Jordan

  Bruce Tonkin: (09:53) While we have made great progress on the accountability work - progress on others areas is stalling - e.g. replacement direvtory services for  domain name registraiton information etc.

  Matthew Shears: (09:54) @Athina - bravo

  Jordan Carter: (09:54) we should avoid overload, and it doesn't matter if we are very light on some of these areas where the community, organised through other structures, is working on the topics

  seun ojedeji 2: (09:54) @Bruce +1

  Calabar City Hub: (09:54) @Bruce I think there is need to spread into other areas equally.

  Leon Sanchez (Co-Chair ALAC): (09:56) Great news Athina!

  Athina Fragkouli (ASO) 2: (09:57) :)

  Andrew Sullivan: (10:01) I think the idea of having a date after which we declare end regardless of output seems like a reasonable idea

  Calabar City Hub: (10:01) Congrats

  Ahmed Amine Naji: (10:01) Good

  Mary Uduma: (10:02) Great News

  David McAuley (RySG): (10:43) I took mine Thomas

  Steward Lafayette: (10:48) Is anybody excited about "citizen access to the net" in this forum?

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (10:53) that slide is insane. Talk about review overload.

  Roelof Meijer (SIDN, ccNSO): (10:55) We should review the review process?

  George Sadowsky: (10:57) I think it's worthwhile to look at the efficiency of the multiple review processes that we are obligated to execute.

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (11:01) could ATRT3 review those?

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) ALAC AP-Regional Member: (11:01) indeed @george, it is a matter of effective resource Mx.

  Ayden Férdeline: (11:03) Sorry I have been listening in to this session but haven't been reading that chat, so maybe this has been addressed. The presentation window on my computer shows a slide partially covered in criss-crossed blue lines. Is this intentional? Or am I missing something?

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (11:03) it seems to be a failure in the Adobe room, Ayden

  Ayden Férdeline: (11:04) Ok, thanks for clarifying Jordan. For a moment I was curious as to what was being shared that was so confidentail!

  Andrew Sullivan: (11:05) If you expand it to full screen and then exit full screen, the crosshatching seems to get smaller

  Andrew Sullivan: (11:06) (i.e. to cover less of the slide)

  Edward Morris: (11:09) ARE

  Andrew Sullivan: (11:09) I don't fully understand why there is a need for multiple ways to review the same stuff.  Wouldn't it be better to identify all the stuff that someone else is already doing, and then not do that?

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) ALAC AP-Regional Member: (11:09) I suspect it could be useful to feed into ATRT3  and yes we could also pick up at the end.

  Steve DelBianco [GNSO - CSG]: (11:10) 4 of the 7 items in WS2 are closely related to the ATRT:   Transparency, Ombudsman, SOAC Accountability, and Staff Accountability.   That's where the potential relationship lies

  Edward Morris: (11:10) Agree with Alan

  Matthew Shears: (11:10) With regard to waiting on ATRT to accomplish some of the WS2 items have we not committed in the proposal to have reccommendaitons on WS2 to review by end of 2016?

  Xavier Calvez: (11:12) Avri +1

  Brett Schaefer: (11:14) @Steve, Those matters are also the ones most closely related to ICANN accountability. Relating back to the previous discussion of what should go first in WS2, perhaps those four issues should be the first tier agenda?

  Steward Lafayette: (11:17) One recommendation is: Transparency and accountability indicators should measured by users (citizens) satisfaction. A close accountability system is losing legitimacy

  Matthew Shears: (11:18) There is good work going on already on HR so it wouldn't make any sense not to encourage that to continue. 

  Avri Doria: (11:19) There is a notion of continuity in the ATRT cycle.  A major task of each ATRT is to review the work done since the last on on implementing the required changes.  I do not say that is the Only task but it is a major required task.

  Steward Lafayette: (11:20) HR is considering humans as resources. The idea is to get citizens a seat on the front table. (logistically, you would know best the right timing to discuss it)

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (11:27) I think they should be done in parallel (WS1 and WS2). 

  Niels ten Oever: (11:27) @Robin +1

  Matthew Shears: (11:27) I don't think we need to wait - some of that work has already been going on for some time

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (11:29) We've got people who want to specialize on issues in WS2, so they are ready to focus on WS2, while many of us continue with WS1.

  Edward Morris: (11:29) WS2 should begin while we have the momentum from WS1.

  Niels ten Oever: (11:29) I would be very interested in getting the human rights work going, this will help us stay within the target date of one year.

  Matthew Shears: (11:30) yes, I believe that we are supposed to have recommendaitons for review by the end of 2016?

  Izumi Okutani(ASO): (11:30) Total support to Andrew's comment

  Athina Fragkouli (ASO) 2: (11:32) agree with Andrew

  Izumi Okutani(ASO): (11:32) I agree and share Andrew's concern,and  per Thomas's clarification, if the parallel work doesn't affect the WS1 implementation schedule to delay, I am OK

  Izumi Okutani(ASO): (11:33) Helpful to confirm from co-chairs that getting WS1 implementation is highest priority, thank you Thomas

  Niels ten Oever: (11:33) Doing both in parralel will also create synergies, also agree priority should be WS1.

  Edward Morris: (11:34) There are different people involved in WS2 issues than would be involved in WS1 implementation and review issues. There should be no problem staffing and continuing with both efforts in parallel.

  Matthew Shears: (11:35) WS1 implementation absolutely has to be the prioirity but that should not preclude those interested in taking WS2 forward at the moment  from doing so

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (11:35) exactly, Matt.

  Andrew Sullivan: (11:35) It seems to me that, if the CCWG has enough confidence in some small group to ensure the completion of implementation, then it'll be possible to work in parallel

  Edward Morris: (11:36) A delay in WS2 will be perceived by some as a lack of commitment to WS2.

  Andrew Sullivan: (11:36) I confess I'm not sanguine that the CCWG will in fact have such confidence, and that instead there is a danger of  distraction

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (11:36) realistically, we have to have implementable bylaws for WS1 finished in June/July

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (11:36) Issues like "transparency" are absolutely critical to our work.  It cannot wait for WS1 to be fully implemented.

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (11:36) to allow time for public comments, etc

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (11:37) so there is some intense work to do in a few months

  Robin Gross [GNSO - NCSG]: (11:37) so what's new, Jordan?  ;-)

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (11:37) nothing new under the sun

  Roelof Meijer (SIDN, ccNSO): (11:37) WS2 1 year? How long was it again that we thought WS1 would take us, back 1 year ago?

  Thomas Rickert, CCWG Co-Chair: (11:38) queue is closed after Avri

  Niels ten Oever: (11:38) @Roelof - Is that a reason for not trying to make the deadline?

  Becky Burr: (11:39) but arent we expecting the replies from the community this week Kavouss?

  Matthew Shears: (11:40) IN Annex 12 para 03 its says: "The CCWG Accountability expects to begin refining the scope of Work Stream 2 during the upcoming ICANN55 meeting in March 2016. It is intended that Work Stream 2 recommendations will be published for comments by the end of 2016"   The question this raises is whether or not we will have time post transition to meet that end of year timeline?

  Sivasubramanian Muthusamy: (11:41) I raised my hand early, Is the response restricted to Members and not particiapnts?

  Niels ten Oever: (11:41) +1 to Jan Scholte && +1 to Avri

  Matthew Shears: (11:41) agree

  Keith Drazek: (11:41) I agree with Avri

  Olga Cavalli - GAC Argentina: (11:41) Agree with Avri

  Andrew Sullivan: (11:41) I agree with Avri on this

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (11:41) Avri agree

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) ALAC AP-Regional Member: (11:42) good point @avri

  David McAuley (RySG): (11:42) +1 @Avri

  ismail derrazi: (11:42) what about the blocking of VoIP in Morocco?!!!

  Edward Morris: (11:42) Delaying the launch of WS2 will endanger support of some of us for the WS1 proposal as submitted to the NTIA. For some if us, WS2 issues are as if not more important than WS1 issues. Delay now would engender the question as to if WS2 will ever take place.

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) ALAC AP-Regional Member: (11:43) noted Ed  I know the Leadership Team is well aware of that.

  Avri Doria: (11:44) the continuity is between WS1 and WS2.  WS1 created the requirements for WS2.  Work will feel abandoned if we do not at least slow start WS2.

  Matthew Shears: (11:44) agre Avri

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) ALAC AP-Regional Member: (11:45) I agree @ avri

  Edward Morris: (11:46) +1 Mathieu

  Athina Fragkouli (ASO) 2: (11:46) I see your point Avri. I guess a slow start of WS2 in that sense would make sense

  Phil Buckingham: (11:46) + Mathieu

  Paul Twomey: (11:46) Thank you Matthew.   The previous discussion was a bit alarming to all of us who came here to keep working on WS2 issues

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (11:46) that's why it is important that it's volunteers who are different people in these areas

  Grace Abuhamad: (11:47) Siva Muthusamy speaking

  jorge villa (ASO): (11:51) I think that we must keep the focus on finishig successfully WS1, but as Avri said, we can start doing some ground work paving the way for a full WS2 deployment

  FIONA ASONGA (ASO): (11:54) +1 Steve Delbianco

  Mary Uduma: (11:56) +=@ Steve

  David McAuley (RySG): (12:00) Transparency is largely meant to address DIDP as I rec all, and it seems that that subject is important enough not to be lumped with others that might deflect the focus on that aspect of transparency

  Keith Drazek: (12:02) Transparency also has a relationship to SO/AC Accountability.

  Keith Drazek: (12:03) (responding to Eberhard)

  Bruce Tonkin: (12:04) I recommend that the CCWG give some consieration to prioritisation.

  Roelof Meijer (SIDN, ccNSO): (12:04) We have to compliment Eberhard for the transition he went through!

  Bruce Tonkin: (12:04) A simple mechansim coul dbe to get each "member" of the CCWG to provide their top 3 priorites amongst the workstream 2 list of topics, and use the results to help prioritize.

  Jordan Carter (.nz, ccNSO): (12:04) IANA stewardship transitions have some good things for everyone

  Mathieu Weill, ccNSO, co-chair: (12:05) @Bruce : at the moment we are "slow starting" it. We'll see which topics get volunteer traction but WS1 is the high priority.

  Brenda Brewer 2: (12:06) Lunch Break for one hour.

  Grace Abuhamad: (12:06) Reconvening at 13:00 WET

  David McAuley (RySG): (12:06) Thanks Grace

  nigel hickson: (12:08) thanks 




  • No labels