[wg-review] 7. [Names Council] Report requested by NC

["YJ Park" <yjpark@myepark.com>]

A. Names Council:

Under the ICANN bylaws, the Names Council is responsible for the management
of the consensus-building process of the DNSO. The NC consists of
representatives selected by each of seven constituencies.  The NC functions
via a list serve, regular teleconference calls, and physical meetings in
conjunction with ICANN quarterly meetings. There have been concerns that the
DNSO Names Council has evolved into a generalist body. Questions below aim
to address the role of the NC, and how to improve it.

· Is the Names Council fulfilling its responsibility to steer and manage the
DNSO consensus process, or can this be improved?

· What are the proper expectations for the Names Council, and what is its
proper role in relation to the DNSO and the ICANN Board?

· Should the NC take a more active role in managing the
consensus-development process, for example by giving working groups more
defined charters and more frequently reviewing the state of their work?

· How can the NC enhance the level of technical or other expertise employed
in the consensus-development process?

· How much or little should the NC be involved in the detailed management of
ICANN?

· Does the NC manage the policy-development process so that recommendations
are reached in a timely manner?

· Does the existing structure work to generate consensus recommendations on
domain name matters?

· Does the Names Council give appropriate level of consideration to the
views of all affected stakeholders?

· The NC recommendations have been criticized as often being 'weak', or
merely reflecting the outcome of the respective working groups. How can the
NC interpret the outcome of the working groups, and formulate a better
defined and stronger recommendations consistent with the consensus process?

· Do the NC representatives adequately communicate with their respective
constituencies? Do the constituencies communicate with their NC
representatives?

· Does the NC adequately communicate with the ICANN staff and Board?

· Does the NC adequately communicate with other SO Councils?

· After consulting ICANN staff to address details which require legal and
technical expertise, does the NC review whether or not such input is
sufficient?

· How can the NC improve the role of the DNSO under ICANN, and improve its
ability to provide advice and input to the ICANN Board on domain name
policy issues?