[council] List of Future GNSO Work -- Please share with your SGs and Cs

[James Gannon]

Amr,

Thanks for the below note. Coming back to the IRD topic, could I trouble you if you have time to write up a paragraph on the commitments and current status, and any NCSG positions/inputs, so that Councilors can bring the topic back to the attention of the group in Cancun?

---
James Gannon

From: NCSG-Discuss <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU> on behalf of Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM>
Reply to: Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM>
Date: Saturday, 15 February 2020 at 16:02
To: "NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU" <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
Subject: Re: [council] List of Future GNSO Work -- Please share with your SGs and Cs

Hi Amr,

Thanks for the input.
Regarding multistakeholder evolution/pdp improvements, it is more related to what was suggested in Brian Cute initiative to give the lead to GNSO to work on consensus and representation/inclusivity track  based on the work done with pdp 3.0. The implementation team submitted its final reportand delivery for council consideration. One suggestion is to give time to the improvements to be fully implemented and review them.

Best,

Rafik

On Sat, Feb 15, 2020, 18:43 Amr Elsadr <aelsadr at icannpolicy.ninja> wrote:
Hi,

I’ve been trying to think about this list of future GNSO work, and tbh…, I don’t see much of it being of terribly high priority, perhaps with the exception of one item, but I’ll get to that later.

There is some work that certainly needs to continue as effectively as possible; namely, concerning ongoing policy development:

c) Phase 3 of the EPDP regarding Priority 2 Workstream issues
d) Phase 2 of the Review of RPMs - Review of the UDRP

…, as well as any existing policies which have been affected by GDPR and the EPDP recommendations, although I will note that for those policies, until their review is complete, there should be enough safeguards in place already to not make them a matter of terrible urgency. This view, however, may differ depending on which special interest party one asks.

Apart from those items, item “i)” on Multistakeholder Model Evolution/PDP Improvements seems like something the GNSO Council should tackle with some sense of urgency, if it is to wrap up whatever is necessary on this from a GNSO perspective, before the next GNSO Review begins.

One thing I would have liked to see at the top of this list, but isn’t on it at all is Internationalized Registration Data (IRD). Now that the GNSO (and the broader ICANN community) is in the process of wrapping up its work on compliance with data protection regulation, I would really like to see the GNSO Council follow up on its commitments to work on IRD. These commitments were made back in 2016 IIRC. This wasn’t during the current Council Leadership Team’s tenure, nor the previous one, but the one prior to that.

That this issue isn’t even on this list at all is something I find to be of concern, and speaks to the GNSO Council’s lack of appropriate interest in a topic, which is an important component of making registration of gTLD domain names accessible to more potential registrants (not only those with a command of languages based on Latin script).

Anyway…, these are my thoughts at the time being, and happy to discuss them and others, if folks would care to weigh in.

Thanks.

Amr


On Feb 8, 2020, at 12:22 AM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM<mailto:rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM>> wrote:

Hi all,

please share input e.g. ranking of the topics and rationale behind the choices. We will consolidate all input.
the result will be used by NCSG councillors for the next GNSO council meeting.

Best,

Rafik
Le ven. 7 févr. 2020 à 00:53, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com<mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>> a écrit :
hi all,

this is a follow-up of SPS meeting and request for input from GNSO groups regarding the priorities for GNSO for the coming year. The attached list indicates future work for GNSO with some background information
NCSG PC should coordinate and consolidate the input by the time of GNSO Council meeting in the 20th February.
Please let me know if you have any questions.

Best,

Rafik


---------- Forwarded message ---------
De : Drazek, Keith via council <council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
Date: ven. 7 févr. 2020 à 00:47
Subject: [council] List of Future GNSO Work -- Please share with your SGs and Cs
To: council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:council at gnso.icann.org> <council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>
Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org> <gnso-secs at icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>>

Hi all,

As a follow-up to our GNSO Council SPS discussions on work prioritization, I am attaching the list of known work items. You’ll recognize this list as the subject material for the informal “sense of the room” survey we completed on Friday. The survey result will be included in our SPS Report as a reference, but, as we agreed, it is only informational.

Please share this list with your respective SGs and Cs and begin your discussions about priorities for 2020 and 2021. We will discuss this further during our 20 February Council meeting, and also during our F2F meetings in Cancun. Those conversations will be productive only if you’ve socialized this list with your colleagues and have received some direction regarding your groups’ top priorities.

Thanks,
Keith


_______________________________________________
council mailing list
council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council

_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20200216/a7896ecc/attachment.htm>