February 2016 - Ccnso-council

Topics Board- ccNSO Meeting
by Bart Boswinkel March 1, 2016

March 1, 2016

Dear all, Please find included list of topics for discussion with the ICANN Board: 1. Views of the Board with respect to launch of WS 2 2. The need for Cost management / PMO for the CCWG and CWG efforts 3. ccNSO Policy Develop Processes on retirement of ccTLDs and Review Mechanism for decisions relating to delegation, revocation& transfer and retirement of ccTLDs (informational) Kind regards, Bart

1 1

Visa issue / Remote participation
by Ching Chiao Feb. 29, 2016

Feb. 29, 2016

Dear Council Colleagues, Bart, Up to now I've not yet received the visa on arrival approval from the Moroccan local host. The request was filed prior to 12-Feb and so far no response from the host. ICANN travel support has graciously helped me chase many times, but with no result. As much as I'd like to be back to Marrakech and join you all, the airfare already went up and it gives me very little time to make necessary arrangement before traveling, I can only participate the meeting thru Adobe Connect or teleconference. I look forward to another product week, with deep regret for not being able to make it personally this time. Thank you very much. Ching -- Ching Chiao Founder and CEO www.*Brandma*.co 中域国际集团 +886.918.211372 || +86.135.20187032 Beijing . Chengdu . Hangzhou . Hong Kong . Shenzhen. Taipei

1 0

The ICANN IS-SSR department published its activities report for 2H 2015
by Joke Braeken Feb. 29, 2016

Feb. 29, 2016

Dear all, ICANN's Identifier Systems Security, Stability and Resiliency (IS-SSR) department published its activities report for the second half of calendar 2015 (2H 2015). You can find the 2H 2015 report here<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/is-ssr-update-2h-2015-26feb16-e…> [PDF, 429 KB]. This reports describe the activities that are performed to maintain the security, stability, and resiliency of the Internet's global identifier systems. These activities include collaboration with, global security and operations groups and public safety communities where ICANN staff serves in several roles. For more information about IS-SSR click https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/is-ssr-2014-11-24-en. Best regards, Joke Braeken ccNSO Policy Advisor joke.braeken(a)icann.org

1 0

Publication of the final report on the Domain Name System for the Middle East and Adjoining Countries
by Joke Braeken Feb. 29, 2016

Feb. 29, 2016

Dear all, ICANN announced the publication of the final report <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/meac-dns-study-26feb16-en.pdf> [PDF, 8.38 MB] on the Domain Name System (DNS) for the Middle East and Adjoining Countries (MEAC). The "Middle East DNS Study" was completed after receiving feedback on the initial draft, which was published before the ICANN54 meeting in Dublin. The report presents findings on the current state of the Internet and the domain name industry in the MEAC region. ICANN selected a consortium led by the .eu Registry (EURid), with support from Emily Taylor Internet Research, Abu-Ghazaleh Intellectual Property and Oxford Information Labs, to conduct the DNS study. The report will be discussed at ICANN55 at the DNS Industry in the Middle East <https://meetings.icann.org/en/marrakech55/schedule/tue-middle-east-dns> session on Tuesday, 8 March, from 16:30–18:00 (WET). Read the full announcement here: https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-02-26-en Best regards, Joke Braeken ccNSO Policy Advisor joke.braeken(a)icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org>

1 0

nomination period for ICANN's Multistakeholder Ethos Award: closes on 12 March 2016
by Joke Braeken Feb. 29, 2016

Feb. 29, 2016

Dear all, In December 2015, ICANN opened the nomination period for ICANN's Multistakeholder Ethos Award. This email serves as a friendly reminder that the nomination period for community nominees closes on 12 March 2016. ICANN's Multistakeholder Ethos Award, launched in June 2014 in London, seeks to recognize long-standing community members who have served in leadership roles in multiple ICANN working groups or committees, and demonstrated collaboration with different Supporting Organizations and/or Advisory Committees. If you are interested in nominating someone you are invite to send an email to ethosaward2016(a)icann.org<mailto:ethosaward2016@icann.org> including: * Name of nominee. * Community of nominee. * Reasons for nomination. The full announcement is available at: https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2015-12-10-en Best regards, Joke Braeken ccNSO Policy Advisor joke.braeken(a)icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org>

1 1

Confirmation that the CCWG-Accountability Supplemental Final Proposal meets the requirements of the CWG-Stewardship
by Byron Holland Feb. 29, 2016

Feb. 29, 2016

Dear Colleagues, Please see the attached note from the CWG-Stewardship confirming that the CCWG-Accountability Supplemental Final Proposal on Work Stream 1 meets their conditionality requirements. Best regards, Byron From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info] Sent: February-29-16 5:19 AM Subject: Confirmation that the CCWG-Accountability Supplemental Final Proposal meets the requirements of the CWG-Stewardship Importance: High Dear CCWG-Accountability members, participants, and co-chairs, Confirmation that the CCWG-Accountability Supplemental Final Proposal on Work Stream 1 Recommendations meets the requirements of the CWG-Stewardship Final Transition Proposal We write in response to your group's recent publication of the Supplemental Final Proposal on Work Stream 1 Recommendations (the "Final Proposal"). We have prepared this in our capacities as co-chairs of the Cross Community Working Group to Develop an IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions (CWG-Stewardship). Please see our full response attached to this email. The CWG-Stewardship final transition proposal submitted for approval to the chartering organizations on 11 June 2015 is significantly dependent and expressly conditioned on the implementation of ICANN-level accountability mechanisms by the CCWG-Accountability. Specifically, as recognized in the Final Proposal, the CWG-Stewardship Final Transition Proposal sets forth ICANN accountability requirements regarding Community Empowerment Mechanism, IANA Functions Budget, IANA Function Reviews, Customer Standing Committee ("CSC"), Separation Process, Appeals Mechanism, and Post-Transition IANA ("PTI"), as well as Fundamental Bylaws. This document is and should be viewed as an element of the agreed-upon working methods of the CWG-Stewardship and the CCWG-Accountability. Thank you for resolving each of the issues raised in our comment letter relating to your group's publication of its third draft proposal (the "Third Draft Proposal") and for all your hard work in reaching consensus. As you know, we rely on your work and our trust in the work of your group is vital in permitting us to focus on the essential aspects of our work on the stewardship transition. In summary, we confirm that the Final Proposal meets the requirements of the CWG-Stewardship final transition proposal. Congratulations on your Final Proposal and thank-you again all for your collaboration and cooperation throughout this extended period of intense work. Yours sincerely, Lise Fuhr & Jonathan Robinson Co-Chairs, CWG-Stewardship

1 0

Confirmation that the CCWG-Accountability Supplemental Final Proposal meets the requirements of the CWG-Stewardship
by Bart Boswinkel Feb. 29, 2016

Feb. 29, 2016

Dear all, Please find included the letter from the CWG -Stewardship to the co-chairs of the CCWG - Accountability to confirm that the the Final Supplemental Proposal on Work Stream 1 meets the requirements of the CWG-Stewardship Final transition Proposal. Apologies for cross-posting, Kind regards, Bart Boswinkel ccNSO ------------------------- Dear CCWG-Accountability members, participants, and co-chairs, Confirmation that the CCWG-Accountability Supplemental Final Proposal on Work Stream 1 Recommendations meets the requirements of the CWG-Stewardship Final Transition Proposal We write in response to your group's recent publication of the Supplemental Final Proposal on Work Stream 1 Recommendations (the "Final Proposal"). We have prepared this in our capacities as co-chairs of the Cross Community Working Group to Develop an IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions (CWG-Stewardship). Please see our full response attached to this email. The CWG-Stewardship final transition proposal submitted for approval to the chartering organizations on 11 June 2015 is significantly dependent and expressly conditioned on the implementation of ICANN-level accountability mechanisms by the CCWG-Accountability. Specifically, as recognized in the Final Proposal, the CWG-Stewardship Final Transition Proposal sets forth ICANN accountability requirements regarding Community Empowerment Mechanism, IANA Functions Budget, IANA Function Reviews, Customer Standing Committee ("CSC"), Separation Process, Appeals Mechanism, and Post-Transition IANA ("PTI"), as well as Fundamental Bylaws. This document is and should be viewed as an element of the agreed-upon working methods of the CWG-Stewardship and the CCWG-Accountability. Thank you for resolving each of the issues raised in our comment letter relating to your group's publication of its third draft proposal (the "Third Draft Proposal") and for all your hard work in reaching consensus. As you know, we rely on your work and our trust in the work of your group is vital in permitting us to focus on the essential aspects of our work on the stewardship transition. In summary, we confirm that the Final Proposal meets the requirements of the CWG-Stewardship final transition proposal. Congratulations on your Final Proposal and thank-you again all for your collaboration and cooperation throughout this extended period of intense work. Yours sincerely, Lise Fuhr & Jonathan Robinson Co-Chairs, CWG-Stewardship

1 0

Re: The Currently Re-Finalized Proposal as Hardcopy
by Nigel Roberts Feb. 29, 2016

Feb. 29, 2016

IMO this is essential .. I would certainly need one to be able to properly carry out my scrutiny my role in the subsequent 2 days. Sent from my iPad > On 29 Feb 2016, at 08:30, Dr Eberhard W Lisse <epilisse(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Dear Co-Chairs. > > can you please arrange that the participants and members coming to Marrakesh find a single pages (back empty) hardcopy of the Proposal on their desk at Friday's F2F? Does not have to be bound, but if it is in a ring binder please make it available in A4 and corresponding 2 Ring Binder (the famous Leitz Ordner) and Letter/3 Ring Binder (US). > > Or at least for those who would like one. > > If it's bound why not put it into the ICANN goodie bag? > > el > > -- > Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini 4

1 0

FW: Request for Clarification on Threshold Issue
by Stephen Deerhake Feb. 28, 2016

Feb. 28, 2016

FYI, it seems our colleagues in the gNSO are having a bit of buyer's remorse with respect to a particular aspect of the CCWG "final" report, and are requesting further work be undertaken, as indicated in the attached letter to the CCWG co-chairs from Keith Drazek. I really don't see how we can commit the ccNSO to such a moving target. Best, /Stephen PS: FYI, subsequent to the publication of this correspondence, additional CCWG participants have signed onto it. From: accountability-cross-community-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Drazek, Keith Sent: Saturday, February 27, 2016 3:04 PM To: accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Request for Clarification on Threshold Issue Hi Thomas, Mathieu and Leon. I'm submitting the following on behalf of the undersigned members/participants from the GNSO: --------------------------------------------- Dear CCWG-Accountability Chairs, We are very concerned with the response of the Board to the request for clarification regarding the need to adjust the thresholds for the Empowered Community to exercise its powers if the number of decisional participants is less than 5 SOACs. Currently the text in Annex 1 and 2 regarding this possibility is ambiguous: "The thresholds presented in this document were determined based on this assessment. If fewer than five of ICANN's SOs and ACs agree to be decisional Participants, these thresholds for consensus support may be adjusted. Thresholds may also have to be adjusted if ICANN changes to have more SOs or ACs." In our view, there is no question that the thresholds must be adjusted if there are fewer than five decisional participants. We have acknowledged repeatedly and operated under the assumption that there should not be a requirement of unanimous support for the Empowered Community to exercise its powers. Yet, if there are less than five decisional participants, unless the thresholds are adjusted it would require unanimous support for the Empowered Community to: * Reject a proposed Operating Plan/Strategic Plan/Budget; * Recall the entire Board of Directors; and * Reject an ICANN Board decision relating to reviews of IANA functions, including the triggering of any PTI separation process. These powers are central to ensuring that ICANN remains accountable to the Empowered Community. This matter is too critical to the primary purpose of the CCWG-Accountability proposal to remain unclear. As the Board has noted in its own formal comments, "Leaving this issue for future consideration raises the potential for renegotiation of the community thresholds. This potential for renegotiation adds a level of instability and a lack of predictability." Although it has a superficial resemblance to the recent debate over thresholds in the GAC carve-out, we believe it is fundamentally different. There is a great distinction between an SO or AC choosing to not participate, and an SO or AC being blocked from participation in a specific instance, as was the case in the case of the GAC carve-out. We were willing to accept a unanimous threshold for Board recall in the unique circumstances of the GAC carve-out, where the GAC was blocked from participation, but we believe firmly that if any SO or AC elects, whether through a conscious decision or an inability to decide, to not participate, then the non-unanimity principle must be upheld. However, as we saw with the debate over the thresholds in the GAC carve-out, this could be a contentious issue. It is far better to resolve this matter now (and during the drafting of bylaws), prior to the official transfer of the proposal to NTIA, than to delay it when it could have significant negative ramifications on the transition through a failure to resolve it during the implementation phase. Therefore, we respectfully request that the current text in Annex 1 and Annex 2 be edited to replace "may" with "shall" and add an additional explanatory clause: "The thresholds presented in this document were determined based on this assessment. If fewer than five of ICANN's SOs and ACs agree to be decisional Participants, these thresholds for consensus support shall be adjusted to prevent the need for unanimous support among the decisional Participants to exercise any of the seven Community powers. Thresholds may also have to be adjusted if ICANN changes to have more SOs or ACs." Signed, Phil Corwin Steve DelBianco Keith Drazek James Gannon Robin Gross Ed Morris Brett Schaefer Greg Shatan Matthew Shears

3 2

FW: [ccnso-members] RELEASE: Sen. Cruz: ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade Is Misleading the United States Senate
by Byron Holland Feb. 26, 2016

Feb. 26, 2016

Dear El, Thanks for the note. I can assure you that I have spoken to Allan about the email as his inference and labeling was inappropriate. As I am sure you will agree, we should hold every member of our community to the same standard. The "corner" it will be for all who speak inappropriately of others:=) Cheers, Byron -----Original Message----- From: Dr Eberhard W Lisse [mailto:el@lisse.NA] Sent: February-24-16 11:01 AM To: Allan MacGillivray; Byron Holland; ccnso-members(a)icann.org; ccnso-council(a)icann.org Cc: el(a)lisse.NA; paul.rosenzweig(a)redbranchconsulting.com Subject: Re: [ccnso-members] RELEASE: Sen. Cruz: ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade Is Misleading the United States Senate Dear Byron, thank you for posting the press release. Will you please explain to your staff member how the multi stakeholder process works? You have my permission to send him to stand in the corner, but not to spank him. Even conservative think tankers may make as much trouble as me :-)-O, or anyone else. However, this is public knowledge plastered all over the place My personal opinion is that Mr Chehadé's response (if you can call it that) is at the least ill advised but most likely hubris in order to alienate either the next (chronically pissed off) President of the US or a VERY pissed off junior Senator from Alberta, who may just have a point here. As he may have had on the root zone issue. The troublemaker reads in copy. el On 2016-02-24 16:36, Allan MacGillivray wrote: > There is a guy on the CCWG list, Paul Rosenzweig, from a conservative > think tank in DC. He got the press release directly from a Cruz > staffer and sent it to the CCWG list yesterday. And guess who is one > of the CCWG trouble makers, Paul Roesenzweig....... > > Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the TELUS network. > *From: *Byron Holland > *Sent: *Wednesday, February 24, 2016 9:25 AM > *To: *ccNSO Members; ccnso-council(a)icann.org > *Subject: *[ccnso-members] RELEASE: Sen. Cruz: ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade > Is Misleading the United States Senate > > > > FYI > >> >> _Press(a)cruz.senate.gov <mailto:Cruz_Press@cruz.senate.gov>> >> *Sent: *Tuesday, February 23, 2016 6:25 PM >> *Subject: *RELEASE: Sen. Cruz: ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade Is >> Misleading the United States Senate [...] -- Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse \ / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist (Saar) el(a)lisse.NA / * | Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell) PO Box 8421 \ / Bachbrecht, Namibia ;____/

1 0

ccNSO Members meeting ICANN55: sessions on IANA Stewardship Transition and Enhancing ICANN Accountability processes
by Joke Braeken Feb. 26, 2016

Feb. 26, 2016

Dear all, The Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) provided its Chartering Organizations with its final supplemental report on Work Stream 1 recommendations. (https://www.icann.org/news/blog/ccwg-accountability-delivers-report-to-char…) The ccNSO community will be focusing on the IANA Stewardship Transition and Enhancing ICANN Accountability processes during the ccNSO Members meeting on Tuesday morning (BLOCK 1) 7 March, and Wednesday afternoon 8 March (BLOCK 2 & 3), at the occasion of ICANN55 in Marrakech. The ccNSO Council meeting takes place on Wednesday afternoon (17:00 – 18:00) Please find below an overview of the IANA Stewardship Transition Process sessions, during both days of the ccNSO Members meeting. ________ TUESDAY, 8 March BLOCK 1: overview IANA stewardship transition process 11:00 – 12:30 * CWG, CCWG and ICG Processes: Timelines and Interdependencies. * The essence of the Supplemental Final Proposals Work stream 1 CCWG-Accountability WEDNESDAY, 9 March BLOCK 2: Implementation issues final proposal stewardship transition (ICG) 13:30 – 15:15 * Progress with respect to Implementation of the CWG-Stewardship Proposal * CWG Stewardship Proposal Implementation: what does the ccNSO need to do? * Impact of the CCWG-Accountability WS 1 Proposal on the ccNSO BLOCK 3 15:30 – 16:30 Sense of community support CCWG – Accountability Supplemental Final Proposal WS 1 ________ Room: OLIVERAIE. Link to MEETING GUIDE & VENUE MAP<https://meetings.icann.org/en/icann55rakmeetingguide.pdf> Remote participation on Tuesday: https://meetings.icann.org/en/marrakech55/schedule/tue-ccnso-members Remote participation on Wednesday: https://meetings.icann.org/en/marrakech55/schedule/wed-ccnso-members To help the community prepare for upcoming Public Meetings, the Policy Development Support Staff conducts community webinars a week or two before each meeting. During each webinar, the team identifies critical up-coming issues and provides general overviews of other policy development activities that are likely to be discussed at each Public Meeting. The slides, recording and transcript of the presentation of the Webinar held on 25 February have been made available and posted on the ICANN web-site: <http://www.icann.org/en/resources/policy/presentations> http://www.icann.org/en/resources/policy/presentations Best regards, Joke Braeken ccNSO Policy Advisor joke.braeken(a)icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org>

1 0

ccNSO Member Revised Minority Statement CCWG Accountability
by Byron Holland Feb. 25, 2016

Feb. 25, 2016

Dear Colleagues, Please see the attached document for the ccNSO CCWG member's minority report from Dr. Lisse. Regards, Byron

1 0

Triage recommendation 04-2016: Charter Amendments of the GNSO gTLD Registries Stakeholder Group
by Joke Braeken Feb. 25, 2016

Feb. 25, 2016

Dear Councillors, Please find below the proposed Triage recommendation 04-2016. Kindly provide me with your input by the end of 29 February 2016, 23:59 UTC, in case you do not agree with the proposed recommendation. Thank you. Best regards, Joke Braeken ccNSO Policy Advisor joke.braeken(a)icann.org Topic: 04-2016: Charter Amendments of the GNSO gTLD Registries Stakeholder Group Originator: gNSO Summary of request: This public comment proceeding seeks to obtain community input on proposed amendments to the charter of the GNSO’s gTLD Registries Stakeholder Group. Current Status: Amendments have been approved by the membership of the gTLD Registries Stakeholder Group. Next Steps: The ICANN Board of Directors is expected to review the proposed amendments and take action. https://www.icann.org/public-comments/rysg-charter-draft-2016-02-22-en Date received: 23 Feb. 2016 Last day for Comments/input/response, if any: 4 April 2016 23:59 UTC Recommended action, if any: No action Expertise needed, if any: Strategic, operational, managerial Date of submission to Triage Committee: 23 Feb. 2016 Triage Committee input: 24 Feb. 2016 Date of submission to Council: 25 Feb. 2016 Deadline council decision: 29 Feb. 2016 23:59 UTC Impact ccNSO/ccTLDs:

1 0

Triage recommendation 03-2016: Draft Framework of Principles for Cross Community Working Groups
by Joke Braeken Feb. 25, 2016

Feb. 25, 2016

Dear Councillors, Please find below the proposed Triage recommendation 03-2016. Kindly provide me with your input by the end of 29 Feb. 2016 23:59 UTC, 23:59 UTC, in case you do not agree with the proposed recommendation. Thank you. Best regards, Joke Braeken ccNSO Policy Advisor joke.braeken(a)icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org> Topic: 03-2016: Draft Framework of Principles for Cross Community Working Groups Originator: Chartered by the ccNSO and gNSO Councils in March 2014 Summary of request: This public comment proceeding seeks to obtain community feedback on a proposed draft framework of uniform principles to guide the initiation and operations of future cross community working groups. Current Status: The draft framework document has been published for public comment. Next Steps: After the review of public comments received, the final framework document will be prepared. https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ccwg-framework-principles-draft-2016-… Date received: 23 Feb. 2016 Last day for Comments/input/response, if any: 2 April 2016 23:59 UTC Recommended action, if any: ccNSO secretariat to send out call for public comment to the ccNSO-members, ccnso-council and ccTLDcommunity mailing lists Expertise needed, if any: Strategic, operational, managerial Date of submission to Triage Committee: 23 Feb. 2016 Triage Committee input: 24 Feb. 2016 Date of submission to Council: 25 Feb. 2016 Deadline council decision: 29 Feb. 2016 23:59 UTC Impact ccNSO/ccTLDs:

1 0

Re: [ccnso-members] RELEASE: Sen. Cruz: ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade Is Misleading the United States Senate
by Burr, Becky Feb. 24, 2016

Feb. 24, 2016

With all due respect Allan, Paul is outspoken, and I do not agree with all of the positions he has taken, but he has been a thoughtful contributor in the CCWG. The Senator from Alberta (credit to E. Lisse) is an entirely different cat. J. Beckwith Burr Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006 Office: +1.202.533.2932 Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 / neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz> From: Allan MacGillivray <allan.macgillivray(a)cira.ca<mailto:allan.macgillivray@cira.ca>> Date: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 9:36 AM To: Byron Holland <byron.holland(a)cira.ca<mailto:byron.holland@cira.ca>>, "ccnso-members(a)icann.org<mailto:ccnso-members@icann.org>" <ccnso-members(a)icann.org<mailto:ccnso-members@icann.org>>, "'ccnso-council@icann. org'" <ccnso-council(a)icann.org<mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [ccnso-members] RELEASE: Sen. Cruz: ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade Is Misleading the United States Senate There is a guy on the CCWG list, Paul Rosenzweig, from a conservative think tank in DC. He got the press release directly from a Cruz staffer and sent it to the CCWG list yesterday. And guess who is one of the CCWG trouble makers, Paul Roesenzweig....... Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the TELUS network. From: Byron Holland Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 9:25 AM To: ccNSO Members; ccnso-council(a)icann.org<mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org> Subject: [ccnso-members] RELEASE: Sen. Cruz: ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade Is Misleading the United States Senate FYI _Press(a)cruz.senate.gov<mailto:Cruz_Press@cruz.senate.gov>> Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 6:25 PM Subject: RELEASE: Sen. Cruz: ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade Is Misleading the United States Senate [cid:203CB0EA-4171-4ABB-8801-6A4498EBB699] UNITED STATES SENATE Sen. Ted Cruz Press Office FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Cruz Press Office: 202-228-7561 Rachael Slobodien rachael_slobodien(a)cruz.senate.gov<mailto:rachael_slobodien@cruz.senate.gov> Phil Novack: phil_novack(a)cruz.senate.gov<mailto:phil_novack@cruz.senate.gov> February 23, 2015 Sen. Cruz: ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade Is Misleading the United States Senate Chehade should recuse himself from all ICANN decisions that could impact the Chinese government WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) issued the following statement today regarding a letter that Cruz, Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), and Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) received from Fadi Chehade, CEO of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) on Friday. Chehade’s letter<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__cruz.senate.gov_files_d…> was in reply to one that Cruz, Lankford, and Lee sent on February 4<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.cruz.senate.gov_-3F…> raising serious concerns and requesting information regarding Mr. Chehade’s involvement with the World Internet Conference, which is organized by the Chinese government, a regime notorious for its censorship of the Internet and criminalization of online speech. “Either the World Internet Conference and the People’s Republic of China have misreported the events that took place during their own conference or Fadi Chehade isn’t being completely honest with the United States Senate,” said Sen. Cruz. “While Chehade continues to state that his first meeting won’t take place until later this year, the Xinhua News Agency, the official press agency of the People’s Republic of China, reported on December 17, 2015 that, ‘The advisory committee held its first meeting on the sidelines of the second World Internet Conference in Wuzhen of east China's Zhejiang Province. Jack Ma, founder of China’s Internet giant Alibaba, and Fadi Chehade, president and CEO of ICANN, act as co-chairman of the advisory committee.’ It should also be noted that Chehade has admitted that he has entered into an arrangement while still serving as the CEO of ICANN and performing under a contract with the United States government, through which his future travel costs to the Chinese government’s state-sponsored World Internet Conference will be compensated. Travel compensation from the Chinese government can be a form of personal conflict of interest, which could impair Chehade’s ability to act impartially and in the best interest of the government when performing under the contract. As such, Chehade should recuse himself from all ICANN decisions that could impact the Chinese government, which include all negotiations and discussions pertaining to the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) transition.”

2 1

Re: [ccnso-members] RELEASE: Sen. Cruz: ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade Is Misleading the United States Senate
by Nigel Roberts Feb. 24, 2016

Feb. 24, 2016

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objection_%28argument%29 On 24/02/16 14:36, Allan MacGillivray wrote: > There is a guy on the CCWG list, Paul Rosenzweig, from a conservative > think tank in DC. He got the press release directly from a Cruz staffer > and sent it to the CCWG list yesterday. And guess who is one of the CCWG > trouble makers, Paul Roesenzweig....... > > Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the TELUS network. > *From: *Byron Holland > *Sent: *Wednesday, February 24, 2016 9:25 AM > *To: *ccNSO Members; ccnso-council(a)icann.org > *Subject: *[ccnso-members] RELEASE: Sen. Cruz: ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade Is > Misleading the United States Senate > > > > FYI > >> _Press(a)cruz.senate.gov <mailto:Cruz_Press@cruz.senate.gov>> >> *Sent:*Tuesday, February 23, 2016 6:25 PM >> *Subject:*RELEASE: Sen. Cruz: ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade Is Misleading >> the United States Senate >> >> *UNITED STATES SENATE* >> *Sen. Ted Cruz Press Office* >> ** >> *FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE* >> *Cruz Press Office: 202-228-7561* >> Rachael Slobodienrachael_slobodien(a)cruz.senate.gov >> <mailto:rachael_slobodien@cruz.senate.gov> >> Phil Novack:phil_novack@cruz.senate.gov >> <mailto:phil_novack@cruz.senate.gov> >> February 23, 2015 >> ** >> *Sen. Cruz: ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade Is Misleading the United States >> Senate* >> /Chehade should recuse himself from all ICANN decisions that could >> impact the Chinese government/ >> // >> WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) issued the >> following statement today regarding a letter that Cruz, Sen. James >> Lankford (R-Okla.), and Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) received from Fadi >> Chehade, CEO of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and >> Numbers (ICANN) on Friday. Chehade’sletter >> <http://cruz.senate.gov/files/documents/Letters/20160219_ICANN_CEOLetter.pdf>was >> in reply to one thatCruz, Lankford, and Lee sent on February 4 >> <http://www.cruz.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=2588>raising >> serious concerns and requesting information regarding Mr. >> Chehade’s involvement with the World Internet Conference, which is >> organized by the Chinese government, a regime notorious for its >> censorship of the Internet and criminalization of online speech. >> “Either the World Internet Conference and the People’s Republic of >> China have misreported the events that took place during their own >> conference or Fadi Chehade isn’t being completely honest with the >> United States Senate,” said Sen. Cruz. “While Chehade continues to >> state that his first meeting won’t take place until later this >> year, the Xinhua News Agency, the official press agency of the >> People’s Republic of China, reported on December 17, 2015 that, >> ‘The advisory committee held its first meeting on the sidelines of >> the second World Internet Conference in Wuzhen of east China's >> Zhejiang Province. Jack Ma, founder of China’s Internet giant >> Alibaba, and Fadi Chehade, president and CEO of ICANN, act as >> co-chairman of the advisory committee.’ It should also be noted >> that Chehade has admitted that he has entered into an arrangement >> while still serving as the CEO of ICANN and performing under a >> contract with the United States government, through which his >> future travel costs to the Chinese government’s state-sponsored >> World Internet Conference will be compensated. Travel compensation >> from the Chinese government can be a form of personal conflict of >> interest, which could impair Chehade’s ability to act impartially >> and in the best interest of the government when performing under >> the contract. As such, Chehade should recuse himself from all >> ICANN decisions that could impact the Chinese government, which >> include all negotiations and discussions pertaining to the >> Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) transition.” >> >

1 1

Fw: CCWG Final report for your consideration
by Byron Holland Feb. 24, 2016

Feb. 24, 2016

Dear Colleagues Please see the note below from the CCWG Byron From:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx Sent:February 23, 2016 3:20 PM Subject:CCWG Final report for your consideration Dear Chartering Organizations, The Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) is pleased to provide its Chartering Organizations with its report on Work Stream 1 recommendations. You can download the full report here: https://community.icann.org/x/8w2AAw. As per the CCWG-Accountability’s Charter, we now seek your approval to submit this final report to the ICANN Board and ask you to consider this approval in accordance with your respective SO or AC rules and procedures by 9 March 2016 to meet the overall timing requirements, which would allow the IANA Stewardship Transition (as a whole) to proceed. The report is the result of extensive work by the CCWG-Accountability’s 28 members, 175 participants and a team of highly qualified legal advisors since December 2014, which included over 221 calls or meetings, 3 public consultations and more than 13,900 email messages. It represents a carefully crafted balance between key requirements, specific legal advice, and significant compromises by all who participated and includes diligent attention to the input received through the Public Comment proceedings. The final proposal has received the consensus support of the CCWG-Accountability with five minority statements from members recorded for Chartering Organization consideration (see Appendix A). Please note that we are publishing our report today with the minority statements delivered by the original 19 February deadline, but we have given our members a final opportunity to revise, retract or add minority statements based on our compromise reached this morning. We will send you a revised Appendix A on 25 February. As noted in the CCWG-Accountability report, the group worked to meet both NTIA requirements for the overall IANA Stewardship Transition (Annex 14), and the CWG-Stewardship dependencies for the naming community on ICANN accountability enhancements (Annex 13). The co-chairs of the CWG-Stewardship and the CCWG-Accountability have coordinated their efforts. The CWG-Stewardship will deliver a letter to you confirming that its dependencies have been met, thus allowing the IANA Stewardship Transition proposal to move forward. We will make ourselves together with or other key contributors available to you before and during the ICANN 55 meeting in Marrakech to answer any questions you may have and explain any details of the report. For your information, further background documents as well as the slides, recordings and transcripts of recent webinars explain the details of the final proposal are available here: https://community.icann.org/x/ogDxAg. Should you have any further questions please do not hesitate to contact us. Thank you very much for your continued support. Thomas Rickert, Mathieu Weill and Leon Sanchez CCWG-Accountability Co-Chairs

1 0

RELEASE: Sen. Cruz: ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade Is Misleading the United States Senate
by Byron Holland Feb. 24, 2016

Feb. 24, 2016

FYI _Press(a)cruz.senate.gov<mailto:Cruz_Press@cruz.senate.gov>> Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 6:25 PM Subject: RELEASE: Sen. Cruz: ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade Is Misleading the United States Senate [cid:203CB0EA-4171-4ABB-8801-6A4498EBB699] UNITED STATES SENATE Sen. Ted Cruz Press Office FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Cruz Press Office: 202-228-7561 Rachael Slobodien rachael_slobodien(a)cruz.senate.gov<mailto:rachael_slobodien@cruz.senate.gov> Phil Novack: phil_novack(a)cruz.senate.gov<mailto:phil_novack@cruz.senate.gov> February 23, 2015 Sen. Cruz: ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade Is Misleading the United States Senate Chehade should recuse himself from all ICANN decisions that could impact the Chinese government WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) issued the following statement today regarding a letter that Cruz, Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), and Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) received from Fadi Chehade, CEO of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) on Friday. Chehade’s letter<http://cruz.senate.gov/files/documents/Letters/20160219_ICANN_CEOLetter.pdf> was in reply to one that Cruz, Lankford, and Lee sent on February 4<http://www.cruz.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=2588> raising serious concerns and requesting information regarding Mr. Chehade’s involvement with the World Internet Conference, which is organized by the Chinese government, a regime notorious for its censorship of the Internet and criminalization of online speech. “Either the World Internet Conference and the People’s Republic of China have misreported the events that took place during their own conference or Fadi Chehade isn’t being completely honest with the United States Senate,” said Sen. Cruz. “While Chehade continues to state that his first meeting won’t take place until later this year, the Xinhua News Agency, the official press agency of the People’s Republic of China, reported on December 17, 2015 that, ‘The advisory committee held its first meeting on the sidelines of the second World Internet Conference in Wuzhen of east China's Zhejiang Province. Jack Ma, founder of China’s Internet giant Alibaba, and Fadi Chehade, president and CEO of ICANN, act as co-chairman of the advisory committee.’ It should also be noted that Chehade has admitted that he has entered into an arrangement while still serving as the CEO of ICANN and performing under a contract with the United States government, through which his future travel costs to the Chinese government’s state-sponsored World Internet Conference will be compensated. Travel compensation from the Chinese government can be a form of personal conflict of interest, which could impair Chehade’s ability to act impartially and in the best interest of the government when performing under the contract. As such, Chehade should recuse himself from all ICANN decisions that could impact the Chinese government, which include all negotiations and discussions pertaining to the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) transition.”

1 0

FW: CCWG Final report for your consideration
by Kimberly Carlson Feb. 24, 2016

Feb. 24, 2016

Dear all, Please find below the email from the CCWG-Accountability co-chairs on the Final Report on Work Stream 1 recommendations. Thank you, Kim Carlson Dear Chartering Organizations, The Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) is pleased to provide its Chartering Organizations with its report on Work Stream 1 recommendations. You can download the full report here: https://community.icann.org/x/8w2AAw. As per the CCWG-Accountability’s Charter, we now seek your approval to submit this final report to the ICANN Board and ask you to consider this approval in accordance with your respective SO or AC rules and procedures by 9 March 2016 to meet the overall timing requirements, which would allow the IANA Stewardship Transition (as a whole) to proceed. The report is the result of extensive work by the CCWG-Accountability’s 28 members, 175 participants and a team of highly qualified legal advisors since December 2014, which included over 221 calls or meetings, 3 public consultations and more than 13,900 email messages. It represents a carefully crafted balance between key requirements, specific legal advice, and significant compromises by all who participated and includes diligent attention to the input received through the Public Comment proceedings. The final proposal has received the consensus support of the CCWG-Accountability with five minority statements from members recorded for Chartering Organization consideration (see Appendix A). Please note that we are publishing our report today with the minority statements delivered by the original 19 February deadline, but we have given our members a final opportunity to revise, retract or add minority statements based on our compromise reached this morning. We will send you a revised Appendix A on 25 February. As noted in the CCWG-Accountability report, the group worked to meet both NTIA requirements for the overall IANA Stewardship Transition (Annex 14), and the CWG-Stewardship dependencies for the naming community on ICANN accountability enhancements (Annex 13). The co-chairs of the CWG-Stewardship and the CCWG-Accountability have coordinated their efforts. The CWG-Stewardship will deliver a letter to you confirming that its dependencies have been met, thus allowing the IANA Stewardship Transition proposal to move forward. We will make ourselves together with or other key contributors available to you before and during the ICANN 55 meeting in Marrakech to answer any questions you may have and explain any details of the report. For your information, further background documents as well as the slides, recordings and transcripts of recent webinars explain the details of the final proposal are available here: https://community.icann.org/x/ogDxAg. Should you have any further questions please do not hesitate to contact us. Thank you very much for your continued support. Thomas Rickert, Mathieu Weill and Leon Sanchez CCWG-Accountability Co-Chairs

1 0

ccNSO Council in Marrakech
by Kimberly Carlson Feb. 22, 2016

Feb. 22, 2016

Dear all, The ccNSO Council will meet in Marrakech as follows: Sunday, 6 March ccNSO Council Workshop 10:00-12:00 WET local time (10:00-12:00 UTC) Sunday, 6 March ccNSO Council Prep Meeting 12:00-13:00 WET local time (12:00-13:00 UTC) Wednesday, 9 March ccNSO Council Meeting 16:00-18:00 WET local time (16:00-18:00 UTC) *note - the Council meeting will start immediately after the Members meeting, so time may be adjusted The schedule is subject to change, so please continue to check the main meeting schedule: https://meetings.icann.org/en/marrakech55/schedule-full Please let me know if you wish to participate in this meeting remotely. All ccNSO related meetings for Marrakech will be posted here: http://ccnso.icann.org/calendar#mar Kind regards, Kim Carlson

1 1

4th Africa DNS Forum, 4-6 March, Marrakech
by Joke Braeken Feb. 22, 2016

Feb. 22, 2016

Dear All, On behalf of AfTLD, please find below an announcement regarding the 4th Africa DNS Forum. 3 days of sharing, learning and networking at the 4th Africa Domain Name System- DNS Forum 2016! Date: 4-6 March 2016 Location: Marrakech, Morocco Venue: Palmeraie Conference Centre, Marrakech, Morocco What is the Africa DNS Forum? The Africa Domain Name System Forum is an annual open event for stakeholders in the Domain Name Industry in Africa organized by Africa Top Level Domains Organization (AfTLD), the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) and the Internet Society. The objective of the three-day event is to help the African domain name industry in Africa to grow at a competitive rate and ensure that the continent is on par with the rest of the world. Who should attend? Registries, registrars, resellers, registrants DNS experts, government representatives, policy makers from the African region and beyond as well as entrepreneurs interested in investing in the African Domain Name space. The event will be co-hosted with ICANN 55 <https://meetings.icann.org/en/marrakech55>. Why should you attend? More that 200 technical people, business people and government representatives drawn from all over Africa will take part in this multi stakeholder Forum where they will be leading interesting discussions highlighting opportunities in the African Domain Name industry. This will be the fourth African DNS Forum following events in Durban, South Africa (2013), Abuja, Nigeria (2014) and Nairobi, Kenya (2015). Registration is now open: <https://www.internetsociety.org/form/dns-forum-africa%20> For more information please visit the event website <http://www.aftld.org/afdnsforum2016> Best regards, Joke Braeken ccNSO Policy Advisor joke.braeken(a)icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org>

1 1

Fwd: [CCWG-ACCT] A message from the Co-Chairs
by Nigel Roberts Feb. 20, 2016

Feb. 20, 2016

Fellow Councillors In order that we all remain fully informed regarding the progress of the Accountability WG I am forwarded the attached which I received as a member of the list, which intimates at a further (short?) hiccough in the process. -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] A message from the Co-Chairs Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 18:19:15 -0600 From: León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <leonfelipe(a)sanchez.mx> To: Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org> CC: ACCT-Staff (acct-staff(a)icann.org) <acct-staff(a)icann.org> Dear all, As you are aware, we intended to publish our Final Report today (19 February 2016) for Chartering Organization consideration. We are ready to do so, except for one issue where we would like to consider options as a full group. There is, still, ongoing discussion on the issue of thresholds for Board removal in Recommendation #2, which raised concerns in our report after we came to a compromise on Board consideration of GAC Advice (Recommendation #11). Since then, we have tried to propose compromise text that would be acceptable by different groups (c.f. the 12 February and 17 February drafts, posted at https://community.icann.org/x/iw2AAw) We received comments on this issue, and in some cases, minority statements, from members and participants in the ALAC, GAC, GNSO, and the Board. Earlier today, ICANN Chairman, Steve Crocker, posted a note, apparently on behalf of the Icann Board, outlining Board concerns with the latest attempt at compromise text proposed on 17 February: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/2016-February/…. While these last minute interventions are deeply disappointing for those of us who worked extremely hard, within the group and within their respective communities, to build bridges and promote compromise, our main target and duty remains to achieve a stable level of consensus, respecting the bottom-up, multistakeholder nature of the process. It is fortunate that the Board provided this input before we published the report, since it enables us to assess the potential consequences of a Board disagreement later in the process. We believe this issue must be discussed before sending our Final Report to Chartering Organizations. At the very least, we would like the opportunity to discuss a way forward and process as full group on next Tuesdayâs CCWG-Accountability call at 06:00 UTC. There are many options and directions the group can take at this stage, each with different implications and considerations, and these options should be discussed as a group. Until the Tuesday call, letâs keep open channels of communication on our mailing list and work towards a solution. We will also reach out to the Chartering Organizations to inform them of the change in our schedule. As co-chairs, we renew our call upon every Member, upon every Participant, our call upon community leaders especially in the ICANN Board, in the GNSO and in the GAC to step away from confronting each other, to engage constructively and recognize each otherâs value to the multistakeholder model. If you believe that the multistakeholder model can deliver, now is the time to act accordingly. Thank you, Thomas, LeÃ³n, Mathieu /CCWG-Accountability Co-Chairs/

1 0

Updated Agenda - Marrakech Members Meeting
by Kimberly Carlson Feb. 19, 2016

Feb. 19, 2016

Dear all, Please find the updated Marrakech Members meeting agenda here<http://ccnso.icann.org/meetings/marrakech55/agenda.htm>. Remote participation will be available both days through Adobe Connect: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/rak55-oliveraie/ The ICANN55 full schedule can be found here<https://meetings.icann.org/en/marrakech55/schedule-full>. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Kind regards, Kim Carlson

1 0

Informal notes Council meeting 18 February 2016, noon UTC
by Bart Boswinkel Feb. 19, 2016

Feb. 19, 2016

Dear all, Please find included the informal notes from yesterdays Council call, Kind regards, Bart ccNSO Council Call on 18 February @12:00 UTC Agenda 1) Welcome and Apologies Apologies: Vika Mpisane Hiro Hotta Stephen Deerhake Nigel Roberts Carolina Aguerre Peter Van Roste Debbie Monahan Peter Vergote No Attendance: Margarita Becky Ching Chiao Attendance will be included in Attendance overview. 2) Minutes and Actions Minutes have been sent to Council 5 February 2016, no comments Open Action item: PDP note not published. PDP will be on agenda in Marrakesh 3) Stewardship Transition and Accountability Processes General observations CCWG Proposal to be send to chartering organisations 18 February. CWG-Stewardship requirements are most likely met. CWG will inform Chartering organisations of their findings. Costs associated with process: Byron and other chairs SO/AC on call organised by ICANN (board and staff) Costs have escalated. Initial budget 7 million (very loose estimate). Currently at 15 milliion, Expectation is that once dust has settled it will be at USD 25 million. Little understanding. Cost discussion will be an issue in Marrakesh. Suggestion to include item in SOP WG agenda . 3.1 CWG Stewardship Last week ISTACC call (coordinating group of ccNSO appointed members ICG, CWG and CCWG) Focus of the call aound budget and think about implementation, what will need to happen in short term. Final design team aound SLE. Challanges around getting data for transition. Independent consultant. ICANN is working on it. Some data points are difficult to collect, and some are sensitive. Work on SLE is not yet complete CWG itself has picked up on this issue This topic wil be covered in Marrakesh on Wednesday afternoon. 3.2 Update CCWG Accountability Reiteration of publication date. Discussion on WS 1 proposals will be topic Tuesday and Wednesday afternoo ICANN has asked for decision on Tuesday 8 March. Byron has pushed back. ccNSO not able to provide a decision on Tuesday and will stick to original scheme. Short-circuiting may cause more issues then are resolved by an early decision. Implies decision by Council on Wednesday afternoon . 3.3 Update ICG, if any (Keith) (quoted from chat:) ICG will be meeting on 1 March, to consider the inputs from CWG and CCWG on Accountability and I’m hopeful ICG will be able to deliver the full and final plan (with ccNSO approval) to ICANN Board at Marakesh. There is no formal meeting at ICANN of the ICG, but the ICG will be reporting in to the ICANN community on the Monday at Marrakesh. 3.4 ccNSO decision-making process Significant discussion over time, and fair amount of effort to keep community and Council informed. Significant time dedicated during meetings on the CCWG. Council meetings at regular times, including two special Council meetings. The decision-making process will be very similar to decision making on CWG-Stewardship Proposal 4) Council Updates 4.1 Chair Update * ISTACC call, notes are avaialble. * Call organised by ICANN Board on escalating costs CCWG, in particular Cherine Chalaby vocal. Interesting: due to the size of overrun, Board needs to approve. Unclear/lack of clarity when Board was aware of total amount. Even between Board and Staff unclarity when and how it was shared. Secondly: Not clear and part of discussion: Who is responsible and how costs incurred by WG are managed, get approved and are allocated. It appears ICANN wants to push these responsibilities to SO/ACs and WG chairs. Discussion around project management, costs. Having the discussion is healthy. Uncluear is how discussion is going to play out. * Stakeholder engagement. how to include new stakeholders, volunteer burn-out as driving force. 4.2 Vice-Chair Update No update Keith 4.3 Councilors Update None 4.4 Regional Organizations Update Barrack: invite all members for the ccNSO to The Africa Domain Name System Forum, March 4-6 Action staff: send an invite to all ccTLD 4.5 Staff Update None 5) WG updates 5.1 GRC (Guideline review committee) update (Katrina). GRC has completed work on a set of Guideliens, which be submitted to Council for adoption, after consultation of community present in Marrakesh. GRC focusing on second set around Meetings and appointments. 5.2 CCWG Updates • Use of country and territory names: see agenda • CWG on CCWG Principles: see agenda 5.3 Program WG update (Katrina) Agenda posted, updates to follow. 5.4 EPSRP WG. See notes agenda Other updates: none 6) Liaison Updates Written updates 6.1 GNSO Liaison (Patrick Myles, written updates, to follow). 6.2 ALAC Liaison (Ron Sherwood, written updates, was send on 16 February). 7) Work plan Work plan update. To follow Council meeting In Marrakesh Annual plan session and set priorities. As much as possible all attend Action Bart: Send out Priority list and list of previous workshop meeting on this topic ( Singapore 2014). 8) Date of Next Meetings 8.1 Council meetings during Marrakesh meeting (5 – 10 March 2016) - ccNSO Council Workshop Marrakesh, Sunday 6 March 2016, 10-12.00 local time Roles and Responsibilities, Anaual Work plan - ccNSO Council prep meeting, Sunday 6 March 2016, 12.00-12.30 local time Session throughout week are covered Assigning Council members - ccNSO Council – ALAC, Sunday 6 March 2016, 17.00-17.30 local time Opportunity of two of chartering organisations - ccNSO-GNSO Council meeting, Monday 7 March, 12.15-13.45 local time - ccNSO- Board meeting, Tuesday 8 March, 10.00 - 10.45 Topics To be suggested on list to Byron or Bart 8.2 Council meeting 9 March 2016 Marrakesh, 17.00-18.00 local time (17.00 – 18.00 UTC) Need start thinking about time of Council call need tp accomodate all timezones. 9) AOB None 10) Adjourn Council meeting closed at 12.40 UTC

3 2

Re: [ccnso-council] Informal notes Council meeting 18 February 2016, noon UTC
by Burr, Becky Feb. 19, 2016

Feb. 19, 2016

Dear all - Please accept my late apologies for missing yesterday’s Council call. Becky J. Beckwith Burr Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006 Office: +1.202.533.2932 Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 / neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz> From: Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel(a)icann.org<mailto:bart.boswinkel@icann.org>> Date: Friday, February 19, 2016 at 6:43 AM To: "'ccnso-council@icann. org'" <ccnso-council(a)icann.org<mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org>> Subject: [ccnso-council] Informal notes Council meeting 18 February 2016, noon UTC Dear all, Please find included the informal notes from yesterdays Council call, Kind regards, Bart ccNSO Council Call on 18 February @12:00 UTC Agenda 1) Welcome and Apologies Apologies: Vika Mpisane Hiro Hotta Stephen Deerhake Nigel Roberts Carolina Aguerre Peter Van Roste Debbie Monahan Peter Vergote No Attendance: Margarita Becky Ching Chiao Attendance will be included in Attendance overview. 2) Minutes and Actions Minutes have been sent to Council 5 February 2016, no comments Open Action item: PDP note not published. PDP will be on agenda in Marrakesh 3) Stewardship Transition and Accountability Processes General observations CCWG Proposal to be send to chartering organisations 18 February. CWG-Stewardship requirements are most likely met. CWG will inform Chartering organisations of their findings. Costs associated with process: Byron and other chairs SO/AC on call organised by ICANN (board and staff) Costs have escalated. Initial budget 7 million (very loose estimate). Currently at 15 milliion, Expectation is that once dust has settled it will be at USD 25 million. Little understanding. Cost discussion will be an issue in Marrakesh. Suggestion to include item in SOP WG agenda . 3.1 CWG Stewardship Last week ISTACC call (coordinating group of ccNSO appointed members ICG, CWG and CCWG) Focus of the call aound budget and think about implementation, what will need to happen in short term. Final design team aound SLE. Challanges around getting data for transition. Independent consultant. ICANN is working on it. Some data points are difficult to collect, and some are sensitive. Work on SLE is not yet complete CWG itself has picked up on this issue This topic wil be covered in Marrakesh on Wednesday afternoon. 3.2 Update CCWG Accountability Reiteration of publication date. Discussion on WS 1 proposals will be topic Tuesday and Wednesday afternoo ICANN has asked for decision on Tuesday 8 March. Byron has pushed back. ccNSO not able to provide a decision on Tuesday and will stick to original scheme. Short-circuiting may cause more issues then are resolved by an early decision. Implies decision by Council on Wednesday afternoon . 3.3 Update ICG, if any (Keith) (quoted from chat:) ICG will be meeting on 1 March, to consider the inputs from CWG and CCWG on Accountability and I’m hopeful ICG will be able to deliver the full and final plan (with ccNSO approval) to ICANN Board at Marakesh. There is no formal meeting at ICANN of the ICG, but the ICG will be reporting in to the ICANN community on the Monday at Marrakesh. 3.4 ccNSO decision-making process Significant discussion over time, and fair amount of effort to keep community and Council informed. Significant time dedicated during meetings on the CCWG. Council meetings at regular times, including two special Council meetings. The decision-making process will be very similar to decision making on CWG-Stewardship Proposal 4) Council Updates 4.1 Chair Update * ISTACC call, notes are avaialble. * Call organised by ICANN Board on escalating costs CCWG, in particular Cherine Chalaby vocal. Interesting: due to the size of overrun, Board needs to approve. Unclear/lack of clarity when Board was aware of total amount. Even between Board and Staff unclarity when and how it was shared. Secondly: Not clear and part of discussion: Who is responsible and how costs incurred by WG are managed, get approved and are allocated. It appears ICANN wants to push these responsibilities to SO/ACs and WG chairs. Discussion around project management, costs. Having the discussion is healthy. Uncluear is how discussion is going to play out. * Stakeholder engagement. how to include new stakeholders, volunteer burn-out as driving force. 4.2 Vice-Chair Update No update Keith 4.3 Councilors Update None 4.4 Regional Organizations Update Barrack: invite all members for the ccNSO to The Africa Domain Name System Forum, March 4-6 Action staff: send an invite to all ccTLD 4.5 Staff Update None 5) WG updates 5.1 GRC (Guideline review committee) update (Katrina). GRC has completed work on a set of Guideliens, which be submitted to Council for adoption, after consultation of community present in Marrakesh. GRC focusing on second set around Meetings and appointments. 5.2 CCWG Updates • Use of country and territory names: see agenda • CWG on CCWG Principles: see agenda 5.3 Program WG update (Katrina) Agenda posted, updates to follow. 5.4 EPSRP WG. See notes agenda Other updates: none 6) Liaison Updates Written updates 6.1 GNSO Liaison (Patrick Myles, written updates, to follow). 6.2 ALAC Liaison (Ron Sherwood, written updates, was send on 16 February). 7) Work plan Work plan update. To follow Council meeting In Marrakesh Annual plan session and set priorities. As much as possible all attend Action Bart: Send out Priority list and list of previous workshop meeting on this topic ( Singapore 2014). 8) Date of Next Meetings 8.1 Council meetings during Marrakesh meeting (5 – 10 March 2016) - ccNSO Council Workshop Marrakesh, Sunday 6 March 2016, 10-12.00 local time Roles and Responsibilities, Anaual Work plan - ccNSO Council prep meeting, Sunday 6 March 2016, 12.00-12.30 local time Session throughout week are covered Assigning Council members - ccNSO Council – ALAC, Sunday 6 March 2016, 17.00-17.30 local time Opportunity of two of chartering organisations - ccNSO-GNSO Council meeting, Monday 7 March, 12.15-13.45 local time - ccNSO- Board meeting, Tuesday 8 March, 10.00 - 10.45 Topics To be suggested on list to Byron or Bart 8.2 Council meeting 9 March 2016 Marrakesh, 17.00-18.00 local time (17.00 – 18.00 UTC) Need start thinking about time of Council call need tp accomodate all timezones. 9) AOB None 10) Adjourn Council meeting closed at 12.40 UTC

2 1