Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for the CCWG ACCT Meeting #40 - 14 July will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/G6g0Aw A copy of the notes and action items may be found below. Thank you. Best regards, Kim Notes Welcome to call number 40. Rollcall - anyone only on the conference bridge? (Cheryl will join the AC room) Updated SOI's (none) * Progress updates Leon WP3: 3 sub-groups formed SO/accountability Staff accountability Diversity 4 calls held, with a final call later today. Will prepare documents for Paris. Cheryl, Stress test WP Final document has been distributed We have added new tests based on public comment and discussions in Buenos Aires, on Larry Strickling's document, and the Board's impact assessment document. There are place holders for some issues. Work will continue after Paris, and the model and mechanism chosen will influence the tests and what we have to say. The next stress test call will be at 11:00 UTC July 15. Jordan WP1: Focus on the public comment and Buenos Aires comment, and reviewing that content. For the freeze collection we will have documents on the community powers, the AoC incorporation into the bylaws, on the community mechanisms and weights. We will focus on replies to public comment after Paris. Hopeful this will be done in time for the freeze. Becky WP2: Focus on revising the mission statement and core values. Content on this area in the public comment tool, which will be complete by the freeze. Content in the reconsideration section, and hope to be complete on the other sections by the freeze, should be close to complete by the freeze. Holly: The 2 firms have been working to revise the powerpoint of July 7 to address the additional issues asked to take on. And will be ready before the doc freeze. Added details of how to consider the community mechanism as the sole model. Will provide a cross model analysis. And Malcolm Hutty's questions about sections 3 and 4 of the initial proposal to see if any of the models under consideration interact with those issues in a way that needs to be addressed. Nothing from those issues needs to be addressed. Not for the freeze, but a new powerpoint for Paris, describing how a caretaker or interim board might function. This in response held with the chairs and some rapporteurs last week. Any concerns? Holly: Seen some emails about the caretaker board. Concern that some of the solutions suggested are very complex, but will try to address these issues. * Draft agenda for Paris. MW: The agenda is subject to change. We wish to capture the group's expectations Outcome: clarify direction on all key topics before finalize public comment 2 report. Important to remember we are already on course in a process, a lot of work has been done by the WP, very effective. Keep in mind, we are in a process of refinement, avoid the temptation to reinvent, we don't have time. And we must keep focused, and we have preparations for the 2 minutes timer clock for all. We have a broad range and number of topics to reach agreement on. Tijani: refinement phase, suggests no new idea, but that cannot be absolute. But we should listen to old and new ideas. MW: Not that everything is decided, but difficult to accept new ideas that have not been documented before the meeting. And aware that we have to check for unexpected consequences. Avri: In some discussion in some WP, every once in a while we get to a point to the point where someone says "lets put a question out in the second public comment", rather than seeking consensus among ourselves. And too many questions risk opening a 3rd comment process. Alan: Agree with Avri, but we we can ask questions if they are only answering A/B, clear answers. Eberhard: rather than tine constraints, one intervention/topic. Keith: ICANN has a history of 2 minutes clocks. MW: use the 2 minute clock if needed with a best practice of one intervention per topic. MW: agree with Avri on limiting the number of open questions, but we also have the WS1 and WS2 definition to utilise. Also need to be clear on the CWG requirements. The need to achieved consensus, among members and then the chartering organisations. These can be our tools for managing the meeting. See from the agenda, it is very full. CWG requirements, Lise Fuhr. Long Q&A with legal counsel on their presentation. WP3 review. Stress test discussion. AoC review incorporation has some issues to be decided on, and the community mechanisms which will be the core of our work. Review of government input, which is the next agenda item. Alan: WP1 - many parts depend on which organizational model we pick. And closure on many items will depend on the community mechanism. Thomas Schneider: govt input and the agenda and intent of the meeting. Governments have to consult with our stockholders. Very difficult to share these constantly chinned documents. Note this is not a GAC consensus, but a collection of national positions. These comment are based on the public comment documents and this to and including Buenos Aires meeting. This is the state of the discussion in the GAC, and there is not yet consensus on many issues, or the role of governments in the IG ecosystem. And the WSIS+10 will also deal with these issues. A reminder. Perhaps a step back. What are we to do: give the necessary elements to allow the transition to take place in WS1 and then a broad review of ICANN's accountability mechanisms as WS2. We need output that allows the CWG and ICG proposals to go ahead. And we have to endorse this is Dublin. We should have a clear direction when we leave Paris. Care not to overload the boat, and look closely at the CWG proposal and the NTIA requirements, and what accountability mechanisms are necessary for the transition to take place. And everything not necessary for this transition, can move. The boar overloaded. And move the unnecessary to WS2. What is the key expectation of the IANA transition, it seems to be predictability and stability. The community empowerment measures, are exciting, but is the IANA function transition the time for the possibly risky change. What is needed and defer the rest. MW: what would people be willing to move to WS2. But we must start with the CWG agenda. Encourage everyone to think about what issues they really care about and be willing to push to WS2. This will be core on any topics. Becky: Very helpful GAC document, gave a sense of the conversation of the moment. The goal has always been to do in WS1 to make sure that WS2 can also be accomplished. We will hear more calls to de-couple accountability and the IANA transition, but that was not our charge from the community. Thomas Rickert. Thomas, comments much inline with Mathieu's comments earlier. Risk that if we strip-down too many things we risk loosing acceptance and satisfying CWG and NTIA requirements. However, moving to WS2 does not mean the issue is gone, it will just be addressed later. We need concrete proposals for moving items to WS2. MW: Care about shifting options when they have not been aired in the first report, would risk push-back on such changes. Documents to be frozen at 23:59 July 14 (tonight). Staff will compile the package of documents for download. * GAC input - government member compilation. Issues discussed by govt up to BA meeting Staff will provide a summary, it will be ready in the frozen package AoB * Leon: coordination call between the ICG,CWG and AO/AC and Fadi and Board members, Larry Strickling. Monthly coordination call. A time line showing the three phases, to keep the 3 actors up to date on progress. The calls will be transcribed and recorded. As far as aware, these calls are not open. Topics: timeline. Everyone looking to the Paris meeting and our outcomes. Depending on us. Eberhard: F2F in or before Dublin? MW: yes, we are discussing. Considering a meeting before ICANN Dublin starts on Friday, as well as one on the Thursday (of the meeting) to celebrate acceptance, or commiserate. Staff will circulate a note about Dublin plans shortly. Thank you -- look forward to seeing many of you in Paris on Thursday or Friday morning. END