Thank you for your note, Carlton. It it helps at all, in the GNSO Liaison Report Workspace, I have also tried to curate developments by key topics with less details but with relevant links.

Kind regards,
Justine



On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 at 23:39, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> wrote:
Thank you for making this drudge so much more bearable with this report Justine.

Usually I go to the GNSO meeting notes for a matter I have an interest in seeing how it goes in Council. I have all of 3 that are of interest to me in current discussions.

This report truly helps me move it along.

Best,
Carlton

==============================
Carlton A Samuels
Mobile: 876-818-1799
Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround
=============================


On Sun, 27 Aug 2023 at 22:34, Justine Chew via ALAC <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> wrote:
Dear all,

Here is my summary report of the GNSO Council's 24 Aug 2023 meeting, albeit a pretty long summary. You can also read this report posted at the ALAC Liaison to the GNSO workspace, or using the links included below.

Special Summary Report of 24 Aug 2023 Meeting to ALAC

For brevity, I will just highlight a few things here. For some of the issues, you can glean a wider perspective from GNSO Council Aug 2023 Matters of Interest and/or from GNSO Council Aug 2023 Meeting Records.

1. Consent Agenda Item - 2023 Customer Standing Committee (CSC)

  • Council approved the slate of 2023 CSC Members and Liaison, which include the liaison and alternate appointed by ALAC, Holly Raiche and Ejikeme Egbuogu, respectively, for the 2023 - 2025 term.

2. Next Round of New gTLDs / Subsequent Procedures 38 Pending Recommendations & "Other Dependencies"


       a. The 38 Pending Recommendations 
  • Since after ICANN77, the GNSO Council Small Team on SubPro has continued to work with the Board SubPro Caucus co-leads, Avri Doria and Becky Burr, in developing the Council's 2 next sub-deliverables in respect of the 38 Pending Recommendations. This involves bifurcating the 38 recommendations into 2 broad groups: 
    • Group (1) covers Recommendations on the following SubPro Topics which were assessed and are understood to merely require clarifying statements by Council for the Board's consideration in context of the Board's concerns, in order to facilitate adoption by the Board.  
    • Due to a late request by the ICANN Board for more time as "[t]he Board would like to propose a small tweak to the language [in the clarifying statements for Recommendations 9.1, 9.4, 9.8, 9.9, 9.10, 9.12, 9.13, 30.1, 31.16 and 31.17 (all regarding the enforceability of PICs and RVCs) to ensure that it is crystal clear", the recommendations where there is an expectation that the GNSO Council can resolve the ICANN Board concerns via a Clarifying Statement was amended to cover:
      • Topic 3: Applications Assessed in Rounds - Recommendations 3.1,3.2, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7
      • Topic 6: Registry Service Provider Pre-Evaluation - Recommendation 6.8
      • Topic 9: Registry Voluntary Commitments / Public Interest Commitments - Recommendations 9.1, 9.4, 9.8, 9.9, 9.10, 9.12, 9.13, 9.15
      • Topic 26: Security and Stability - Recommendation 26.9
      • Topic 29: Name Collision - Recommendation 29.1
      • Topic 30: GAC Consensus Advice and GAC Early Warning - Recommendation 30.7
      • Topic 31: Objections - Recommendations 31.16, 31.17
      • Topic 34: Community Applications - Recommendation 34.12
      • Topic 35: Auctions - Recommendations 35.3, 35.5
    • The resulting Clarifying Statement as at 23 Aug which was adopted by Council  for Group (1) recommendations is found at this link.

Action by ALAC Liaison

      • To continue participating in Small Team to ensure clarifying statement captures existing ALAC positions, as relevant/needed.
    • Group (2) covers the remaining pending recommendations for which the Council Small Team will continue to work on in light of the clear signal by the Board SubPro Caucus co-leads that the Board will very likely decline to adopt as they currently read. The Small Team's scope of work here includes considering whether such recommendations should be revised, and if so, how - either through the 'GNSO Operating Procedures section 16' path (which would involve reconvening the SubPro PDP WG), or through a 'Supplemental Recommendation' path for which Council will need to determine the mechanism to produce such supplemental recommendation.

Action by ALAC Liaison
To continue participating in Small Team to ensure clarifying statement captures existing ALAC positions, as relevant/needed, or to advocate for the inclusion of input outside of GNSO where Council opts for the 'Supplemental Recommendation' path.

c. Closed Generics Framework

    • Council received a substantive update on the status of the Closed Generics Framework produced by the GAC-GNSO-ALAC Dialogue small team, post a review of community comments received in response to the request for comments on the Draft Closed Generics Framework which closed on 15 Jul 2023. 
    • The Chairs of the GAC, GNSO and ALAC convened to discuss what should happen with this Closed Generics Framework, namely whether there was sufficient community consensus for it to move to a GNSO policy development process. They concluded there was not and that there was not sufficient demand to take it further through a policy process. As a result, the GNSO Chair, GAC Chair, and ALAC Chair plan to send a separate communication to the ICANN Board that reflects the decision they took and, as stated in the letter, expressing the collective view that:

      • (1) closed generic gTLDs should not be viewed as a dependency for the next round; 

      • (2) until there is community-developed policy, the Board should maintain the position from the 2012 round (i.e., any applications seeking to impose exclusive registry access for "generic strings" to a single person or entity and/or that person's or entity's Affiliates (as defined in Section 2.9(c) of the Registry Agreement) should not proceed; and

      • (3) should the community decide in the future to resume the policy discussions, this should be based on the good work that has been done to date in the facilitated dialogue. 

    • This outcome was pre-empted by ALAC Chair Jonathan Zuck at the CPWG call on 9 August.

3. Next Round of New gTLDs - Standing Predictability Implementation Review Team (SPIRT) 

  • In its Final Report, the Subsequent Procedures Working Group recommended “the formation of a Standing Predictability Implementation Review Team (‘SPIRT’) (Pronounced ‘spirit’) to serve as the body responsible for reviewing potential issues related to the Program, to conduct analysis utilizing the framework, and to recommend the process/mechanism that should be followed to address the issue (i.e., utilize the Predictability Framework). The GNSO Council shall be responsible for oversight of the SPIRT and may review all recommendations of the SPIRT in accordance with the procedures outlined in the GNSO Operating Procedures and Annexes thereto.”
  • Council discussed the task of chartering (not constituting) the SPIRT and concluded that it would be useful to set up a chartering team to include participation from the At-Large/ALAC, GAC and other parts of the community.

Action by ALAC Liaison
To alert the ALAC on timing of the call to form the SPIRT chartering team, in due course.

4. Discussion Paper on .Quebec 

  • The GNSO Chair led the commentary on this issue which essentially concluded that the issue of .quebec (TLD) not being a variant of “.québec” did not require an immediate resolution and one that did not squarely sit in the remit of the Expedited Policy Development Process on Internationalized Domain Names (EPDP on IDNs).

5. GNSO Council Committee for Overseeing and Implementing Continuous Improvement (CCOICI) Recommendations Report on Review of the Statement of Interest (SOI) Requirements 

  • Council received an overview of the CCOICI Recommendations Report on the SOI Requirements which concluded that no consensus was reached on the ability to exempt participants from declaring in their GNSO SOI who they represented whenever they participated in a PDP in case of professional ethical obligations preventing complications
  • Although it was recommended that the GNSO SOI format be updated to form two parts (see below), the existing SOI language in relation to exemption is to remain as is.
    • a) General Statement of Interest which contains general information about a participant (parent).
    • b) Activity Specific Statement of Interest which contains information that is provided specific to the activity, for example, motivation for participation (child)

Thanks for reading / considering.

Justine Chew
ALAC Liaison to the GNSO 


On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 at 20:00, Justine Chew <justine.chew.icann@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear all,

I have just been informed that with regards to the agenda item 4 for the GNSO Council Meeting which will take place in just over an hour today that the Board has requested more time because "[t]he Board would like to propose a small tweak to the language [to the clarifying statements for Recommendations 9.1, 9.4, 9.8, 9.9, 9.10, 9.12, 9.13, 30.1, 30.16 and 31.17 (all regarding the enforceability of PICs and RVCs) to ensure that it is crystal clear". Therefore the update to that agenda item is as follows:

Item 4: COUNCIL VOTE - SubPro Small Team Clarifying Statement  
  • Hence the recommendations where there is an expectation that the GNSO Council can resolve ICANN Board concerns via a Clarifying Statement are now
  • Topic 3: Applications Assessed in Rounds - Recommendations 3.1, 3.2, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7
    • The SubPro Final Report recommendation envisions that “the next application procedure should be processed in the form of a round” and “Application procedures must take place at predictable, regularly occurring intervals without indeterminable periods of review”. However, the GNSO Council confirms its willingness to engage with the ICANN Board to explore a shared vision for the long-term evolution of the program, which could be materially different than what is envisioned for the next round of the New gTLD Program in the Topic 3 recommendations.
  • Topic 6: Registry Service Provider Pre-Evaluation - Recommendation 6.8
    • The GNSO Council confirms its understanding of the Implementation Review Team (IRT) Principles & Guidelines that state that, “the IRT is convened to assist staff in developing the implementation details for the policy to ensure that the implementation conforms to the intent of the policy recommendations.” The Council therefore recognizes that ICANN org will be responsible for establishing the fees charged for the RSP pre-evaluation program, in consultation with the IRT, as is consistent with the roles and responsibilities captured in the IRT Principles & Guidelines. The language used in Recommendation 6.8 is not intended to alter the respective roles and responsibilities of staff and the IRT.
  • Topic 9: Registry Voluntary Commitments / Public Interest Commitments - Recommendations 9.1, 9.4, 9.8, 9.9, 9.10, 9.12, 9.13, 9.15
    • Recommendations 9.1, 9.4, 9.8, 9.9, 9.10, 9.12, 9.13 - The GNSO Council confirms that in respect to any new Public Interest Commitments (PICs) and Registry Voluntary Commitments (RVCs), PICs/RVCs entered into must be contractually enforceable, and in respect of RVCs, enforceability is determined by both ICANN org and the applicant. And further, the Council observes that among the purposes of PICs / RVCs is to address public comments, in addressing strings deemed highly sensitive or related to regulated industries, objections, whether formal or informal, GAC Early Warnings, GAC Consensus Advice, and/or other comments from the GAC.
    • Recommendation 9.15: The GNSO Council confirms that this recommendation does not require any implementation nor creates any dependencies for the Next Round of the New gTLD Program.
  • Topic 26: Security and Stability - Recommendation 26.9
    • The GNSO Council confirms that the “any level” language referenced in the recommendation should be interpreted to only be in respect of domain names that are allocated by the registry operator.
  • Topic 29: Name Collision - Recommendation 29.1
    • The GNSO Council believes that Recommendation 29.1 can be adopted by the Board on the understanding that it does not need to be acted on until such time any next steps for mitigating name collision risks are better understood out of the Name Collision Analysis Project (NCAP) Study 2.
  • Topic 30: GAC Consensus Advice and GAC Early Warning - Recommendation 30.7
    • Please see the Council’s clarifying statement for Recommendations 9.1, 9.4, 9.8, 9.9, 9.10, 9.12, 9.13.
  • Topic 31: Objections - Recommendations 31.16, 31.17
    • Please see the Council’s clarifying statement for Recommendations 9.1, 9.4, 9.8, 9.9, 9.10, 9.12, 9.13.
  • Topic 34: Community Applications - Recommendation 34.12
    • The GNSO Council confirms its recommendation that terms included in the contract between ICANN org and the CPE Provider regarding the CPE process must be subject to public comment. This recommendation however is not intended to require ICANN org to disclose any confidential terms of the agreement between ICANN org and the CPE Provider.
  • Topic 35: Auctions - Recommendations 35.3, 35.5
    • The GNSO Council confirms that the references to private auctions in Recommendations 35.3 and 35.5 merely acknowledge the existence of private auctions in 2012 and should NOT be seen as an endorsement or prohibition of their continued practice in future rounds of the New gTLD Program. The Council notes that there were extensive discussions on the use of private auctions in the SubPro working group. To the extent that draft recommendations were developed as to private auctions, these did not receive consensus support in the working group but did receive strong support with significant opposition.
  • Council will vote on the clarifying statement to be submitted to the ICANN Board.


Justine Chew
ALAC Liaison to the GNSO 


On Tue, 15 Aug 2023 at 17:47, Justine Chew <justine.chew.icann@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear all,

Just a note to inform you that the agenda for the GNSO Council meeting of 24 Aug 2023 at 13:00 UTC is out as follows: 

It's another packed agenda; for a curated version of the highlighted agenda items (especially item 4), please visit this link.

GNSO Council Meeting #8 of 2023 held on 24 Aug 2023

Full Agenda | Documents | Motions

  • Item 1: Administrative Matters
  • Item 2: Opening Remarks / Review of Projects List and Action Item List. 
  • Item 3: Consent Agenda
    • Approval of the 2023 Customer Standing Committee (CSC) Slate
  • Item 4: COUNCIL VOTE - SubPro Small Team Clarifying Statement
  • Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - GNSO Council Committee for Overseeing and Implementing Continuous Improvement (CCOICI) Recommendations Report on Review of the Statement of Interest (SOI) Requirements 
  • Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Chartering the Standing Predictability Implementation Review Team (“SPIRT”)
  • Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - SubPro Pending Recommendations - Expected Non-Adoption 
  • Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Closed Generics
  • Item 9: AOB
    • 9.1 Update from NIS2 Outreach Team 
    • 9.2 ICANN78 Planning
    • 9.3 Discussion Paper on .Quebec
    • 9.4 Grant Program Implementation update to Chartering Organizations

As usual, Council meetings are open to observers in listen-only mode. If you would like to observe the meeting, please check this link for details. 

Thanks for reading / considering.

Justine Chew
ALAC Liaison to the GNSO 

_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac

At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.