RE: [council] Review Working Group

["Peter de Blanc" <pdeblanc@usvi.net>]

Fellow NC members:


A suggestion was made that the WG submit a "proposed charter" to the NC for
ratification prior to undertaking its work.

I submit that it would be impossible to even gather ideas and discuss such a
charter, without an operating list for those persons who wish to, or are
willing to participate.

Given the absence of any clear policy as may have been output by working
group "D", It seems that the only way to move forward with the YJ WG-F is to
turn on the list.

The WG was voted upon and approved in a public meeting. Any delays could
provoke a negative public reaction.

Does anyone on the council disagree with the necessity of activating the
list now?

Peter de Blanc




-----Original Message-----
From: owner-council@dnso.org [mailto:owner-council@dnso.org]On Behalf Of
YJ Park
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 11:56 AM
To: Philip Sheppard; council@dnso.org
Subject: Re: [council] Review Working Group


Philip and NC as a whole,

============================================
Please, Proceed with WG Formation by Announcing Mailing List
Creation, REVIEW WORKING GROUP, WG-F.
============================================

> Before then I think it is premature to establish any mail list or assume
any
> codified name for the group such as WG F.

> Let's please follow a clear process.

It would be far clearer process to have more explanation
why it is premature to establish a Working Group.

Can I have a chance to share what have been done so far
regarding the Working Group formation process since Berlin,
May in 1999 compared to the process which we have been
muddling here and the descriptions in the ICANN Bylaws?

Hoping we can learn some lessons from this hitory-tracking process,
I would be pleased to be surprised by seeing current Names Council
decide things with "REASON" and "LOGIC".

For the sake of your convenience, all the working groups have been
created first through "Emailing List" sometimes with timeframe
-WG A- however, most works have been done after its WG formation
including timeframe and even its goals.

YJ

[Appendix I] DNSO activities according to timetable
=============================================
1999/07/23 Charter for the Working Commitee D
1999/07/09 Charter for the Working Commitee E
1999/06/25 Charter for the Working Group C
1999/06/25 Working Group B, C, D, and E created.
1999/06/15 Names Council - call for participation in Workings Groups
1999/05/27 First informal meeting of the provisional Names Council
==============================================

[Appendix II] Details of WG Formation Process
==============================================
(I) DNSO Names Council - November 14, 2000's WG proposal

Chicoine: Motion to make YJ the chair of a WG to address certain
               DNSO specific issues. Approved by show of hands.

(II) DNSO Names Council Teleconference on June 11th, 1999's WG

It was agreed that creation of the working group to address dispute
resolution issues has the highest priority, [snip] It also was observed that
the Bylaws require participation in the working groups of at least one
representative from each of the seven Constituencies.

WG A was created, with Johathan Cohen (FICPI, IP Constituency) and
Amadeu Abril i Abril (Nominalia, Registrar Constituency) as co-chairs.

(III) DNSO Names Council on June 25th meeting,

The Names Council will continue its work on the agenda and will create
new working groups to deal with

WG B - Famous Trade-marks.
WG C - New gTLDs.
WG D - DNSO Business Plan and internal procedures.
WG E - Global Awareness and Outreach.

Those interested in working on WG B (famous marks) need to send
an e-mail to Jonathan Cohen by June 22 to scaf@idealaw.com;
on WG C (new gTLDs) need to send an e-mail to Javier Sola by June 22
to javier@aui.es. Contacts for WGs D and E are to be announced.

[Appendix III] ICANN Bylaws related with WG Formation
=============================================
Section 2 (b)
The NC is responsible for the management of the consensus building
process of the DNSO. It shall adopt such procedures and policies
as it sees fit to carry out that responsibility, including the designation
of such research or drafting committees, working groups and other bodies
of the GA as it determines are appropriate to carry out the substantive
work of the DNSO.

Section 2 (c)
If the NC undertakes consideration of a domain name topic, or if
a Constituency so requests, the NC shall designate one or more
research or drafting committees, or working groups of the GA,
as appropriate to evaluate the topic, and shall set a time frame for
the report of such committee or working group.
=========================================

Reference
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/la2000/archive/scribe-icann-111400-2.html
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/19990617.NCtelecon.html
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/19990615.NCwg.html
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/19990612.NCtelecon.html
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/19990603.NCtelecon.html
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/19990527.NCberlin.html
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/calendardnso.html
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/19990709.NCwge.html
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/19990723.NCwgd.html
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/19990625.NCsj-admin.html
http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm