[lac-discuss-en] ????? Q = utf-8 Algunos_temas_ante_el_proceso_de_Trans = = utf-8 b aWNpw7Nu =?

[harold.arcos at gmail.com]

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]]

 Subject:????? Q = utf-8 Algunos_temas_ante_el_proceso_de_Trans = = utf-8 b aWNpw7Nu =? 
 Desde: harold.arcos at gmail.com

 Ladies and gentlemen region 


 I share this way I prepared a summary of issues associated with the 
 IANA transition and which are ongoing within subgroups 
 of work. 


 This process we are experiencing is recent after the milestone represented 
 the presentation of the proposal to the US government. 


 Some of these groups have only made a single meeting, others 
 They are discussing the guiding principle of the group. That is, it is still 
 good time to sit up and share experience as a region 
 address all these issues together. Some structural issues 
 corporation (but no less important) and others of greater interest to 
 users.


 I share some links that allow us to review firsthand the 
 initial documents of the issues under discussion. 




 *HUMAN RIGHTS* 


 Human Rights:  https://community.icann.org/x/kBWOAw 


 Within this working group some members propose extending the 
 Scope of ICANN in human rights. options as proposed: work a 
 implementation framework, while others are more inclined in 
 work a framework of interpretation. As we will assume this issue is 
 extremely delicate because ICANN is a technical organization by definition 
 It is making efforts not to get involved in a legal discussion 
 must assume the providers and users, but it is an obvious fact that the 
 corporation has a leading role on the structure of the Internet. 




 * * JURISDICTION 


 jurisdiction:  https://community.icann.org/x/khWOAw 


 One of the first discussions focused on the word Jurisdiction not 
 It is taken as the geographical area where ICANN operates.In this point 
 It was extended a first discussion and admitted that there would be consensus 
 priori. This topic has been debated long ago since I was Fadi 
 CEO. Within this working group some members are inclined 
 moving the legal headquarters to Switzerland or even ICANN Geneva. others 
 inclined to keep her in California. 




 * ODBUSMAN * 


 Ombudsman:  https://community.icann.org/x/lhWOAw 


 This subgroup works the role of Odbusman within the new configuration 
 ICANN structure. 




 * COOPERATIVE PARTICIPATION PROCESS. * 


 CEP (Cooperative Engagement processs and Independent Review processs). 


 CEP:  https://community.icann.org/x/nBWOAw 


 This group will seek to work on a proposed process in which 
 you can take assume an alternative to resolve cases before going to a 
 IRP. This group has not met yet. 




 * RESPONSIBILITIES OF ORGANIZATIONS SUPPORT (SO) AND COMMITTEES 
 ADVISORS (AC) *


 SO / AC Accountability:  https://community.icann.org/x/lBWOAw 


 This group deals with issues involving everyone. For example, in the Committee 
 Governmental Advisory (GAC) has a discussion on the definition of their 
 participation and scope after the transition. issues are discussed as they 
 Supporting Organization Generic Names (GNSO) is a structure 
 complex and the process of internal decision making is complex too, 
 then that is a challenge to solve before taking the leading role 
 post transition. Within the public and private sectors are reviewed how 
 Participants act within the SO / AC and whether they would be effective spokespeople 
 the interests we represent. Within the Community Schools 
 Assumed, At-large also has the challenge of defining how At-Large will 
 towards the participation of representatives. 




 * FINAL USUSARIOS *


 At-large is discussed whether the end user has responsibilities and how 
 They must report them according to a practice of transparency for all, 
 others think they have no obligation to report. 


 Does composiciohn Icann should be balanced? They are also questions that 
 they generate. 




 * Recommendation 7 and 13 * 


 https://community.icann.org/display/als2/ATLAS+II+Recommendation+7 


 a periodic review model arises multipart 
 interested. This proposal does not seem to occur during the road 
 Work 2 (WS2) 


 From the CCWG Responsibility efforts are under way to define which areas 
 They must be controlled by Icann. 




 https://community.icann.org/display/als2/ATLAS+II+Recommendation+13 


 During the Board will WS2 who receives this recommendation. 


 Icann should study and seek to ensure general representation 
 there is a balance of representation of all parties 
 Icann integrate.


 Some questions arise: What are the criteria for considering 
 there is a representation of stakeholders.? In the sub group not 
 yet it is known whether being treated that perspective. 




 * * CHALLENGES AHEAD 


 In this subgroup scenarios of how the Icann be structured they arise? 
 How redesign ICANN is it part of this agenda? It is one of the questions 
 generated to assume the post transition period. some participants 
 Asked whether GNSO could deal with the public interest arise? 
 In theory GNSO helps the Board to make decisions but within GNSO 
 not reached concrete recommendations could then be thought On a 
 GNSO reconfiguration? 




 * LIABILITY OF STAFF * 


 * Staff Accountability:  https://community.icann.org/x/mhWOAw 
 <  https://community.icann.org/x/mhWOAw> 


 Working group that will review staff responsibilities of Staff.
 The group has met once and are working on a document that was 
 distributed through google docs. 




 *TRANSPARENCY* 


 Transparency:  https://community.icann.org/x/mBWOAw 


 There has been talk of disclosure of documents among other actions 
 They can take as good practices. 




 Receive a hug 


 Harold 



[[--Original text (es)
http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/fb875aeb5a.html
--]]