Dear all, Please find some informal notes taken during the council prep meeting yesterday. Best regards. Joke Braeken ccNSO Council Prep Meeting Monday 26 June | Boardroom 1-2 1. Welcome congratulations to councilor Hiro Hotta (.jp): winner of the MultiStakeholder Ethos Awards 2. Agenda council meeting on Thursday 3. inter-meeting council decisions 4. PDP Nigel Roberts as chair PDP WG and Eberhard Lisse as vice-chair: nominated by the WG members Update to be provided tomorrow 5. CSC charter Martin and Abdalla are appointed members. Bart suggested to move this to update section of the agenda. Not ready yet for adoption. 6. TLD-OPS steering Cmtee Cristian stepped down. Jacques as new chair, nominated by the members 7. CCWG Accountability budget was approved. This item became obsolete. 8. appointment to NomCom Jörg Schweiger was already reappointed last year, and he is not eligible for reappointmet. We need to issue a call for volunteers. Jörg felt the ccNSO is underrepresented. Demi: 8 of the board members (half of the board) is nominated by the NomCom. There are 7 GNSO members in the NomCom, 5 from At-Large Peter: if we link this with regions, I assume we will be looking for candidates from that region. This will be a difficult exercise. Katrina: if we ask for more members, the bylaws need to be changed. This is not a done deal, but something to think about. 9. CCWG Country & Territory Names final report is out for adoption by the councils. 2-letter codes: preliminary agreement reached by the group that they should be kept for ccTLD use. No agreement could be found on 3-letter names. Different views, even within the members from the same SO. Community consultation and update to be provided tomorrow by Annebeth Lange and Nick Weban Smith. There will be a geo names cross-community session on Tue & Thu afternoon. New gTLD Subsequent Procedures WG: tried to develop a compromise last week. First attempt, but work in progress. In September 2014 the Study Group recommended Council: In light of the need for further work on the treatment of country and territory names, the complexity of the issue at hand and the aforementioned inconsistencies between various ICANN policies, it is also recommended that the ccNSO Council request that the ICANN Board extend the current rule in the new gTLD Applicant Guidebook regarding the exclusion of all country and territory names in all languages, for consecutive rounds of new gTLD applications. Council adopted this recommendation in 2014. Given the establishment of the CCWG UCTN, Council did not pursue this recommendation, awaiting the outcome of the deliberations and recommendations of the CCWG. Demi: we cannot confuse the concept of ccTLDs with the position of governments. Way forward: should it be under the umbrella of the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures WG? They have the mandate, but the ccNSO feels to be an “intruder”, almost. The discussions are very wide, and the geo names are only a very minor part on the agenda of this group. Suggested is to create a new work track for geo names. Another alternative is to have something under umbrella of the ccNSO, a new CCWG would need to have a much wider mandate. The 5th track would fall under GNSO PDP. Outcome would be controlled by GNSO at the end of the day. Perhaps the ccNSO and GAC could have a kind of veto, to be fed into the PDP, to mitigate some of the risks. What would happen if the current rules in the AGB would remain in force? This would be Annebeth’s preferred way forward. Keep the status quo. However, GNSO will not agree. This is something to be discussed at ICANN59 with the GNSO and GAC during the joint sessions. Ching: are we comfortable with the existing GAC early warning mechanism which set to protect country names? if not, what more should we ask? Annebeth: Not sure if we should have strong views on that. Peter VanRoste: CENTR launched a survey to have an overview of what is happening in the ccTLD world, without making assumptions. Not all ccTLDs are on the same page. Young-eum: This is a serious matter. ccTLDs need to educate/inform GAC members of this issue, and get more interest and support from the GAC. Katrina: are we ready to take a decision at ICANN59? Are we ready to think about this? Byron: Discuss this with the ccNSO and broader community, have the temperature of the room 10. Discussion and Adoption: Guideline: ccNSO Procedure for the Exercise of the Empowered Community’s rights to Approve Specified Actions tomorrow there will be a GRC update during the ccNSO Members Meeting 3 alternatives: 1. Only ccNSO Council to take approval action decision 2. ccNSO Council decision on approval action subject to request of members vote and members vote (under rules of the ccNSO) 3. Only members vote (no quorum, simple majority) The deadlines in the bylaws are not compatible with the current rules of the ccNSO. Questionable whether adoption of approval action Guideline can be applied to this Approval Action process, given that is has started without . Luckily this approval action is not controversial 11. Further steps with respect to .cr case .cr sent a letter to the GAC. ccNSO was put in copy. .cr was threatened to be closed. Peter VanRoste Internet & jurisdiction initiative by Bertrand de la Chapelle. A sub-group is discussing cross-boarder impact of law enforcement and policy. The NTIA spoke out on a call, expressing their disbelief that ccTLDs were not aware they should follow instructions from US Law Enforcement Agencies. This is not a .cr problem only. In Europe some countries have explicit laws that a subject from that country should not follow instructions from LEA. Broader debate would be helpful. This is not a stand-alone issue. (note for meeting Programme WG) 12. Participation of the ccNSO in the Abu Dhabi meeting community discussion on Wednesday morning In this context please note the letter from Katrina in response to a query from ICANN’s CEO and President with respect to the need for broader meeting venue selection criteria. The core of that letter was that first the current meeting strategy needs to be evaluated (after ICANN 60) and then define the criteria for selection of meeting venues 13. Progress Terms of Reference review CSC charter 14. item 10 and 14 to be united in one item 15. joint meeting with GNSO council Update amendment charter CWG Internet Governance will be something the GNSO has some potentially tougher questions on 16. CCWG Auction Proceeds March 2015: ccNSO decided not to participate. Then we changed our minds. 3 ccNSO members to this group. Ching as co-chair, and Peter Vergote. Matthieu has left .fr and stepped down from this CCWG. We launched a call for volunteers, did not receive any applications. Ching’s term on the council expires this autumn. So he will not be a ccNSO rep on this CCWG anymore. According to the charter, we are supposed to have 3 members to this CCWG Stephen Deerhake and Pablo Rodriguez volunteered. Joke Braeken ccNSO Policy Advisor joke.braeken@icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org> Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccNSO Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/ http://ccnso.icann.org