[ALAC] ICANN68 Planning Meeting (16 April) & Keith Drazek email
Maureen Hilyard
maureen.hilyard at gmail.com
Thu Apr 16 23:37:49 UTC 2020
On Apr 16, 2020, at 7:07 PM, David Olive <david.olive at icann.org> wrote:
*-------*
*ICANN68 Meeting Framework:*
- Sessions listed on the formal meeting schedule will receive technical,
language and meetings support as outlined by Nick on the call (i.e. ICANN
Virtual Policy Forum support).
- The formal meeting schedule will focus on “hot topics” (i.e. high
interest plenary sessions), a Public Forum, Executive Q&A and other
priority sessions identified by the community (e.g. policy topics meriting
cross-community dialogue; individual or bilateral working sessions to
progress important work).
- Other sessions can be organized that do not appear on the formal
meeting schedule – however, *only sessions that are published on the
formal schedule will receive full ICANN Virtual Policy Forum support*.
- These “other sessions” will be considered “regular” (normal
inter-sessional) meetings and be supported by the staff teams
that normally
manage these sessions (e.g. Policy).
- They can either be scheduled during the meeting dates (with the
caveats as noted) or around the meeting (e.g. before or after
the official
meeting dates).
- The formal meeting schedule will be supplemented by Prep Week, other
sessions such as working group meetings that do not need to take place
during the meeting period and post-meeting readouts and follow up webinars
– as befitting a flexible, deconstructed Virtual Policy Forum.
*Action Items:*
1. By next week (suggested date: *Thursday 23 April*), each community
group to provide its input as to *what sessions and topics it believes
should be on the official meeting schedule* (and hence receive full
ICANN Virtual Policy Forum meeting support).
1. Input to include (if possible) feedback as to whether additional
plenary sessions are needed (in addition to one on DNS abuse) and, if so,
which (if any) of the topic(s) noted in the survey should be the
subject of
additional session(s).
2. For planning purposes, *community groups to take as a starting
point the proposal that priority sessions be scheduled, as much as
possible, during a 4-hour block between 0400-0800 UTC.* *As noted
above, this does not prevent other sessions from being scheduled
during the
4 days of the meeting, but full support will not be available
for all such
sessions.*
3. Fulfillment of requests for live interpretation and/or ICANN org’s
Meetings Technical Services (MTS) support for individual
community sessions
outside the 4-hour block will depend on the availability of the requested
service at that time.
2. By next week (suggested date: *Thursday 23 April*), each community
group to provide its feedback as to whether or not to announce the
recipient of the *2020 Community Excellence Award* during the Virtual
Policy Forum, with the actual ceremony to take place at the next
face-to-face ICANN Public Meeting.
3. By end-April, Tanzanica King to prepare *preliminary ICANN68 meeting
schedule* based on community group input, taking into account
availability of requested technical and language services, meeting room
capacity and availability, need to ensure breaks between sessions, etc.
*Next Planning Call: *
- 30 April 2020 – Notice and calendar invites being sent shortly
---------
David A. Olive
Senior Vice President
Policy Development Support
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Washington, D.C.
_______________________________________________
Drazek, Keith via SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning
1:32 PM (2 minutes ago)
to David, SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning
Thank you, David.
Following up the good discussion of this group on Wednesday, I’d like to
underscore a couple of points for everyone’s consideration as we engage our
respective communities.
1. Under these challenging circumstances, which could worsen in some places
as we approach June/July, we should be focused on only what’s necessary,
time-sensitive, and mission-critical. As such, we need to avoid adding
extra plenary sessions just to fill time and slots.
2. ICANN 68 is our annual Policy Forum. As such, we should keep the focus
of our meeting slot allocation on the actual work of policy development and
associated implementation work. In the Policy Forum construct, we do not
typically have a Public Forum or Q&A with ICANN Execs. As such, we should
avoid adding those kinds of sessions and stick to plenary sessions that
support or enhance policy development/implementation.
3. There is clear cross-community interest in the topic of DNS Abuse, and
it is relevant to the current circumstances of COVID-19. I would support a
plenary session on DNS Abuse, but I’m having difficulty identifying other
similar topics that would warrant scarce time and support resources at a
challenging hour for much of the community. Let’s be judicious in our
selection of such plenary sessions and ensure we leave sufficient slots
available for the policy work.
That’s my initial feedback and thinking from a GNSO Council perspective.
I’ll provide additional input after the GNSO community has had a chance to
consider further.
Best regards to all! Stay safe.
Keith
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/attachments/20200416/d38cf8b7/attachment.html>
More information about the ALAC
mailing list