- Accountability-Cross-Community

WG: Contribution from the GAC into the CCWG F2F meeting in Istanbul
by Thomas.Schneider＠bakom.admin.ch March 23, 2015

March 23, 2015

Hi to you all i have not seen the document distributed to the CCWG and put up on the CCWG website. Thank you for doing this as soon as possible. Best regards Thomas Von: Schneider Thomas BAKOM Gesendet: Montag, 23. März 2015 07:58 An: rickert(a)anwaelte.de; Mathieu.Weill(a)afnic.fr; leonfelipe(a)sanchez.mx Cc: Adam Peake; Grace Abuhamad; 'Alice Jansen'; gac(a)icann.org Betreff: Contribution from the GAC into the CCWG F2F meeting in Istanbul Dear Co-chairs of the CCWG Attached you find a contribution from the GAC to this week's CCWG-Accountability f2f meeting in Istanbul. Given the short time to work on this since the ICANN Singapore meeting, this is a text to be seen as GAC consensus based on a best effort consultation. Individual GAC members will bring in additional views into the CCWG's work. Best regards Thomas Thomas Schneider Chair ICANN Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC)

2 1

New accountability issue
by Alan Greenberg March 23, 2015

March 23, 2015

This is NOT an issue related to the IANA transition, but in my mind is a serious accountability issue. The issue is not a new one, but has recently been raised again in the context of the GNSO WG on Policy and Implementation. One of the outcomes of that WG (should it be approved) is that ALL issues that impact stakeholders, regardless of when the issue arises in the policy-implementation continuum, must be referred to the GNSO and subject to a MS decision-making process. At the present, some stakeholders believe that some similar decisions have been made unilaterally by staff or the Board. The potential accountability issue is whether the GNSO is capable of addressing issues where the Public Interest may be at odds with the desired of the Contracted Parties, and if not, how do we fix it. The problem is that contracted parties have a very strong vested interest to attempt to ensure outcomes that support their needs and can invest significant resources in ensuring satisfactory outcomes. That is a completely natural position for them to take. Those who are defending the public interest tend to have few such resources. This can impact WG outcomes. Moreover, ultimately, contracted parties, working together, have an effective veto within the GNSO (although clearly not one they would prefer to use). Past situations have resulted in either watered-down results which did not come anywhere near meeting the public interest needs in the view of non-contracted parties, or have resulted in deadlock. Although no one is advocating the Board taking unilateral decisions in such cases, it DOES have the ability to decide that the Public Interest is of paramount import in any specific case. Please note that this is not an accusation against specific contracted parties or their representatives. But it does reflect a scenario that MIGHT arise and where ICANN must be able to take decisions that are in the public interest. This is very closely related to the issue that we are always reminded of - ICANN Directors must look at the Public Interest EVEN IF a decision is counter to the wishes of the AC/SO that appointed them. How do we ensure that the Policy Processes below the Board are as accountable? Alan

3 2

WP2 documents - 23 March
by Alice Jansen March 23, 2015

March 23, 2015

Dear all, Becky's documents can be found on the wiki at:https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/WP+2+Draft+Documents I have also included them in the email attachments. Best Alice

1 0

Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Fwd: [CWG-Stewardship] RySG IANA Statement
by Alan Greenberg March 23, 2015

March 23, 2015

I strongly support the need for a MS component in the CSC. I have routinely said it will not be swamped by such people even if there were no limit to the numbers (which we are not even contemplating) because there will be a moderately heavy workload with no companion mandate from employers. But we need some level of balance. Alan At 22/03/2015 11:25 PM, Greg Shatan wrote: >I recognize that the registries have a unique and significant >interest in the continuing operational excellence of the IANA Functions. > >However, I believe there needs to be a voice and a role for the rest >of the multistakeholder community in the CSC. I don't think this is >what the NTIA was looking for when it sought to "transition key >Internet domain name functions to the global multistakeholder >community." A customer only CSC with no other organized oversight >body sounds like a registries paradise, but not a multistakeholder reality. > >We've been round and round on this before, both in the CWG and in >RFP3. In RFP3, the conclusion was that there should be at least one >representative from the non-registries portion of the >multistakeholder community. This will aid in keeping this an open, >transparent process. > >There is at least one positive aspect of this suggestion -- we don't >have to worry about the possibility of "capture" since it's already captured. > >On other points -- I have been participating (to a more modest >extent) in the CCWG as well as in this group. I think the danger of >forum shopping or inconsistent results is way overstated in this >document. There is a very real interest in coordination in both WGs >and I think the radical step of foregoing all accountability >concerns in this CWG is a radical solution to a very modest issue >(and one that is well in hand). (I would also note that should such >a significant change in the remit of both groups be pursued, it >would require charter amendments for both groups, to be approved by >all of the chartering organizations.) > >I would also reject the suggestion that the MRT is excess baggage >and there is no need for truly multistakeholder oversight. > >We'll need to balance self-interest and public interest if we are to >get to the end of the road. > >Greg Shatan > >. > >On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 12:25 PM, Jordan Carter ><<mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz>jordan(a)internetnz.net.nz> wrote: >hi all, Martin: > >On 22 March 2015 at 18:22, Martin Boyle ><<mailto:Martin.Boyle@nominet.org.uk>Martin.Boyle(a)nominet.org.uk> wrote: >Hi Jordan, >Your comment > > > >In the end, between the CWG and the CCWG, we have to deal with the >post-contract environment, and we have to have a genuinely >multistakeholder solution for the overall oversight of the IANA >functions. I don't think a customer-only CSC achieves that, and nor >does an IAP - but they are parts of the general accountability >puzzle for sure." > >worries me. > >It seems to imply that we need multi-stakeholder at every level. > >I don't think that this is what the NTIA announcement says. Indeed >i'd say Customer in CSC has a specific meaning and the CSC should >work for customers to ensure good service. > > >I am sorry that it came across that way because I completely agree >with you. I specifically do not think the customer committee has to >be the multistakeholder body - my view is that it should be a >customer committee. > >What I meant was that between CCWG and CWG, we also have to >construct the multistakeholder oversight process, that is broader >than the customers. > >HTH > >Jordan > > >Best > >Martin > > >Sent from my iPhone > > > On 22 Mar 2015, at 15:03, Jordan Carter > <<mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz>jordan(a)internetnz.net.nz> wrote: > > > > In the end, between the CWG and the CCWG, we have to deal with > the post-contract environment, and we have to have a genuinely > multistakeholder solution for the overall oversight of the IANA > functions. I don't think a customer-only CSC achieves that, and nor > does an IAP - but they are parts of the general accountability puzzle for sure. > > > > >-- >Jordan Carter > >Chief Executive >InternetNZ > >04 495 2118 (office) | <tel:%2B64%2021%20442%20649>+64 21 442 649 (mob) ><mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz>jordan(a)internetnz.net.nz >Skype: jordancarter > >A better world through a better Internet > > >_______________________________________________ >Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list ><mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org>Accountability-Cross-Community(a)icann.org >https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community > > >_______________________________________________ >Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list >Accountability-Cross-Community(a)icann.org >https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

1 0

Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Fwd: [CWG-Stewardship] RySG IANA Statement
by tijani.benjemaa＠topnet.tn March 23, 2015

March 23, 2015

Greg, I can’t agree more; You are absolutely right. about the CSC. But when you say “We'll need to balance self-interest and public interest” I remind you that it is clearly said in the articles that ICANN should act in the public interest, and not in the interest of any stakeholder. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tijani BEN JEMAA Executive Director Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI) Phone: + 216 41 649 605 Mobile: + 216 98 330 114 Fax: + 216 70 853 376 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Public Comments
by Kavouss Arasteh March 23, 2015

March 23, 2015

Dear All, May somebody kindly mention how many public comments are foreseen and what are the period(s) deadline for comments It is important that atleast two public comments to be foreseen each with atleast 21 days response period KAVOUSS

7 9

Istanbul Mtg - Proposed Agenda
by Alice Jansen March 22, 2015

March 22, 2015

Dear all, In preparation for your meeting on 23-24 March, please find attached the proposed meeting agenda. Thanks, Best regards Alice

1 0

Reminder WP1 gathering 17:30 - Room 19 Level M2
by Jordan Carter March 22, 2015

March 22, 2015

Hi all Our informal WP1 gathering is at 4.30pm local time in Istanbul. It's in the same room as the WP2 meeting - Room 19 on level M2 of the conference centre in the Hilton. See you there if you're coming, Jordan -- Jordan Carter Chief Executive *InternetNZ* 04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649 (mob) jordan(a)internetnz.net.nz Skype: jordancarter *A better world through a better Internet *

2 3

Vol. 2: Update on IANA Stewardship Discussions
by Grace Abuhamad March 22, 2015

March 22, 2015

Vol. 2: Update on IANA Stewardship Discussions https://www.icann.org/news/blog/vol-2-update-on-iana-stewardship-discussions ICANN is compiling bi-weekly updates on the community discussions and progress of theIANA Stewardship Transition and Enhancing ICANN Accountability Processes. This information is positioned to help inform interested stakeholders in the recent developments in the processes, upcoming key dates, latest documents and drafts and a snapshot of any news coverage that occurs over the timeframe.‬‬ In brief * The protocol parameters and numbers proposals submitted to the ICG in January 2015 have moved into Step 2 of the Proposal Assembly and Finalization Process <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/iana-transition-assembly-finali zation-24dec14-en.pdf> [PDF, 92 KB]. * The work in the CWG-Stewardship and CCWG-Accountability have intensified, and both have activated a number of specialized teams focusing on specific issues. * CWG-Stewardship and CCWG-Accountability will hold face-to-face meetings in Istanbul at the end of March. * U.S. Senate Committees have questioned witnesses about the IANA Stewardship Transition and its implications for a variety of domestic and international issues. ICG * The IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) is now using a website independent of ICANN: http://www.ianacg.org <http://www.ianacg.org/> . (Note that ICANN, as convener and facilitator of the IANA Stewardship Transition process, will continue to provide information on the transition, as well as the Enhancing ICANN Accountability process, on its website, https://www.icann.org <https://www.icann.org/> .) * The ICG is planning to hold a face-to-face meeting 18-19 June in Buenos Aires before ICANN 53 <https://buenosaires53.icann.org/> . If necessary, the ICG may also meet on the morning of 20 June. Timeline of work: * Following discussions at ICANN 52 <http://singapore52.icann.org/en/> in Singapore about the possibility of extending the ICG timeline for finalizing the IANA Stewardship Transition proposal, the ICG has decided to proceed as much as possible with the protocol parameters and numbers proposals and revisit the timeline <https://www.dropbox.com/s/y1c1efipctyvchu/TimelineDiscussion-v8.docx?dl=0> in the future once there is clearer information on how much work the names proposal requires of the ICG and the wider community. * With regard to the protocol parameters and numbers proposals, the ICG has moved forward into Step 2 of its Proposal Assembly and Finalization Process <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/iana-transition-assembly-finali zation-24dec14-en.pdf> [PDF, 92 KB]. Step 2 examines the compatibility and interoperability, accountability, and workability of the submitted proposals. Additional output of the ICG: * At its 25 February teleconference <http://www.ianacg.org/coordination-group/icg-archives/> , in addition to the final consolidated proposal to be submitted to the ICANN Board for transmission to the NTIA <http://ntia.doc.gov/> , ICG members decided to also produce a report of the information it collects during its work to ensure the three components of the stewardship proposal – protocol parameters, numbers and names – are not in conflict. CWG-Stewardship * The pace of work in the Cross-Community Working Group to Develop an IANAStewardship Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions (CWG-Stewardship <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/CWG+to+Develop+an+IAN A+Stewardship+Transition+Proposal+on+Naming+Related+Functions> ) is increasing as the CWG-Stewardship enters a new phase of work using "Design Teams." In addition, the CWG-Stewardship will hold a face-to-face meeting in Istanbul <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/In-Person+Attendees> , 26-27 March 2015. As of 9 March, 18 CWG-Stewardship members and 15 participants have confirmed onsite attendance for the meeting. Updated draft proposal: * On 26 February, CWG-Stewardship published version 2 <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/49351404/CWG%20-%20Draft%2 0Transition%20Plan%20V2.0%20updated.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=142536748 6000&api=v2> [PDF, 232 KB] of the draft transition proposal, on which it will base its future updates. In particular, the work of the Design Teams is designed to fill in the remaining gaps in the proposal. The CWG-Stewardship is also working to refine its document, Draft of Principles and Criteria that Should Underpin Decisions on the Transition of NTIA Stewardship <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/49351404/Draft%20of%20Prin ciples_11%20December_clean.docx?version=1&modificationDate=1423050412000&api =v2> . The most recent version, sent to the CWG-Stewardship's mailing list for discussion, is dated 9 March 2015 <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150309/fb787018 /DraftofPrinciples-updated9March-0001.docx> , and is still a work in progress. A new way of working: * CWG-Stewardship has introduced a new way of working on the names proposal: small groups of CWG-Stewardship members are to form "Design Teams" that each work on a very specific issue related to the names proposal. The aim is for each Design Team to deliver the results of its work back to the CWG-Stewardship for its consideration and action within two weeks of the Design Team's creation. Approved Design Teams will maintain publicly archived mailing lists of their communications. As of 5 March, there were 11 proposed Design Teams <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/Design+Teams+List> . Legal counsel: * CWG-Stewardship's "Client Committee" has selected Sidley Austin LLP <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/2015-March/002171.html> as legal counsel to the CWG-Stewardship. Sidley Austin will provide legal advice and consultation to the CWG-Stewardship as they develop their proposal. CCWG-Accountability * The work of the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANNAccountability (CCWG-Accountability) continues to gather speed with the formation of three new Work Parties (see "New Work Parties underway" below). The CCWG-Accountability will meet face-to-face in Istanbul, 23-24 March 2015 <https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/In+Person+Attendees> , just prior to the CWG-Stewardship's face-to-face meeting at the same location. * The expected outcome of the Istanbul meeting is broad consensus on the work stream 1 mechanisms CCWG-Accountability will propose for public comment, launch date of 6 April 2015. New Work Parties underway: * WP1, Community Empowerment <https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/WP1+--+Community+Empowerm ent> , has developed drafts of a number of accountability mechanisms <https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/WP1+Draft+Documents> based on a standardized template. Mechanisms under investigation include how to mitigate against ICANN or NTIA choosing to terminate the Affirmation of Commitments (AoC). The outcome of which would be ICANN no longer being held to its Affirmation Commitments, including the conduct of community reviews and required implementation of review team recommendations. * WP2, Review and Redress <https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/WP2+--+Review+and+Redress > , held its first teleconference on 27 February 2015. It has created four specialized sub teams: Community Compact regarding ICANN Mission <https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/Compact+Mission> ,Office of Ombudsman <https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/Office+of+Ombudsman> , Request for Reconsideration <https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/Request+for+Reconsiderati on> , and Independent Review <https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/Independent+Review> . WP2 plans to have all current drafting work completed by 19 March 2015, in time for the CCWG-Accountability's Istanbul face-to-face meeting. * The Stress Test Work Party (ST-WP) <https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/ST-WP+--+Stress+Tests+Wor k+Party> will hold its first teleconference on 11 March 2015 <https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=52891298> . Its work has led on from one of the four original sub-groups of the CCWG-Accountability, on Identifying Contingencies <https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=51413864> , and is using that original sub-group'smailing list <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-accountability4/> to conduct its work. The latest version of the document that is the focus of ST-WP's activities, Using Stress Tests to evaluate existing & proposed accountability measures (v7) <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-accountability4/attachments/20150307/ec8 f82ea/ApplyingStressTestsDraftv7-0001.docx> , was posted to the mailing list on 7 March 2015. Legal counsel: * The CCWG-Accountability's Legal Sub Team has been working on a draft document <https://docs.google.com/document/d/132V7P8nmyalhoso7zcevjW3_ox1laXn5JIEH3dD AF3A/edit?usp=sharing> outlining the issues it wishes to ask of legal counsel (see also "Legal counsel" in the CWG-Stewardship section above). The CCWG-Accountability hopes to use the same firm as chosen by CWG-Stewardship, but remains open to the possibility of choosing a different legal counsel if the CWG-Stewardship's choice proves not to be the most appropriate one for CCWG-Accountability. Updates on other transition-related activities US Senate hearings: * Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, & Transportation * On 25 February, a U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, & Transportation hearing, Preserving the Multistakeholder Model of Internet Governance <http://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Hearings&ContentRecord_id =683924ae-83d7-4bf4-922a-cdecb9556ba9&ContentType_id=14f995b9-dfa5-407a-9d35 -56cc7152a7ed&Group_id=b06c39af-e033-4cba-9221-de668ca1978a&MonthDisplay=2&Y earDisplay=2015> , focused on the IANA Stewardship Transition and the changes to ICANN's accountability needed to facilitate that transition. There were three witnesses before the hearing: Lawrence Strickling, NTIA <http://ntia.doc.gov/> Administrator, ICANN President and CEO Fadi Chehadé and U.S. Ambassador David Gross on behalf of the Internet Governance Coalition. The witnesses were asked about the relationship of the IANA stewardship transition to a variety of issues, including intellectual property rights, net neutrality, human rights online, openness and innovation, international diplomacy and U.S. security. * * Senate Committee On Appropriations, Subcommittee On Commerce, Justice, Science, And Related Agencies * On 27 February, during the Subcommittee's hearing, Financial Year 2016 Department of Commerce Budget <http://www.appropriations.senate.gov/hearings-and-testimony/cjs-subcommitte e-hearing-fy16-department-commerce-budget> , U.S. Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker was asked why there was a need to remove the U.S. Government from the IANAstewardship role. The webcast can be viewed here <http://www.appropriations.senate.gov/webcast/cjs-subcommittee-hearing-fy16- department-commerce-budget> . Upcoming key dates 19 Mar 2015CWG-Stewardship Meeting #30 <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/Meetings> , 11:00-13:00 UTC 23-24 Mar 2015CCWG-Accountability Face-to-Face Meeting <https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/In+Person+Attendees> , Istanbul 25 Mar 2015ICG Call #14 <https://www.ianacg.org/upcoming-icg-calls-13th-14th/> , 20:00-21:00 UTC 26-27 Mar 2015CWG-Stewardship Face-to-Face Meeting <https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=52890325> (Meetings #31 & #32), Istanbul 18-19 Jun 2015ICG Face-to-Face Meeting, ICANN 53 <https://buenosaires53.icann.org/> , Buenos Aires Latest documents and drafts 10 Mar 2015CCWG Accountability - Draft Legal Scoping Document <https://docs.google.com/document/d/132V7P8nmyalhoso7zcevjW3_ox1laXn5JIEH3dD AF3A/edit?usp=sharing> 7 Mar 2015CCWG Accountability Stress Test Work Party - Draft 7: Using Stress Tests to evaluate existing & proposed accountability measures <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-accountability4/attachments/20150307/ec8 f82ea/ApplyingStressTestsDraftv7-0001.docx> 9 Mar 2015CWG Stewardship - Draft of Principles and Criteria that Should Underpin Decisions on the Transition of NTIA Stewardship <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150309/fb787018 /DraftofPrinciples-updated9March-0001.docx> 26 Feb 2015CWG Stewardship - Draft Transition Plan version 2 <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/49351404/CWG%20-%20Draft%2 0Transition%20Plan%20V2.0%20updated.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=142536748 6000&api=v2> [PDF, 232 KB] ICG - Process Timeline version 8 <https://www.dropbox.com/s/5w9jg2bfv6gr7xm/TimelineDiscussion-v8.docx?dl=0> IANA Stewardship Transition in the news 27 Feb 2015Internet, Stati Uniti a marcia indietro: in pericolo la nuova governance <http://www.corrierecomunicazioni.it/tlc/32874_internet-stati-uniti-a-marcia -indietro-in-pericolo-la-nuova-governance.htm> , corrierecomunicazioni.it, [IT] 26 Feb 2015奥巴马不会把互联网控制权交给中国 <http://www.qstheory.cn/politics/2015-02/26/c_1114438882.htm> , Qiushi [CN] Internet-Verwaltung: Schlagabtausch im US-Senat zur IANA-Reform <http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Internet-Verwaltung-Schlagabtausch-i m-US-Senat-zur-IANA-Reform-2559818.html> , Heise Online [DE] You can play a role … Anyone can participate in discussions about the future of IANA's stewardship and ICANNaccountability.For information on joining CWG-Stewardship, contactgrace.abuhamad(a)icann.org. For information on joining CCWG-Accountability, contactaccountability-staff(a)icann.org. Compiled on behalf of ICANN by Samantha Dickinson | 17 March 2015

4 3

CCWG chairs/advisors 5:30 Room 20
by Adam Peake March 22, 2015

March 22, 2015

Hi everyone, CCWG co-chairs and advisors will meet at 5:30 this afternoon in room 20, M2. Informal meeting, all welcome to observe. Best, Adam

2 1