[nc-whois] Proposed agenda for 12 September 2002 - Advisory to TF

["Cade,Marilyn S - LGA" <mcade@att.com>]

Dear WHOIS TF

Tony and I would like to call your attention to the advisory below,
regarding the Request of the NC Chair for a discussion on WHOIS
during the NC call 9/12. In keeping with the way that this TF works,
we will discuss this during our call so that all TF members 
are able to comment. Following the NC call, we will have further
feedback.
Several TF members are NC members, so they can be very helpful
in the discussion during the NC call, and in feedback later.


Best regards

Marilyn			Antonio

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bruce Tonkin [mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au]
> Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 6:26 AM
> To: council@dnso.org
> Cc: 'nc-intake@dnso.org'
> Subject: [council] Proposed agenda for 12 September 2002
> 
> 
> Hello All,
> 
> I note from the current Rules of Procedure for the Names 
> council that agenda
> items should be sent to the Names Council Intake Committee 21 
> days before
> the next meeting.
> The Intake Committee will send the agenda no later than 15 
> days before the
> meeting to the NC secretariat and the chair, and then the 
> agenda will be
> posted by the Secretariat.
> 
> Well clearly these timelines have not been met in the case of 
> the agenda for
> the meeting
> on 12 September, so I submit the following suggested agenda 
> for comment,
> before it is confirmed by the Secretariat.
> 
> At this stage I think it is important that we review the 
> current state of
> the main work items being undertaken by the Names council, 
> and then consider
> next steps (e.g deletes, and any further comments on the 
> reform process).
> 
> As a general rule I think we should use the names council 
> teleconferences to
> get early feedback and discussion on task force initial findings and
> draft/initial recommendations, rather than spend the time on 
> procedural
> matters (which can be dealt with usually via email).   We need better
> engagement and communication between the task forces, names 
> council members,
> and Board.
> The NC members can then help drive the consensus process within their
> constituencies to give further information to their nominees 
> on the task
> forces, and strive to reach consensus.
> 
> In my view, in future task forces should keep to their 
> initial terms of
> reference, and the terms of reference should be varied after 
> approval of the
> Names Council.  We need to ensure that we can stay focussed 
> on a particular
> issue, resolve that issue in a timely fashion, then move onto 
> looking at the
> next issue.  This will tend to avoid projects that go on 
> forever.  A good
> software engineering principal is that it is worth spending 
> more time to get
> the definition of the task right, as it saves significant 
> time later on.
> 
> I welcome feedback from members of the council on the comments above.
> 
> SUGGESTED AGENDA:
> 
> (1) Actions from last meeting - report on suggested process 
> for addressing
> deletes (15 MINS)
> 
> (2) Update on ICANN Board election process (5 MINS)
> 
> (3) Transfer Task Force - review current status of outcomes 
> with respect to
> the terms of reference (see below) - seek feedback from NC 
> members on draft
> recommendations and points of contention within the task 
> force   (30 MINS)
> 
> (4) WHOIS Task Force - review current status of outcomes with 
> respect to the
> terms of reference (see below) - seek feedback from NC 
> members on draft
> recommendations and points of contention within the task 
> force   (30 MINS)
> 
> (5) Feedback on the Second Interim Implementation Report from 
> the Committee
> of ICANN Evolution and Reform
> (http://www.icann.org/committees/evol-reform/second-implementa
> tion-report-02
> sep02.htm) (30 MINS)
> 
> My aim would be to try to stick to the time limits above, and 
> if discussion
> hasn't finished on a topic, we continue via email, and then 
> at the next
> conference call.
> 
> Please let me know if you would like to see changes in the 
> agenda above.
> 
> Regards,
> Bruce Tonkin
> (see below for terms of reference)
> 
> **********************
> 
> TRANSFERS Task Force Terms of Reference (process started 11 
> October 2001):
> The purpose of the Task Force on Transfers is to:
> 
> --develop broad understanding across the NC of the issues 
> underlying the
> disputed area of transfers of domain names between registrars 
> 
> --ensure  understanding of the proposed approach as documented in the
> Registrars' procedural document, which has been voted on by 
> the Registrars
> 
> --identify any broad policy issues (separate from contract 
> issues), which
> are the responsibility of the DNSO
> 
> -devise recommendations which have broad cross constituency 
> support  to any
> identified problems arising from the language of the existing 
>  agreements
> where policy needs to guide contractual changes.
> 
> --undertake a "fast track" working effort, via a Task Force,  
> to present a
> proposal for NC consideration at Marina del Ray NC meeting 
> and to recommend
> next steps, if any. 
> 
> ********************************
> 
> WHOIS Task Force (started 10 July 2001)
> Mission:
> "Consult with Community with regard to establishing whether a 
> review of
> ICANN's WHOIS Policy is due and, if so, how best to address"
> 
> *******************************************************
> 
> 
> 
> 
>