[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