RE: [council] Re: proposed schedule changes

[HiroHOTTA <h.hotta@hco.ntt.co.jp>]

Andrew,

Thank you for your kind investigation on this matter.
I understand the Board's situation.
Now I come back to NC to see how DNSO should schedule 
its meetings between July 14 and July 17.

Hiro

At 00/04/17 12:53, owner-council@dnso.org wrote:
> Hiro:
> 
> We've discussed your proposal (shifting the ICANN Public Forum and Board
> meeting 1/2 day later) with careful attention, but it's simply not going to
> be possible.  There are two primary reasons for a full-day Public Forum
> followed by a Board meeting the next day:
> 
> (1)  The Board wants to preserve its ability to hold a full-day Board
> meeting on Sunday, 16 July.  (I emphasize that DNSO groups should feel free
> to schedule themselves at the same time as the Board meeting, if that's most
> convenient).
> (2)  The staff requires some time (i.e., Saturday night) to prepare draft
> resolutions that take into account ideas and views presented at the Public
> Forum.
> 
> So the Board will adhere to the basic schedule I presented earlier --
> namely, a full-day Public Forum on July 15, and a Board meeting starting in
> the morning of July 16.
> 
> I greatly appreciate your efforts to reach a sensible schedule for everyone
> concerned, and I'm sorry that we can't make the adjustment you suggest.
> 
> [For what it's worth, I agree with Ken's notion that there may be a
> significant value to DNSO groups to meet after the Board meeting.  For
> example, the NC's recommendations on new TLDs should be completed long
> before July 15, so that there will be adequate time for public review and
> comment.  A post-Board meeting makes a lot of sense, as it would allow the
> NC to take account of the Board's actions and to structure its
> July-to-November work schedule properly.  Some groups (ccTLDs, for example)
> have particular needs that require at least some portion of their meetings
> to occur prior to July 15.  But all DNSO-related groups should consider
> whether a post-Board meeting would be valuable, in the sense that it would
> focus the NC/constituency/working group on future efforts.  Much of the work
> of the DNSO constituencies is ongoing, and not directed toward items on the
> Board's immediate agenda.  In short, I think the DNSO should experiment with
> different schedule combinations to see what works best.]
> 
> Best,
> 
> --Andrew
> 
> 
> 
> [ -----Original Message-----
> [ From: owner-council@dnso.org [mailto:owner-council@dnso.org]On Behalf Of
> [ HiroHOTTA
> [ Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2000 10:42 AM
> [ To: Ken Stubbs; council@dnso.org
> [ Subject: [council] Re: proposed schedule changes
> [ 
> [ 
> [ Thank you, Ken.
> [ 
> [ I respect your comment and agree that extra burdon is not 
> [ acceptable for most of the attendees and Constituencies.
> [ 
> [ As you know, I have asked Andrew whether ICANN Board could 
> [ meet July 15 afternoon and July 16 full day. If it agrees, 
> [ DNSO-related meetings can fit July 14 full day and July 15
> [ morning. In this case, NC can meet on July 17, of course.
> [ 
> [ How do you feel about this?
> [ 
> [ Hiro
> [ 
>  
----------
Hirofumi Hotta
R&D Strategy, NTT