- Ccnso-council - lists.icann.org

18-2015: Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) - Input Needed on its Proposed Accountability Enhancements (Work Stream 1)
by Gabriella Schittek May 8, 2015

May 8, 2015

Dear Councillors, Please, let me know by Monday, 11 May in case you do not agree with Triage recommendation to request for input 18-2015: Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) - Proposed Accountability Enhancements (Work Stream 1). Kind regards, Gabi == Topic: 18-2015: Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) - Input Needed on its Proposed Accountability Enhancements (Work Stream 1) Originator: Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) Summary of request: The CCWG-Accountability requests community feedback on the proposed enhancements to ICANN's accountability framework it has identified as essential to happen or be committed to before the IANA Stewardship Transition takes place (Work Stream 1). Input is south to improve the proposal of the CCWG-Accountability and help it carry on with the next steps, including Chartering Organizations' endorsement of the CCWG-Accountability output before it is submitted to the ICANN Board. https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-3-2015-05-04-en Date received: 5 May 2015 Last day for Comments/input/response, if any: 3 June 2015 Recommended action, if any: Send to email lists for information (done); staff to assist in distributing all the relevant explanatory materials, including materials prepared by, e.g., ROs. Expertise needed, if any: Various Date of submission to Council: 8 May 2015 Last date of Council decision: 11 May 2015 Impact on ccNSO/ccTLDs: High

1 0

Re: [ccnso-council] Fwd: [ccnso-members] Re: [ccTLDcommunity] Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) - Input Needed on its Proposed Accountability Enhancements (Work Stream 1)
by Nigel Roberts May 7, 2015

May 7, 2015

*VERY* Well put. I just think I have been spoiled by the stellar abilities of Keith (in particular), Becky, Byron, Lesley and others (in DRD, FoI, and now Council) to chair meetings and enable the working-togther of members with disparate approaches and disparate positions towards unanimity, (let alone rough consensus!) I must be naive and unrealistic in my expectationg that WGs that are broader than just within the ccNSO can do the same . . . On 05/07/2015 05:39 AM, Barrack Otieno wrote: > +1 to Lesley, we should strive to accommodate each other , we can look > towards achieving some rough consensus. > > Regards > > On 5/7/15, Keith Davidson <keith(a)internetnz.net.nz> wrote: >> >> Agree Lesley, that we should re-evaluate the timeline in light of this. >> But what has happened cannot be un-happened and I fear there are some >> irresolvable differences in perspectives that have arisen. >> >> Cheers >> >> Keith >> >> On 7/05/2015 10:15 a.m., Lesley Cowley wrote: >>> I suggest that the NTIA letter posted just now may be helpful. It states >>> that “We have never viewed the September 30 date as a deadline, but have >>> stated from the start that the transition planning should proceed >>> according to whatever schedule the community sets” >>> >>> Accordingly, I think we should set a different deadline if it is apparent >>> that the current one is creating all sorts of problems. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Lesley >>> >>> On 6 May 2015, at 23:07, Keith Davidson <keith(a)internetnz.net.nz> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 6/05/2015 9:16 p.m., Nigel Roberts wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Fellow-Councillors >>>>> >>>>> I am becoming increasingly concerned about the road that the IANA >>>>> transition is taking, and in particular, the fundamental issue of >>>>> Accountability. >>>>> >>>>> I, as have other council members, have had the privilege on working >>>>> with >>>>> Dr Lisse on the Delegation WG and the Framework of Interpretation. >>>>> Under >>>>> Keith's chairmanship we fully explored and respected differing >>>>> viewpoints, and did not need to resort to ad hominem complaints at any >>>>> time. >>>> <snip> >>>> >>>> The working groups I chaired were fortunate to not have hard deadlines, >>>> and allowed us the luxury of exploring and teasing out issues from all >>>> participants and respondents to the consultations. >>>> >>>> Sadly, the TLD community has not had this luxury and has been battling a >>>> ridiculous timeline on the IANA transition. >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> Keith >>>> >>> >>> >> > >

3 4

Letter NTIA to ICG
by Bart Boswinkel May 7, 2015

May 7, 2015

Dear all, Please find included for your information the letter from NTIA to ICG on the timing of the IANA Stewardship Transition process This was discussed at todays ISTACC call, Kind regards, Bart

2 2

Sponsors still sought for ccTLD Cocktail Event in Buenos Aires
by Kristina Nordstrom May 7, 2015

May 7, 2015

Dear all, We are still looking for sponsors for the ccNSO organised ccTLD Community Cocktail on Tuesday night, 23rd June in Buenos Aires. Since the cocktail depends on it I thought I should let you know that so far no offers of sponsorship has come in. Should your registry be interested in sponsoring this event, please let me know as soon as possible. Any amount is welcome and appreciated! Kind regards, Kristina

1 0

Fwd: [ccnso-members] Re: [ccTLDcommunity] Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) - Input Needed on its Proposed Accountability Enhancements (Work Stream 1)
by Nigel Roberts May 6, 2015

May 6, 2015

Fellow-Councillors I am becoming increasingly concerned about the road that the IANA transition is taking, and in particular, the fundamental issue of Accountability. I, as have other council members, have had the privilege on working with Dr Lisse on the Delegation WG and the Framework of Interpretation. Under Keith's chairmanship we fully explored and respected differing viewpoints, and did not need to resort to ad hominem complaints at any time. I have also had the dubious privilege of reading the CCWG email list traffic as the WG has gone about its work. It makes me sad, that having worked in a successful WG, that this equally important topic cannot be run in a similar way. Colleagues, from all I see, Dr Lisse's concerns are accurate, albeit expressed in his "usual charming bedside manner". The Charter of the WG DOES appear to be being ignored. Deadlines DO appear to be being imposed artificially and unilaterally. In Westmister Parliaments, there is a controversial procedure used by Governments known as a "Guillotine motion" in order to restrict debate and force through Government business and the Government view. For example, in Canada, see http://www.parl.gc.ca/procedure-book-livre/document.aspx?sbdid=68a2776a-f2a… It now emerged that that ICANN can Guillotine the Public accountability discussion, without consulting other CCWG membersm, merely on the say-so of two staff members who are not named. This is quite wrong, in my view. But even if it were right (which it is not) the PERCEPTION is all wrong. It fails 'the smell test'. It's well, UNACCOUNTABILITY. To my mind, the road ICANN is taking is leading me to seeking a meeting with my government with a view to asking them to make formal representations to NTIA that ICANN do not appear to be proposing the required accountability measures to permit transition. If they can't be accountable when proposing accountability measures, they sure as eggs are eggs won't be accountable once they've got complete control. To my mind, we need to be showing the sort of leadership that won us the ccNSO in its present form, in 2000-2005. Thoughts? Any suggestions on what Council, and the ccTLD community should be doing? We should CERTAINLY be looking to discuss this deeply in BA. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [ccnso-members] Re: [ccTLDcommunity] Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) - Input Needed on its Proposed Accountability Enhancements (Work Stream 1) Date: Wed, 06 May 2015 09:24:25 +0100 From: Dr Eberhard Lisse <el(a)lisse.na> Reply-To: el(a)lisse.na Organization: Dr Eberhard W Lisse To: ccnso-members(a)icann.org, cctldcommunity(a)cctld-managers.org, cctldworld(a)icann.org CC: accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org, directors(a)omadhina.net Dear Byron, Dear Colleagues, it is unfortunate that Mr Weill now becomes emotional. The Charter clearly states: Section V: Rules of Engagement Decision-Making Methodologies: In developing its Proposal(s), work plan and any other reports, the CCWG-Accountability shall seek to act by consensus. Consensus calls should always make best efforts to involve all members (the CCWG-Accountability or sub-working group). The Chair(s) shall be responsible for designating each position as having one of the following designations: a) Full Consensus - a position where no minority disagrees; identified by an absence of objection b) Consensus – a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree In the absence of Full Consensus, the Chair(s) should allow for the submission of minority viewpoint(s) and these, along with the consensus view, shall be included in the report. I do not see any room for ambiguity here ("any other reports", "involve all members", "designating each position" minority viewpoints "shall be included in the report") I most certainly not have filed countless objections (the Co-Chairs were probably too busy ignoring them rather than them) and most certainly not "since it started". I have diligently participated and most constructively which was stated by all three Co-Chairs (when it suited them, obviously) during and after the Frankfurt and Istanbul meetings. I have however since Singapore come to believe that we are doing this wrong and have voiced this in Singapore repeatedly. My objections mainly concern two issues, namely the refusal to deal with the fundamental issues of IANA/ICANN accountability. And the process ie the rushing to an arbitrary deadline without careful consideration. As a member of the FoI Wg I have participated in what must be considered the yardstick on thorough and considered review and debate. It is telling that instead of dealing with the substance of my concerns, innuendo and allegation are being used. As if it was ok to do whatever one wants to but it was not ok to talk about it. Sadness indeed. I strongly urge ccTLD Managers to soundly reject this rubbish "report" which tinkers on the surface, with the effect of tossing ccTLD Managers a few bones on issues that don't concern them really, and to demand that the fundamental questions that affect us ccTLD Managers are asked and answered. greetings, el On 2015-05-06 06:44, Mathieu Weill wrote: > Dear Byron, Dear Colleagues, > > To set the record straight, Dr Lisse's statements about the > violation of the CCWG Accountability Charter and the dynamics of > the group are a misrepresentation of facts. Speaking of facts, we > are more than happy to provide details in response to the > accusations as well as explanations we gave to Dr Lisse on the > public mailing list, to support our statement. > > We would also note for the benefit of readers of these lists that > Dr Lisse has filed countless objections against almost everything > the CCWG did since it started. Participants and members of the > CCWG have expressed to the co-chairs that they consider Dr Lisse's > behaviour as an attempt to discredit the work of fellow volunteers > and derail the work of the group. > > We will not burden everyone on the lists that were cc-ed with > details, especially when we have the opportunity to discuss and > engage on substance. But we wanted to set this record straight, > and express our deep sadness about the use of such a process > within the ccTLD community. > > That being said, we encourage other ccTLD members and participants > in the CCWG to express their views related to the substance of the > proposals. > > Best, > Thomas Rickert and Mathieu Weill, co-chairs [...] -- Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse \ / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist (Saar) el(a)lisse.NA / * | Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell) PO Box 8421 \ / Bachbrecht, Namibia ;____/

5 12

Doodle for Informal Council Call 28 May
by Kristina Nordstrom May 6, 2015

May 6, 2015

Dear all, As per the agreement on the previous Council Call, this Doodle was created in order to find a good time for an informal Council call at the end of May to adress the topic of the CWG 2nd draft proposal public comments. The proposed date is 28 May and the suggested times are 12:00 and 20:00 UTC. http://doodle.com/pkacbxdagrgqdnzq Please fill it in as soon as possible. Thanks and kind regards, Kristina

1 0

ICANN Calls with Community on Public Comments Submitted on the Draft FY16 Operating Plan and Budget
by Gabriella Schittek May 6, 2015

May 6, 2015

Dear all, ICANN will be holding community calls during which the comments submitted on the Draft FY16 Operating Plan and Budget will be presented by the submitters to ICANN Staff, in order to enhance the understanding of the comments, and thus supporting an improved response quality. This is a suggested step that addresses community feedback received in the past and addresses ATRT2 recommendations (#12.1 and #12.5). Each call will be public, focused on each organization that submitted comments, and will be attended by at least 1 Board Finance Committee member. Additional board members may attend based on availability. The Staff and Board members attending will primarily LISTEN and ASK clarifying questions as needed. Responses to public comments will not be provided during these calls, unless the comments are factual with a very specific and simple answer. The call with the ccNSO SOP WG is scheduled for Friday, 8 May at 6.00 UTC however, each call is entirely open to anyone interested in participating. Please submit a request to controller(a)icann.org to receive dial-in instructions for the call. See more at: https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2015-05-05-en Kind regards, Gabi

1 0

Fwd: Re: [ccTLDcommunity] Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) - Input Needed on its Proposed Accountability Enhancements (Work Stream 1)
by Nigel Roberts May 5, 2015

May 5, 2015

-------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Re: [ccTLDcommunity] Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) - Input Needed on its Proposed Accountability Enhancements (Work Stream 1) Date: Tue, 05 May 2015 08:26:07 +0100 From: Nigel Roberts <nigel(a)channelisles.net> To: cctldcommunity(a)cctld-managers.org Dear all I realise that as a simple member of the council I'm not that up on the internal and constitutional niceties of the different and confusingly named alphabet-soup working groups busily campaigning to persuade the NTIA emperor to relinquish his not-that-old clothes, but I do really need some help with a couple of questions. Perhaps ccTLDcommunity members can help me here, please? 1. Is the role of "ICANN Global Leader" defined in the Charter of this particular WG, please? Or alternatively, in the ICANN by-laws? 2. What does it actually mean in terms of powers held by a Global Leader over, for example, members of the ccNSO? 3. Where, in the Charter, or the by-laws, does it specify that a "Global leader", whether acting alone or in concert with another "global leader" can abbreviate the required minimum consultation? Surely, if a minumum is required, well, it's required, isn't it? I look forward to being enlightened. Nigel > .. a second Public Comment period is > planned for July, and will be a full 40-day period. Because this (first) > Public Comment period is less than the required 40-day minimum, it has > been approved by two ICANN Global Leaders.

2 1

FW: [Cctldworld] [CWG-Stewardship] REMINDER: tomorrow! WEBINAR: Further Discussion on the CWG-Stewardship 2nd Draft Proposal for Public Comment
by Bart Boswinkel May 5, 2015

May 5, 2015

From: Lise Fuhr <lise.fuhr(a)difo.dk<mailto:lise.fuhr@difo.dk>> Date: Tuesday 5 May 2015 18:56 To: "cctldcommunity(a)cctld-managers.org<mailto:cctldcommunity@cctld-managers.org>" <cctldcommunity(a)cctld-managers.org<mailto:cctldcommunity@cctld-managers.org>>, "cctldworld(a)icann.org<mailto:cctldworld@icann.org>" <cctldworld(a)icann.org<mailto:cctldworld@icann.org>>, "ccnso-members(a)icann.org<mailto:ccnso-members@icann.org>" <ccnso-members(a)icann.org<mailto:ccnso-members@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Cctldworld] [CWG-Stewardship] REMINDER: tomorrow! WEBINAR: Further Discussion on the CWG-Stewardship 2nd Draft Proposal for Public Comment Dear All, Please be aware of this follow-up series of webinars on the content of the 2nd draft proposal, and possibility of asking questions to the draft. Best regards, Lise ccTLD Co-chair of the CWG Fra: cwg-stewardship-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] På vegne af Grace Abuhamad Sendt: 5. maj 2015 18:43 Til: cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> Cc: Brenda Brewer Emne: [CWG-Stewardship] REMINDER: tomorrow! WEBINAR: Further Discussion on the CWG-Stewardship 2nd Draft Proposal for Public Comment All- Please recirculate this announcement to your communities. We want to make sure as many people as possible can take advantage of the webinar tomorrow and Thursday. Thank you- Grace Original link: https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2015-04-28-en WEBINAR: Further Discussion on the CWG-Stewardship 2nd Draft Proposal for Public Comment The Cross Community Working Group to Develop an IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal for Naming Related Functions (CWG-Stewardship) released its 2nd draft proposal for public comment on 22 April<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/cwg-stewardship-draft-proposal-2015-0…>. Following the opening of the public comment proceeding, the CWG-Stewardship Chairs hosted two briefing webinars on 24 April<https://community.icann.org/x/ryYnAw>. The briefing webinars on 24 April focused on the CWG-Stewardship work process, development of the 2nd draft proposal, and provided an overview of the contents and proposed structural model. The CWG-Stewardship Chairs will now host a follow-up series of webinars to brief interested community members on the content of the 2nd draft proposal, and to respond to questions that have surfaced since the briefings on 24 April. These two webinars may help further inform community submissions in time for the close of the public comment period on 20 May. These two webinars will be held at different times to facilitate participation across time zones. The webinars will take place on: · 6 May from 13:00 - 14:30 UTC (time zone converter here<http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=CWG-Stewardship+We…>) · 7 May from 06:00 - 07:30 UTC (time zone converter here<http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=CWG-Stewardship+We…>) ________________________________ Webinar Details & How to Attend The webinars will be run in an Adobe Connect room<https://icann.adobeconnect.com/cwg-iana/>. If you are interested in attending the webinar and would like to receive dial-in details, please send an email to brenda.brewer(a)icann.org<mailto:brenda.brewer@icann.org> and indicate which time you would like to attend the webinar. Please note that the webinar will be conducted in English and will be recorded and transcribed. Subsequently the transcripts will be translated in the 5 UN languages and posted on the CWG-Stewardship Wiki here<https://community.icann.org/x/V4E0Aw>. ________________________________ Further information For further information about the CWG-Stewardship's work, please seehttps://community.icann.org/x/37fhAg. For further information about the ICG and the IANA Stewardship Transition, please seehttps://www.icann.org/stewardship.

1 0

Webinar Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability): Presentation on the Draft Report for Public Comment
by Gabriella Schittek May 5, 2015

May 5, 2015

Dear all, WEBINAR: Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability): Presentation on the Draft Report for Public Comment4 May 2015 The Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability was established to initiate a related process to the IANA Stewardship Transition process to ensure that ICANN's accountability and transparency commitments to the global Internet community are maintained and enhanced in the absence of its historical contractual relationship with the U.S. Government. This report for public comment represents the current work product of the CCWG-Accountability. It is focused on draft Work Stream 1 recommendations (Work Stream 1 is the CCWG-Accountability's work on changes to ICANN's accountability arrangements which must be in place, or committed to, prior to the IANA Stewardship transition), which were the focus of the first five months of work (from December 2014 until May 2015). These recommendations are not presented as the consensus of the CCWG-Accountability at this point. The CCWG-Accountability is seeking confirmation of its approach and guidance upon several options. The CCWG-Accountability will hold two identical webinars at different times to facilitate participation across time zones. The webinars will take place on: * 11 May from 11:00 12:30 UTC (time zone converter here <http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=CCWG-Accountabili ty+Webinar&iso=20150511T11&p1=1440&ah=1&am=30>) * 11 May from 19:00 20:30 UTC (time zone converter here <http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=CCWG-Accountabili ty+Webinar&iso=20150511T19&p1=1440&ah=1&am=30>) ________________________________________ Webinar Details & How to AttendThe webinars will be run in an Adobe Connect room <https://icann.adobeconnect.com/accountability/>. If you are interested in attending the webinar and would like to receive dial-in details, please send an email to brenda.brewer(a)icann.org and indicate which time you would like to attend the webinar. Please note that the webinar will be conducted in English and will be recorded and transcribed. Subsequently the transcripts will be translated in the 5 UN languages and posted on the CCWG-Accountability Wiki here <https://community.icann.org/x/rYQ0Aw>. ________________________________________ Further informationFor further information about the CCWG-Accountability's work, please see https://community.icann.org/x/ogDxAg. For further information about the related IANA Stewardship Transition process, please see https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability.

1 0