Attendees:
Members: Stephen Deerhake, Eberhard Lisse, Barrack Otieno, Sean Copeland, Nigel Roberts, Martin Boyle, Peter Koch, Nick Wenban Smith, Danko Jevtovic, Debbie Monahad, Liz Williams, Svitlana Tkachenko
Participants:
Observers and experts: Naela Sarras
Staff: Bart Boswinkel, Kim Carlson
Apologies: Michele Neylon, Patricio Poblete, Jaap Akkerhuis
Agenda:
1. Welcome & Roll Call
2. Action Items
3. Work Schedule San Juan - Panama
3.1 Check where we are
4. Continue with comparative analysis
4.1 Overview of process steps
4.1.1 Continue review of Outline
(start at line 73 landscape version)
4.2 Role of stakeholders
4.2.1 Present Stakeholders Mind Map
4.2.2 Outline version
5. AOB
6. Next Meeting: 31 May 2018, 14.00 UTC
Documents:
Recordings:
Transcript: EN
Chat Transcript:
23:51:49 From Eberhard Lisse : Hi, I am not yet here :-=)-O
23:52:10 From Kimberly Carlson : Ah ok, welcome Eberhard, welcome all
23:56:19 From Joke Braeken : hello everyone. If you would like to follow the live note taking, go to https://docs.google.com/document/d/1str5uUpSUQPjDFtLwrLyAgAzauZrg_TicVNnd82EREQ/edit?usp=sharing
23:57:51 From Peter Koch : Good ${timeofday}
23:58:28 From Kimberly Carlson : @Peter, glad we could accommodate
00:01:15 From naela.sarras : hi all
00:03:44 From lizwilliams : Hello everyone…as I will be in the European timezone just after the ICANN Panama meeting. I would be more than happy to give up my privilege of a 16:03 meeting…and thank you all for that…but perhaps we should take another look at timings
00:05:28 From lizwilliams : And we could also look at rotating the chairmanship duties to save horrible hours for some people…
00:06:36 From Joke Braeken : hello everyone. If you would like to follow the live note taking, go to https://docs.google.com/document/d/1str5uUpSUQPjDFtLwrLyAgAzauZrg_TicVNnd82EREQ/edit?usp=sharing
00:06:41 From Peter Koch : instead of a “hand”: I would like to repeat my request for a drop of the term “SSxit” in line 57
00:06:49 From sveta : Good morning!
00:07:45 From Eberhard Lisse : It is till the same document, without changes made last time
00:08:10 From Peter Koch : OK, works for me, tnx
00:09:47 From nigel : Do you prefer 'sudexit'?
I'm sorry to see the suffix '-exit'appears to have entered the English language in the same way the suffix '-gate' did in the 1970s.
00:12:52 From nigel : AGREE re wiki
00:13:35 From Kimberly Carlson : Glossary is a work in progress: https://community.icann.org/x/5hgFBQ
00:15:11 From Peter Koch : @nigel: I guess my point was that we might not need to invent, in this case, our own social media style eye catcher; ‘brexit’ (in whatever capitalisation) is a gini I am not eager to send back into its bottle (referring to the wording here,only, of course)
00:15:45 From lizwilliams : Hands are up…
00:15:49 From lizwilliams : new hand
00:16:46 From Eberhard Lisse : double-mute
00:18:19 From Eberhard Lisse : I agree with Mot for the policyartin. But the details are n
00:18:34 From Eberhard Lisse : s/Mot/Martin/ :-)-O
00:19:58 From Eberhard Lisse : I agree with Liz, we can do this in the MindMap
00:20:37 From nigel : "Who needs to be informed? By whom? And when?"
00:21:58 From nigel : I suggest we avoid the word 'required' as this implies there is already something that requires this (e.g. policy, law etc).
00:22:02 From lizwilliams : Should we provide guidance suggestions even if it is different on a case by case basis?
00:22:44 From nigel : Nick is broadcast quality.
00:23:40 From Eberhard Lisse : Some ccTLD Managers send paper mails, some email, some social network, some publish on their web page
00:24:15 From lizwilliams : @ Nick…I wonder if we can think more broadly about potential effected parties who might be a) asleep at the wheel about implications and/or b) might be outside the cc in question…
00:26:02 From Eberhard Lisse : that is not an issue for this Wg as we have decided
00:27:01 From Peter Koch : @Nick: the (non-)eligibility of UK citizens for the EU TLD is solely a matter of EU TLD policy, out of scope for this group, I believe
00:31:44 From Eberhard Lisse : so we write some general statement into the Mindmap, please?
00:31:56 From nigel : Peter: it's actuall not a matter of EURid policy - the .EU domain is regulated by a binding law that remains binding law throughout the current EU for the foreseeable future.
00:33:44 From Peter Koch : that’s why I said “EU TLD policy”, avoiding to state who is actually setting that; however, whetherthat’s EUrid or the commission is probably not making much of a difference for our discussion
00:33:50 From lizwilliams : So do we want w
00:34:04 From lizwilliams : Worst practice…let’s think of another term...
00:34:51 From lizwilliams : So you’ve just named it…”General Guidelines” is nice...
00:34:59 From Barrack Otieno : can we use the term guidelines
00:35:09 From Barrack Otieno : as a compromise
00:35:12 From Eberhard Lisse : No, that mises the point
00:35:40 From Barrack Otieno : ok
00:35:43 From Eberhard Lisse : Nobody (at ICANN) tells a ccTLD Manager what to do
00:35:49 From Peter Koch : Maybe the elephant in the room is that the ccTLD manager might have an interest to continue management of the TLD and thus might have little inclination to notify current and prospective customers too early and how that effects the ‘notification’ and the effective notification date
00:36:39 From lizwilliams : @ Peter…then the idea that we have generic, high level guidelines about what we think might be a good idea in certain situations is a useful exercise.
00:36:45 From Eberhard Lisse : Peter, agreed, but that must not affect the Policy, ie stop the proceedings
00:37:37 From Eberhard Lisse : Liz, don’t go there, it’s not going achieve consensus.
00:38:13 From Eberhard Lisse : We can not tell a ccTLD Manager what to do
00:38:47 From lizwilliams : Eberhard…I will always go where I don’t have some clear sense of the understanding of the group which evolves over time. It is not OK to shut down, in this working group, reasonable and thoughtful conversation about what a policy might end up like for future situations.
00:39:16 From Eberhard Lisse : And I am going to die in the ditch about this
00:39:37 From lizwilliams : And, just for good order, I am not saying that we should tell a ccTLD manager what to do. I am suggesting that, in the absence of “no arrangement” we need to have something to provide guidance.
00:39:43 From Eberhard Lisse : which is the level agreed upon in previous correspondence
00:39:59 From Eberhard Lisse : If you could be bothered to do your homework when entering this group
00:40:39 From lizwilliams : Eberhard…please…I have read all of the documents and I have also prepared for the meeting. It is always OK to seek clarification with colleagues and to open up conversation not shut it down.
00:40:48 From nigel : I'm less than keen on using the word 'Guidlines' when we mean 'Rules'.
00:42:04 From lizwilliams : @Nigel…is it good to use rules? I have no particular preference but it is clear that there are sensitivities here about terminology?
00:43:58 From Eberhard Lisse : There are sensitivities in the ccTLD space about subsidiarity.
00:44:44 From Eberhard Lisse : Bart you were lound and clear
00:50:18 From lizwilliams : Whatever you come up with is fine but I am just looking for stability in the document that we are reading…
00:50:28 From lizwilliams : Over the longer term…
00:51:47 From Joke Braeken : here is the link to the Wiki space: https://community.icann.org/display/ccnsowkspc/Policy+Development+Process+%28PDP%29+-+Retirement
00:54:20 From nigel : Before we run out of time, I have a very short item under AOB
00:58:02 From nigel : @Liz. What I mean is no mincing of words. If something is obligatory in effect (which it can't be) we can't get around this by using terms of art that seem to indicate optionaltiy.
00:58:10 From Peter Koch : I’ll have to leave soon for a different appointment
00:58:26 From martin boyle : I was hoping to encurage us to start to move towards a policy framework in this doc!
00:58:56 From lizwilliams : @Nigel…whew…and I even speak English…what were you saying…? Three words or less for clarity...
01:01:24 From Debbie : good idea EL - I am happy to do that
01:01:49 From lizwilliams : Good idea…I will do that too…I just had a meeting with our GAC people this week…they will be more than happy to do more work…
01:02:21 From Peter Koch : thanks everyone, bye
01:02:35 From Debbie : yes, happy with Zoom too
01:03:29 From Nick WS : I like zoom. the only downside is you can’t see the order of hands up to speak but otherwise it’s great. much better than WebEx
01:03:45 From martin boyle : zoom does need rather a lot of windows open...
01:03:50 From Eberhard Lisse : Bart is keeping track of theorder, so that eworks good enough for me
01:03:54 From Sean Copeland : @Nick, I have requested the hand numbers to be added… hopefully paying for the service gets attention :)
01:03:56 From martin boyle : hate to use on a laptop!
01:03:57 From lizwilliams : I like zoom…just because it sounds faster...
01:04:18 From Debbie : good night
01:04:18 From Nick WS : thanks and bye
01:04:19 From Kimberly Carlson : thanks all, bye
01:04:26 From sveta : thanks all
