[ga] DNSO Review - Questions on NC

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

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

V. Structure:

The structure of the DNSO is as follows: The NC, Seven constituencies, 
and the General Assembly.

A. Names Council:

Under the ICANN bylaws, the Names Council is responsible for the 
management of the consensus-building process of the DNSO. The NC 
consists of representatives selected by each of seven constituencies.  
The NC functions via a list serve, regular teleconference calls, and 
physical meetings in conjunction with ICANN quarterly meetings. There 
have been concerns that the DNSO Names Council has evolved into a 
generalist body. Questions below aim to address the role of the NC, and 
how to improve it.

·	Is the Names Council fulfilling its responsibility to steer and manage
 the DNSO consensus process, or can this be improved?

·	What are the proper expectations for the Names Council, and what is 
its proper role in relation to the DNSO and the ICANN Board?

·	Should the NC take a more active role in managing the consensus-
development process, for example by giving working groups more defined 
charters and more frequently reviewing the state of their work?

·	How can the NC enhance the level of technical or other expertise 
employed in the consensus-development process?

·	How much or little should the NC be involved in the detailed 
management of ICANN?

·	Does the NC manage the policy-development process so that 
recommendations are reached in a timely manner?

·	Does the existing structure work to generate consensus recommendations
 on domain name matters?

·	Does the Names Council give appropriate level of consideration to the 
views of all affected stakeholders?

·	The NC recommendations have been criticized as often being ‘weak’, or 
merely reflecting the outcome of the respective working groups. How can 
the NC interpret the outcome of the working groups, and formulate a 
better defined and stronger recommendations consistent with the 
consensus process?

·	Do the NC representatives adequately communicate with their respective
 constituencies? Do the constituencies communicate with their NC 
representatives?

·	Does the NC adequately communicate with the ICANN staff and Board?

·	Does the NC adequately communicate with other SO Councils?

·	After consulting ICANN staff to address details which require legal 
and technical expertise, does the NC review whether or not such input is
 sufficient?

·	How can the NC improve the role of the DNSO under ICANN, and improve 
its ability to provide advice and input to the ICANN Board on domain 
name policy issues?

*******************************************************************
--
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