Dear All,
Please find below the notes taken during the council meeting from Thursday 18 May (12 UTC)
Best regards,
Joke
Apologies: Peter Van Roste, Ben Fuller, Nigel Roberts (leaving early), Margarita Valdes, Abibu Ntahigiye
NOTES
1.
Welcome and apologies
2.
Minutes and Actions
Minutes from the previous meeting were published.
Action items from the previous meeting:
- draft to increase travel funding slots
- CCWG IG questions
- Letter to the Board
- ALAC liaison: ALAC chair has no issues with the current situation.
- table: items to be included in each council meeting
- update wiki
- GRC is working on an update of the council responsibilities guideline
- issue report to be published for public comment. Will be done by next Wednesday 24 May
3.
Overview inter-meeting council decisions
- RDS/WHOIS review: letter sent to board
- submission OPS Plan & Budget
- Jordan appointed as co-chair CCWG Accountability
- 2 calls for volunteers. to replace Mathieu Weill on CCWG-Accountability and the CCWG new gTLD Auction Proceeds
- discussion next steps EPSRP
- draft FAQ to GAC
4.
ccNSO as decisional participant update
4.1.
Approval Action process
ICANN Board adopts an approval action, this kicks off the entire process. They publish it then for public comment (40 days). When we learn about this event, the secretariat will update website and wiki. The council informs the community. Once the 40-day period is over, ICANN staff analyses the public comments received. The Board then decides on the approval action, and submit it to the EC Administration. The ECA can then ask the board to organise a community telco (optional step), or they can direct ICANN to organise a community forum (as F2F at ICANN meeting, or telco). Anyone can ask questions during the community forum, and at the end of the ICANN-meeting a 21 day period starts. The ccNSO council then has to decide to either support this action, reject it, or abstain.
Problem: the 21 day period is in the bylaws, we cannot change that. However, 21 days is too short, but according to the rules of the ccNSO, any decision of the council may be questioned by the community. If 10% of the members request so, there will be a member vote (currently 17 members). we then need to organise a voting, and at least 50% of the members need to vote. This takes at least 14 days. If we do not come up with a decision, we will neither support nor reject the action.
Therefor the GRC proposes 2 alternatives to the voting (included in the draft guideline):
1) we listen closely to the community and then take a decision (preferred way forward)
2) we take a decision early in the process, and allow members to object, and then have time only for 1 round of voting. Likely we will not get 50% of the votes, so it means we will be neutral, and do not take a decision.
Community Forum will be held at 8 am on Tuesday, in Johannesburg (ICANN59).
Where the guidelines explicitly say the rules do not apply, there is a mandatory consultation. In the other case it is expected to have a consultaton, but not mandatory.
Byron: Challenges regarding the authority to schedule the community forum. Will the EC have the voice that it needs?
Stephen: meeting format is not adjusted to reality, now that the new bylaws are in place. Considerable further discussion needed with ICANN regarding the scheduling. Most likely we have community forums at 2 out of 3 meetings, and the meeting format is not adjusted to that.
4.2.
ECA update
Correspondence form ALAC and GNSO nominating their board members. Will be sent to John Jeffreys later today. Similar document expected regarding ccNSO Board seat 11. Will be sent out after this call.
5.
Council response to SO/AC accountability public comment WS2
We have received a SO/AC accountability report. The GRC looked into this, and has not found any issues. The GRC suggest to support the direction of travel expressed in the document by the CCWG.
Byron: recommendations to continue are 3-fold. They question the practical ability to continue. Accountability roundtable might be a significant challenge to put into operation. Concerned that they already mention now that they will be challenged. Even the CCWG has a sense that the conclusion is foregone already. We should flag it as a concern.
6.
CSC charter review
Small team needed: draft team that prepares the parameters for the review. . Max 2 or 3 from our side. We have reached out to Martin Boyle and Maarten Simon. Maarten cannot join unfortunately, and we are waiting feedback from Martin B.
Byron: very important that we as a community get what we need from the CSC. Byron encourages people to participate in this review. Important work, but not a huge amount.
Another call for volunteers will be sent out once the parameters for the review are in place.
7.
EPSRP update
Thank you to Hiro and Wafa to be on the working team. Strategy was discussed, on how to ensure we come up with a mutually acceptable solution with SSAC. They expect to have 2 people as well in the team. We almost finalised the draft description of work.
8.
PDP Progress
Call for volunteers for this WG was closed. List is being displayed in the AdobeConnect room.
Draft resolution
Move? Alejandra
Seconder? Byron
Against? none
Abstentions? none
All in favour
9.
Extension CCWG Accountability mandate
10.
The CCWG-Accountability WS2 Co-Chairs would welcome approval or support of the ccNSO to extend the mandate of the CCWG prior to the finalization of the ICANN FY18 budget and remain at the disposal of the ccNSO to provide any additional information or presentations.
We have issued a call for volunteers to replace Mathieu on the CCWG. We have received no response to that call for volunteers. This will be one of the topics for discussion in Johannesburg. (Accountability session, ICANN59)
Broader problem is the lack of qualified volunteers.
ATRT3 review: we are asked to nominate 1 to 7 candidates. Currently there is only 1 person that receives endorsement from the ccNSO (Demi Getschko)
We also need to replace Mathieu on the CCWG new gTLD auction proceeds. Ching is co-chair, and then we have Peter Vergote (.be). Ching his term ends at ICANN60.
Ching: more comprehensive review will start now on the mechanism and the scope of the funds. how to govern the use of those funds? (200 plus million available to the benefit of the community)
at ICANN59: decision to be taken on how to proceed regarding the CCWG accountability mandate, and how to deal with the issue of lack of volunteers.
11.
ICANN59 meeting agenda
==> Block schedule with ccNSO relevant sessions.
Overview of the current draft agenda.
Main highlights: split of the WG updates into cross-community updates, and ccNSO WG updates
No RO update. No legal session, no marketing session.
The ccNSO as decisional participant is a main topic in this ccNSO members meeting
Call for volunteers ccTLD news: 3 responses (.rs, .eu, .cn)
==> Cross-community sessions: 3 hosted by the ccNSO. interest from other SO/ACs
New: the other SO/ACs want to be involved in the planning of the cross-community topics. Interest from the GNSO and GAC regarding GDPR, interest mainly from GAC regarding who sets ICANN’s priorities. Talks with Jordan, Peter and Giovanni are ongoing regarding the planning of these sessions.
One of the ccNSO proposals for cross-community topics for ICANN59 was entitled “Rejection Action Petitions: Is the EC able to Exercise its Rights under the ICANN Bylaws?” Katrina informed the ICANN59 planning team that since there seemed to be little interest from other communities on this topic, the ccNSO preferred to withdraw this proposal. Nonetheless, the ccNSO believes this is the topic of the utmost importance. Therefor it has been decided to limit the scope to the ccNSO only, and run it as a ccNSO internal session during the ccNSO Members Meeting. Anyone interested to see how the ccNSO intends to deal with Rejection petitions and related issues is welcome to attend. Currently the session is tentatively scheduled for Wednesday, 28 June, block 2.
==> WG meetings
scheduled for Monday. PDP WG will meet on Thursday.
Joint session with GAC. Topics for discussion include:
- update CWG-UCTN
- update PDP
12.
CSC and RZERC update
13.
Council updates, RO, Secretariat
None
14.
WG update
Thanks to Alejandra for executing a difficult task
GRC: draft approval action guideline is currently work in progress.
Needs to be adopted in Johannesburg latest.
CCWG-AP
The group looked into the initial response to the charter question. The actual working plan will be sent to different SO/ACs before the end of this week. Response to the Board letter has been submitted as well: thanking them for their guidance. Concerns regarding administration costs for running the funds.
15.
Liaison updates
16.
Next meetings
- at ICANN59 (Thursday, block 1)
- 20 July (12 UTC)
- 21 September (12 UTC)
17.
AOB
Stephen expects to share a monthly written update with the council. Comments are welcome.
18.
Closure
Thank you. Please continue to provide feedback and input.
Joke Braeken
ccNSO Policy Advisor
Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccNSO
Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/