May 2016 - Bc-gnso - lists.icann.org

FW: Synchronizing WS2 accountability projects with upcoming Accountability & Transparency Review (ATRT3)
by Steve DelBianco 26 May '16

26 May '16

BC members — below is the note I circulated to the CCWG-Accountability today. As we discussed on our last 2 BC calls, the Work Stream 2 bylaws give the community more leverage than ATRT would, when it comes to adopting accountability enhancements that might be resisted by ICANN board and legal. From: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco(a)netchoice.org<mailto:sdelbianco@netchoice.org>> Date: Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 10:24 AM To: "accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>" <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>> Subject: Synchronizing WS2 accountability projects with upcoming Accountability & Transparency Review (ATRT3) Just wanted to start a new thread on something CCWG should discuss as we begin Work Stream 2 (WS2). The attached document has all the background, and is summarized below. Several of our approved WS2 accountability tasks are within the scope of the next Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3), which is currently scheduled to begin Jan-2017. The CCWG may wish to consider whether to recommend delaying the start of ATRT3 in order to allow WS2 accountability items to be completed first. Currently ICANN is obligated to the 2009 Affirmation of Commitments with NTIA (AoC). ICANN’s Board made a commitment to NTIA to begin ATRT3 in January 2017. Regarding timing of ATRT3, note that the draft new bylaws require this review “be conducted no less frequently than every five years measured from the date the previous Accountability and Transparency Review Team was convened.” Since the last ATRT was convened in Feb-2013, ATRT3 could begin as late as Feb-2018. Below is a summary of WS2 items, CCWG discussions of WS2, and comparison of proposed bylaws for WS2 and ATRT recommendations. This document is intended to help CCWG determine whether and how to integrate and/or sequence WS2 activities with the third Accountability and Transparency Review. This document provides necessary background to address three questions: 1. How does the scope of ATRT compare with WS2 accountability items? 2. What do the proposed bylaws require for implementation of WS2? 3. What do draft new bylaws require for the AoC review of Accountability and Transparency (ATRT)? My own view is that WS2 gives the community more leverage than ATRT to achieve adoption of accountability enhancements that might be resisted by ICANN board and legal.

1 0

ICANN transition Work Stream 2 meetings in Helsinki on 25-Jun
by Steve DelBianco 23 May '16

23 May '16

BC Members — the CCWG-Accountability will hold meetings in Helsinki on Sunday 25-Jun, from 8:30am to 5pm, to begin WORK STREAM 2 projects that will be addressed over next 12 to 16 months. If you’d like to join any of the Work Stream 2 projects (listed below), please try to attend this face-to-face meeting. ICANN’s draft new Bylaws include a transition article tasking the CCWG to develop further enhancements to ICANN’s accountability, known as Work Stream 2: 1. Considering improvements to ICANN’s standards for diversity at all levels   2. Staff accountability   3. Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committee accountability  4. Improving ICANN’s transparency with a focus on: a. Enhancements to ICANN’s existing Document Information Disclosure Policy  b. Transparency of ICANN’s interactions with governments c. Improvements to the whistleblower policy d. Transparency of Board deliberations 5. Developing a Framework of Interpretation for Human Rights 6. Addressing jurisdiction-related questions 7. Considering enhancements to the Ombudsman’s role and function 8. Guidelines for good faith standards of conduct associated with removal of directors 9. Reviewing the Cooperative Engagement Process (part of Independent Review Process)

4 4

FILED: BC comment on Draft New ICANN Bylaws
by Steve DelBianco 21 May '16

21 May '16

Today we filed our comment on the Draft New ICANN Bylaws. (attached and here<http://www.bizconst.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/BC-comment-on-Draft-new-…>) This comment was drafted by Steve DelBianco, Denise Michel, and Chris Wilson. Thanks also to Chantelle for edits. It was approved in accord with the BC Charter.

1 0

Business Constituency point about Affirmation Reviews in the new draft Bylaws
by Steve DelBianco 12 May '16

12 May '16

Today the BC agreed to share these points about the draft new bylaws, regarding the SSR and WHOIS Affirmation Reviews. These 2 reviews are already late per the Affirmation requirements, and would also be “late" when we add the review requirement to the Bylaws. The BC is not troubled by a new Bylaw that also requires ICANN to begin the next SSR and WHOIS review as soon as possible. -- Draft Bylaws Section 4.6 (c) (v), regarding timing of the Security, Stability, and Resiliency (SSR) review required under the Affirmation of Commitments, which is now to be brought into ICANN bylaws. Text from new Bylaws: "The SSR Review shall be conducted no less frequently than every five years, measured from the date the previous SSR Review Team was convened." BC Comment: The previous SSR review was convened in 2010, so a 5-year interval would require the next review by Oct-2015. Some CCWG members are concerned that the above text creates a new problem since the SSR review would be at least 1 year late at the time the Bylaws are approved. Those concerned are suggesting revisions to the draft Bylaws to avoid a situation where ICANN is immediately failing to honor its new Bylaws. The SSR review is already later than is required under the Affirmation of Commitments, so ICANN is already failing to meet that obligation. We are not troubled by a new Bylaw that also requires ICANN to begin the next SSR review as soon as possible. We prefer that ICANN follow through on the Board-approved 2016 start date for SSR-2 review. We expect SSR-2 to assess ICANN’s implementation of SSR-1, including the extent to which ICANN is prepared to meet future challenges and threats to the security, stability, and resiliency of the Internet DNS, consistent with ICANN's limited technical mission. — Draft Bylaws Section 4.6 (e) (v), regarding timing of the Whois/Directory Service review required under the Affirmation of Commitments, which is now to be brought into ICANN bylaws. Text from new Bylaws: "The Directory Service Review shall be conducted no less frequently than every five years, measured from the date the previous Directory Service Review Team was convened.” BC Comment: The previous Whois review was convened in Oct-2010, so a 5-year interval would require the next review by Oct-2015. Some CCWG members are concerned that the above text creates a new problem since the Whois/Directory Service review would be at least 1 year late at the time the Bylaws are approved. Those concerned are suggesting revisions to the draft Bylaws to avoid a situation where ICANN is immediately failing to honor its new Bylaws. The Whois review is already later than is required under the Affirmation of Commitments, so ICANN is already failing to meet that obligation. We are not troubled by a new Bylaw that also requires ICANN to begin the next Whois/Directory Service review as soon as possible. We prefer that ICANN follow through on the Board-approved 2016 start date for Whois-2 review. We expect Whois-2 to assess ICANN’s implementation of Whois-1 and current Whois policy. We recognize that there are policy efforts underway to develop a next generation registration directory service. As repeatedly reinforced by ICANN’s Board, however, the effort to replace Whois complements, and runs in parallel with, ICANN’s obligation to fully enforce existing consensus policy and contractual conditions relating to Whois.

1 0

FILED: BC comment on geo-names in 2 dot-brand gTLDs (.TORAY and .PICTET)
by Steve DelBianco 10 May '16

10 May '16

Today we filed comment in support of releasing geo-names in .TORAY and .PICTET TLDs See here<http://www.bizconst.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/BC-comment-on-release-of…> and attached. Thanks again to Andy Abrams for drafting this comment.

1 0

FILED: BC comment on new gTLD Safeguards to Mitigate DNS Abuse
by Steve DelBianco 05 May '16

05 May '16

Today we filed our comment on new gTLD Safeguards to Mitigate DNS Abuse. (attached and here<http://www.bizconst.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/BC-comment-on-Safeguards…>) This is regarding an ICANN staff draft report<https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/reviews/dns-abuse/draft-safeguards-against-dn…> on the extent to which Safeguards for new gTLDs have addressed DNS abuse. (link<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/new-gtld-safeguards-dns-abuse-2016-03…> to comment page). Comments close 13-May, but we want to post early so that other commenters might amplify our points (as discussed on last week’s BC call). Thanks again to drafters Angie Graves, Andy Abrams, and Denise Michel, and contributors Olga Yaguez and Chris Wilson.

1 0