Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Sun, 14 Jun 2015 09:40:26 +0900 |
Content-Type: | multipart/alternative |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Hi everyone,
few weeks ago we discussed about topics we would like to ask ICANN board
members about, during our NCSG-Board 1 hour session. We got those topic
below and we got several interventions in the list.
since, we shared the topics earlier with the board, we don't necessarily
need introduction for each during the session. However, we should prepare
for the meeting and develop more questions and interventions. any NCSG
member attending physically or remotely the session can intervene.
Please check the topics and share your thoughts, you can also ask questions
if you would to get some clarifications to understand the background and
the issues.
- Does the board have any plans for new/revised/additional naming policy
pr programs outside of the new gTLD program?
- Does the board feel that the IANA functions should remain within ICANN
in perpetuity, if so should the community not have the right to
periodically review the performance of the IANA and if required seek bids
rom alternate providers?
- When performing its work, what situations does the board feel it it
exercising its fiduciary responsibility, and does the board take into
account the community input when making such decisions., has the board
received formal guidance on the boundaries if their fiduciary
responsibility with regards to the IANA transition?
- On the topic of ‘Public Interest Commitments’ how does the board feel
that PICs interact with existing bottom up policy making at ICANN. Does the
board feel that there may be a conflict between PICS and multistakeholder
policy development. How does the board plan to enforce PICs, specifically
in the case where there may not be community agreement over the actions
contained in the PIC?When will the community be given the opportunity to
review the PICs process in a bottom up manner?
- On the topic of gTLD auction proceeds, does the board plan to accept
the community suggestions via the CCWG current being chartered or will the
board unilaterally decide the uses for the sequestered funds? In the
case of a unilateral decision what will be the boards basis for the
decision, and what inputs will the board be soliciting apart from the CCWG
initiated by the GNSO
Best Regards,
Rafik Dammak
NCSG Chair
|
|
|