Hi Dan,

> On Aug 7, 2016, at 7:32 PM, Dan Krimm <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

[SNIP]

> Or, are we now considering governments "stakeholders" too?  If so, why not
> just make GAC a garden-variety SG in GNSO?  The "GSG" -- Government
> Stakeholder Group?

I have a personal view on this, but to my knowledge, this isn’t actually codified anywhere that I can tell. Seems to me that although folks from the GAC and ALAC (for example) should have some sort of say on gTLD policy, only those directly affected by those policies belong in the GNSO. So we have gTLD registries and registrars in the GNSO, as well as gTLD commercial and noncommercial registrants (was never quite sure how the ISPs fit into this, so my reasoning may be flawed).

Although GAC and ALAC provide Advice (capital A) to the ICANN board on multiple issues including gTLD policies, the GNSO is responsible for the development of policy Recommendations (capital R). Both the Advice and Recommendations are mandated to the different groups by the ICANN bylaws.

Of course, the GNSO process that results in these recommendations is open to participation regardless of whether or not a person has any affiliation to an ICANN SO/AC at all. However, the process is still managed by the GNSO’s stakeholders, represented by the GNSO Council.

My 2 cents.

Thanks.

Amr