Re: do we want to have constituency meetings in singapore next month?

[Einar Stefferud <Stef@nma.com>]

I am opposed to leaving the effort to meld the two drafts till a face
to face meeting cna be helad one day before the ICANN BoD plans to
select something.

There will be no time to get community reactions to any compromise
meld, so it will have dubious credentials at best.

So, we shodul be working more diligently on the net to resolve the
differences well before the SG meeting!

What are we waiting for, anyway?	Cheers...\Stef

PS: Given the draconian nanture fo the ICANN Guidles for NSI "test"
    Registrars, and the strong possibility that ICANN plans to impose
    all of those guidelines on all registries and registrars in the
    future, I think that the DNSO should be claming more power to
    oppose ICANN than either draft currently claims...\s

>From your message Fri, 12 Feb 1999 09:29:17 -0500:
}
}Chon and all,
}
}While not OPPOSED, personally, to a meeting of constituencies, keep in mind
}that at this point, there are TWO proposals for the DNSO, and only ONE
}defines which constituencies there will be. Unless either 1) the two are
}merged pre-Singapore or 2) ICANN selects one over the other, it doesn't make
}much sense to hold constituency meetings. I would much rather see time for a
}meeting of the proposers of each of the two proposals in a negotiating
}session.
}
}What I would propose is for the morning of 3.2, see if you can schedule an
}open negotiating session of the folks from the proposals. That would be the
}"signing sponsors" of the Paris draft and of the DNSO.org draft. I have no
}problem if the MEETING is open (ie, there is an audience), but this should
}be a merging meeting, rather than an incorporate-new-ideas meeting. Then,
}once (hoepfully) the two drafts are merged into a coherent whole, we then
}have DNSO meetings in which everyone can participate (ie, not just watch),
}talking about what changes, if any, need to be made to that merged draft.
}
}NOTE: AIP is collecting suggestions to the Paris draft at the address
}specified at the dnso.association.org web site, and will send those, as
}well, so that the input of the public on the lists are also included in the
}post-draftmerger meetings.
}
}If all this takes place on 3.2, then we finally have a SINGLE proposal that
}ICANN can approve or not at its Board Meeting, and then, on 3.5, the work of
}the DNSO can begin...
}
}Just a proposal.
}
}Thoughts?
}
}Sincerely,
}Andrew
}
}Kilnam Chon wrote:
}> we have the following DNSO and ICANN Board meetings in singapore;
}> 
}>   1999.3.2      DNSO Meeting(8:00 - 18:00)
}>   1999.3.3                                      ICANN Open Meeting
}>   1999.3.4                                      ICANN Board Meeting(Closed)
}>   1999.3.5      DNSO Meeting(8:00 - 18:00)
}> 
}> our question/suggestion is "do we want to hold preliminary DNSO constituency
}> meetings on 1999.3.4?" if we do, then some constituencies would meet in the
}> morning or afternoon in parallel on 1999.3.4.  For example,
}> 
}>         Morning                 Afternoon
}> 
}>         ISP & Connectivity      Business
}>         Registry                Registrar
}>         Trademark               Non-commercial
}> 
}> some of the reasons for the above proposal are
}> 
}> 1. it may make sense for SOME constituencies to have preliminary meetings
}>    since many are in singapore.
}> 2. there are no specific DNSO/ICANN events to participate on 1999.3.4(of
}>    course, there are many sessions at APRICOT and Internet World Conference,
}>    but this is a different matter.)
}> 
}> let us know if you like the above proposal.  we are going to decide if we
}> coordinate these meetings on 1999.03.04 as well as the second DNSO Meeting
}> on 1999.03.05 during 1999.03.02 DNSO Meeting.
}
}-- 
}Andrew Q. Kraft, MAIP
}Executive Director, Association of Internet Professionals (AIP)
}Email:      akraft@association.org
}Phone:      310-724-6589
}More Info:  http://www.association.org/