[ga] DNSO Review - Questions on DNSO Responsibilities

["Roberto Gaetano" <roberto.gaetano@voila.fr>]

*******************************************************************

III. DNSO Responsibilities:

The DNSO is responsible for advising the ICANN Board with respect to 
policy issues relating to the domain name system. The DNSO’s primary 
responsibility is to develop and recommend substantive policies 
regarding to the domain name system. Additionally, the Board can refer 
substantive policies regarding the domain name system to the DNSO for 
initial consideration and recommendation to the Board.

To date, the DNSO has been tasked with the following responsibilities:

A. Universal Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP): Working Group A, Names 
Council’s review of Working Group A report, followed by the Names 
Council recommendation based on the Working Group A’s report to the 
Board and the final adoption by the ICANN Board.

B. new generic Top Level Domains (new gTLDs): Working Group B and C, 
Names Council review of Working Group B and C’s reports, followed by its
 recommendations to the Board.

C. DNSO ICANN Board Elections: Two elections held: 1) October 1999, 
choosing three ICANN Board members for 3, 2, 1 years respectively; 2) 
September 2000, filling the three year seat for the 1 year expired seat.


·	To what extent has the DNSO fulfilled the responsibilities in A, B and
 C?

·	Have the policies recommended by the DNSO represented an adequate 
consensus of the affected stakeholders?  Have the 	viewpoints of all 
stakeholders been considered?

·	Have the recommendations been well defined, useful in terms of being 
timely and being structured with a degree of specificity/flexibility 
appropriate to allow practical implementation?

·	To the extent the recommendations have been adopted as policies, have 
they received the support of those being asked to implement them?

·	Has the DNSO failed to address problems that have been called to its 
attention through the Names Council?


·	Does the DNSO performance require improvement, and if so, how?

·	Are the responsibilities of the components (NC, Constituencies, GA) 
and the relationship among them well defined?

·	How can the DNSO minimize the amount of subjectivity and increase the 
amount of objective consensus building, with its current structure? With
 a different structure?

·	Has the DNSO process brought expertise to the issues it has addressed?
  If not, how can the degree of expertise be 	enhanced?

*******************************************************************
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html