Logo

Terri Agnew's Personal Meeting Room - Shared screen with speaker view
Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry)
36:23
Hi. I'm the 7034071354 dial in.
julie.hedlund
37:27
@Kirstina — noted!
Michelle DeSmyter
38:04
Thank you Kristina - this is noted
Steve Chan
40:14
The link to the document being shared is available here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/12_x8zYR9r6zXqfA7dmoosSPH12NmcyJ-2FEjecGrBh4/edit?usp=sharing
Kathy Kleiman
40:37
hand up
Steve Chan
40:41
Yes
Steve Chan
44:03
Jeff, correct
Kathy Kleiman
45:55
Tx!
Kathy Kleiman
46:10
fine
Kathy Kleiman
46:17
sure
Martin Sutton
47:41
happy with Kristina’s text
Kathy Kleiman
49:37
Steve, are you editing in real time?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
51:53
He is tying to @Kathy
Kathy Kleiman
53:56
Have I been muted externally?
Jeff Neuman
54:15
Dont think so, but I thought your hand went down
Jeff Neuman
54:18
is it up?
Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC)
55:02
Hi all - my airport internet connection keeps cutting out and staff has muted my phone so participation is difficult. If I can please get the directions to mute and unmute my own phone, I may be able to participate. Unfortunately, the mute buton on the phone itself doesn't work as it does in Adobe Connect. Is it a #6 or a *6? (I was told two different things in the last call.) Thanks, Anne
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
56:21
Anne the phone app may have a setting that overides your usual setting, such as Mic on at start of call or mic/video off....
Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry)
56:46
What would "anything visible" encompass?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
58:20
My Android phone app might be different to your phone OS but in my one the mute/unmute is done in the çall setting 'selection of the ongoing call by icon when in an zoom oudio bridge... hopefully that is some help ...
Kathy Kleiman
58:22
Anne, you have no microphone visible
Kathy Kleiman
58:50
I don't think you have the ability to participate by audio in Zoom right now.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
59:33
if she connects via her device zoom
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:00:14
we see an icon if she gets audio via the ausio bridge we would see no mic ( I think)
Kathy Kleiman
01:00:24
can you give some examples Jeff
Jamie Baxter | dotgay
01:04:14
would a non-minor change involve the cost or length of an evaluation?
Kathy Kleiman
01:04:34
they could have an effect on the community too :-)
Kathy Kleiman
01:09:47
We need the gateway group here.
Kathy Kleiman
01:10:01
good questions
Kathy Kleiman
01:10:41
it's hard to know ahead of time...
Julie Bisland
01:11:07
@all: who dialed in from phone number ending in -6882?
Kathy Kleiman
01:11:37
I'm not sure adverse works -- what's adverse to one party may be a benefit to another
Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry)
01:13:03
True, Kathy. But adverse to any would be sufficient. My initial thought was to avoid triggering some further action where there was agreement that a material impact existed, but was a positive one.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:13:36
@Kristina if memory srves the flow we imagined for when a loop back to wider community discusion over an Implementation Review Team "jut managing it" was for material effects not just adverse effects but your pin in it should allow us to get back to that later....
Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry)
01:13:59
got it. Thanks, @Cheryl.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:14:06
should read "Just managing it
Jamie Baxter | dotgay
01:17:26
and given Martin’s explanation, I would assert that any timeline or cost that gets expanded two-fold or more should not be an exception.
Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry)
01:17:47
oops. sorry. note that my "solution to what" question remains.
Kathy Kleiman
01:20:03
Objections go through 3rd parties
Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry)
01:20:17
seems to me that we're having definitional issues w/r/t "procedure" and "process". if that's the case, perhaps a quick footnote example would be helpful (and it sounds like that's the direction Jeff is going).
Kathy Kleiman
01:20:27
How can we narrow the 2nd bullet?
Kathy Kleiman
01:21:00
changes don't make sense yet
Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry)
01:21:25
mechanisms with non-substantive impact?
Kathy Kleiman
01:21:45
can we capture that as a clarifying line?
Kathy Kleiman
01:21:47
additional line?
Kathy Kleiman
01:22:31
yes! If we can include Kristina's line as an additio nal one
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:23:37
Good audio now CW
Jamie Baxter | dotgay
01:24:02
are timelines on filing objections seen as a different type of timeline as a third party evaluation timeline?
Jamie Baxter | dotgay
01:24:44
to me they have equal levels of predictability impact
Kathy Kleiman
01:25:20
@Steve- additional line: These proposed changes are intended to be only those that involve mechanisms with no substantive impact. [Pending consideration of Chris' concerns]
Kathy Kleiman
01:25:52
Adverse to whom? Material to whome? Should this pass through a policy gateway first?
Steve Chan
01:28:24
Jeff, hand up about Kathy/Kristina’s suggestion
Jamie Baxter | dotgay
01:30:13
for things that are unforeseen are different however from things that were poorly scoped, researched, or commissioned on ICANN’s behalf before making AGB commitments
Kathy Kleiman
01:30:30
From Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry) to Everyone: 11:47 AMmechanisms with non-substantive impact?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:31:11
Exactly @Steve
Justine Chew
01:31:24
+1 Jeff and Steve
Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry)
01:33:42
Responding to Steve's Comment: IMO, an example of a change that woulnd't be substantive but could have a material adverse impact would be requiring that Legal Rights Objections be filed through a proprietary platform instead of email. Wouldn't affect the substantive LRO (elements, standing, etc), but there may be some potential objectors that, for one reason or another, can't use that platform.
Steve Chan
01:34:31
Ahhh, thank you Kristina.
Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry)
01:34:54
To be clear, I'm most interested in making sure that the proposed text is unambiguous, clear, and capable of only 1 interpretation.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:35:25
That sounds liek a laudable plan to me @Kristina
Justine Chew
01:36:23
+1 Jaime
Kathy Kleiman
01:36:31
It might be a good idea to capture Kristina's idea as a comment to this text...
Vanda Scartezini
01:37:16
sorry to be late was driving…
Vanda Scartezini
01:37:23
too much traffic..
Vanda Scartezini
01:37:45
will leave and return since there is a problem with my audio
julie.hedlund
01:38:11
@Kristina: Your text and examples are captured as the chat room is captured, as well as in the recording and the transcript.
Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry)
01:38:35
Thanks, @Julie and @Steve!
PMcGrady
01:39:11
I think we can do better than SNAG.
Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry)
01:39:37
Agreed, @Paul.
Justine Chew
01:40:01
and PAAT @Paul
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:41:37
Perfectly Anne
Kathy Kleiman
01:43:47
How do we build all of that into this point???
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:44:56
ensure that this documentation is crossed refeenced with the 0new_ current policies and processes re IRT's that we worked on since the last rpunds implementation seems a start @Kathy
Kathy Kleiman
01:45:57
hand up
christopher wilkinson
01:46:10
@better than SNAG - :-))
Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry)
01:51:16
Once we're set on the concepts, I think a workflow/participants diagram could be super helpful for the entire Predictability Framework.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:51:18
Highlighted and commens refelect that Kathy
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:52:26
and those WF Diags need to be reconciled with the existing ones out of the relativly recent IRT Guideline flow charst on this are as well @Kristina
Kathy Kleiman
01:53:03
Tx CLO, this remains an area of great concern to (and comments by) the NCSG and Public Interest Communities. Looking forward to circling back!
Kathy Kleiman
01:57:43
the council never hears about it unless the SNAP wants them too...
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:58:28
Yes the Standing advisoty entity should not be to confused with IRT's as we have seen used or proposed in the past but IMO very much the useful gateway entity I hear people and in this call specifically what Kathy is raisin) in our discussions here
Justine Chew
01:59:24
@Kathy, make sure we have a GNSO council liaison on [SNAG] -- won't this help?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:59:37
it Yes Martin nees to be a useful adjunct to 'traditional' IRT activities (as they are defined in recent GNSO guidelines
Kathy Kleiman
01:59:40
@CLO - tx, and how can we continue this discussion?
Kathy Kleiman
01:59:53
How do we flesh this out? Who runs the funnel?
Jeff Neuman
02:00:02
@KATHY - just coming to that last question
Vanda Scartezini
02:00:24
+ 1 martin
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
02:00:29
yep @Jeff... kinda getting to that (we hope) @Kathy
Kathy Kleiman
02:01:29
Let's think about a small, narrowly tailored group at the very top of the funnel.
Kathy Kleiman
02:01:46
It woudl be lighter weight, easier to participate in, and able to render fast decisions.
Kathy Kleiman
02:01:52
We have to work with existing IRT precedent.
Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry)
02:02:16
I would like to participate, but I have this EPDP thing that takes up some time. Please add me to the list and I'll do the best I can.
Kathy Kleiman
02:02:25
sign me up!
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
02:02:35
Yes people good progress today Thanks for todays discussions
Kathy Kleiman
02:02:44
:-)
Martin Sutton
02:02:48
EPDP not finished? 😀
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
02:02:57
LOL @Martin
Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry)
02:03:04
Haha @martin
christopher wilkinson
02:03:16
Will join. Small group. CW.
Martin Sutton
02:04:09
Add me in, thx
Michelle DeSmyter
02:04:18
Next meeting: Monday, 13 May 2019 at 20:00 UTC
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
02:04:19
Thanks everyone Bye for now
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
02:04:25
all OK
Steve Chan
02:04:28
Nope
Martin Sutton
02:04:35
bye all
Kathy Kleiman
02:04:36
Tx Jeff!
PMcGrady
02:04:37
Thanks All!
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
02:04:38
Bye
Vanda Scartezini
02:04:38
thanks quite interesting points on IOt. kisses to all