Changes

Technical Liaison Group Review (view source)

Revision as of 23:21, 29 June 2021

13 bytes added , 2 years ago

→‎Board Action on the Working Group Final Report

Line 68: Line 68:

===Board Action on the Working Group Final Report===

The board accepted the working group's report at its meeting on August 25, 2011, and referred it to the SIC for futher analysis and recommendations regarding a course of action.<ref>[https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2011-08-25-en#1.3 Resolution of the Board], August 25, 2011</ref> At it meeting in September, the SIC considered the current relationship with the TLG and proposed to continue discussion at [[ICANN 42]] in Dakar after committee members have had a chance to forumulate and exchange proposals for strengthening ICANN's relationship with TLG component organizations.<ref>[https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/minutes-bsic-2011-09-15-en SIC Meeting Minutes], September 15, 2011</ref> In Dakar, the SIC's meeting resulted only in a recommendation to the Board that the TR-WG's final report be posted for public comment.<ref>[https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/minutes-bsic-2011-10-23-en SIC Meeting Minutes], October 23, 2011</ref> During the time allocated for committee reports to the board, however, [[Ray Plzak]] (chair of the SIC) did provide some information regarding the SIC's discussion of the TLG review:

−

<blockquote>Part of the discussion coming out of the TLG review and the need for ICANN to get advice has also caused the committee to look at the broader scope of how does ICANN Board get the advice that it needs, not only on technical matters but on a number of other matters. The [[New gTLD program]] is going to cause -- it has caused the board to receive advice and need advice in areas that it hadn't necessarily needed detailed advice before. So we're going to look at the advisory committee structure. And we don't know where that discussion is going to go. But the thing is that it's something that needs to be done. Because in the end it's the ability of the board to get good advice when it needs it that's important.<ref>[https://archive.icann.org/en/meetings/dakar2011/bitcache/Transcript_%20Board%20Committee%20Reports-vid=29627&disposition=attachment&op=download.txt ICANN 42 Archive - Transcript: Committee Reports to the Board], October 28, 2011</ref>

+

<blockquote>Part of the discussion coming out of the TLG review and the need for ICANN to get advice has also caused the committee to look at the broader scope of how does ICANN Board get the advice that it needs, not only on technical matters but on a number of other matters. The [[New gTLD program]] is going to cause -- it has caused the board to receive advice and need advice in areas that it hadn't necessarily needed detailed advice before. So we're going to look at the advisory committee structure. And we don't know where that discussion is going to go. But the thing is that it's something that needs to be done. Because in the end it's the ability of the board to get good advice when it needs it that's important.<ref>[https://archive.icann.org/en/meetings/dakar2011/bitcache/Transcript_%20Board%20Committee%20Reports-vid=29627&disposition=attachment&op=download.txt ICANN 42 Archive - Transcript: Committee Reports to the Board], October 28, 2011</ref></blockquote>

At the board meeting later that day, the board passed a resolution directing that the working group's report be posted for public comment.<ref>[https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2011-10-28-en#1.7 Resolution of the Board], October 28, 2011</ref>

JP

Bureaucrats, Check users, lookupuser, Administrators, translator

3,197

edits