From: Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info> To: <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] ICANN Board meeting with the GNSO Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 17:56:37 +0100

From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: 21 June 2014 17:55 To: Steve Crocker (steve@shinkuro.com); diane.schroeder@icann.org; Bruce Tonkin (Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au); Bill Graham (bill.graham@icann.org) Cc: Cassia Oliveira (cassia.oliveira@icann.org); Theresa Swinehart (theresa.swinehart@icann.org); fadi.chehade@icann.org; Diana Middleton (diana.middleton@icann.org) Subject: ICANN Board meeting with the GNSO Importance: High

Hello Steve,

Facilitated by the Council, the GNSO has today discussed our planned meetings with Theresa Swineheart, Fadi Chehade, the ICANN GDD and the ICANN Board tomorrow. We will be meeting with the board for 90 minutes after our meeting with Theresa, Fadi and the GDD.

The following topics include those which you and I touched on previously and are updated based on what the GNSO has discussed today.

1. Recent Developments (Guide - 5 mins) a. A brief update to highlight any key recent developments in the work of the Council 2. Board Engagement & Involvement (with the community) / GNSO Board Seats (Guide - 25 mins) Possible questions and discussion points: a. A common understanding of the role of a director / directors responsibilities b. Potential for conflict between duty as a director and representing the GNSO (CPH or NCPH) c. How does the above square with responsibilities to the broader ICANN the community d. Understanding above relationships with conflict of interest provisions e. GNSO appointed board members in a communication & liaison role

i. Is a more effective capability possible and/or do we need a GNSO liaison to the board?

ii. In contrast with the past, the board seems to spend much more time with “itself” than with / within the community What are the ways in which the board can be / be seen to be observing, engaging with and immersed within the community? f. Any potential short vs long term changes?

i. Short => no bylaw change

ii. Long => bylaw change g. Does this topic may touch on ICANN Accountability issues? 3. The (output of) Expert Working Group on WHOIS (Guide - 25 mins) Possible questions and discussion points: a. Thoughts / discussion on where does this go next? b. What more, if anything, is required before the GNSO can work with the output? c. Careful consideration and thought as well as an indication of timing is required? 4. Issues (and recent improvements where relevant) with the "ICANN Model” (Guide - 25 mins) Possible questions and discussion points: a. Volume of work and demand on the volunteer structure – the cause and effects of this? ICANN staff is growing and developing fast whilst broader community is struggling to keep pace with the myriad initiatives.

i. Some sensitivity with (the perception of) a proposed increase in board compensation and

ii. Does this (increased compensation) reflect any increase in responsibilities / accountability? b. Any ongoing concerns or issues with "the model" i.e. bottom-up, multi-stakeholder processes? Note: References are increasingly made to terms such as dialogue and consultation which may not be compatible with this. c. Feedback on core functions that the SGs and constituencies rely on? How is ICANN serving the needs of the GNSO? 5. IDN Development & Adoption (Guide - 10 mins) Possible questions and discussion points: a. Progress of project 2.2 (LGR) and project 7 (policy implementation / delegation) b. Should the Council be prepared for policy-related work (since the VIP project is a Board-designated project) i.e. anything which requires further policy change on IDN TLD delegation and operation.

c. How has ICANN coordinated the works of Top-level (VIP) and the 2nd-level (IDN guidelines)? To ensure the industry engaged and to protect the user's from security risks. Thank-you for taking the time to review this input into the prospective scope of our meeting tomorrow.

Best wishes,

Jonathan