Dear All,
Please find below the notes from the
ccNSO Council Meeting from 12 January 2017, 19.00 UTC
Best regards.
Joke Braeken
ccNSO Policy Advisor
Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccNSO
Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/
1) Welcome and Apologies
happy New Year by the chair
èAdministrative Topics
2) Minutes and Actions
Minutes circulated on 6 Jan. No comments received.
All action items complete.
Any questions/comments? Feel free to jump in.
3) Overview inter-meeting Council decisions
SSR2: top 3 members appointed to review team.
If there is the need by other SO/AC chairs to fill additional slots, the other candidates are also put forward. (to be discussed under item 7 as well)
Katrina to inform staff and chair about our selection.
Byron:
logistics/timing - timing and process going forward from here?
Katrina:
your question will be addressed under item 7.
4) Appointments and call volunteers
4.1 Appointment ccNSO Liaison to ALAC
2 candidates: Wafa & Ben.
Their application material was presented to the council.
We need to select one of them by the end of next week. Secretariat to launch the process tomorrow. Deadline to submit preference: end next week.
4.2 Appointment Volunteers Ethos Awards Committee
Nigel & Margarita put their names forward. Thank you.
Movers? Ching
Seconders? Byron / Alejandra
Against? no-one
Abstentions? no-one
4.3 Appointment (interim) co-chair CCWG Auction Proceeds
Mathieu, Peter, Ching: asked for their opinion on the interim chair. Do we need one? If yes, who volunteers?
Ching volunteered to be interim co-chair, Mathieu supported him. Peter objects for the ccNSO to appoint a co-chair to this CCWG.
Peter:
I am not against someone from ccNSO as co-chair.
just a warning. It is about funds that do not come from our members, but organisations under the umbrella of the GNSO. However, it is already in archives of GNSO: there is already a reference to Ching as co-chair. Would be wrong to change our minds now. This
is an interim co-chair, we might reconsider our position later.
Ching:
Mathieu and I agree on the caution Peter warned us for. I shared this concern with Jonathan Robertson (co-chair). He is aware. Positive sign that ccNSO wants to send its voice to this WG.
Katrina:
we already agreed to participate. at this point we have an interim co-chair. we could perhaps revisit this in Johannesburg. We could decide either not to have a co-chair, or to remove the "interim" from the title.
4.4 Call for volunteers ccNSO liaison to GNSO
Patrick Myles will step down. Needs to be replaced.
Movers? Nigel
Seconded? Alejandra
Any comments/questions?
Acknowledgement of good job Patrick did by Ching and Barrack
è Substantive topics
5) Adoption Final report and closure WG EPSRP, submission of Final report to the ICANN Board of Directors
WG prepared a report for public comment. Support from ALAC, GAC, Verisign. Critical document submitted by SSAC. Discussions in HYD resulted in an updated report by SSAC. WG asked to adjust its report, if deemed necessary. They adjusted the report indeed. Added conservatism principle, and RFC6912 requirements should be taken into account. Minor further tweaks. The updated report by the WG was submitted to the council.
Mover? Stephen
Seconder? Byron
Against ? none
Abstentions? none
All in favour
Hiro was on this WG. Thank you.
6) Organizational review ccNSO and timeline.
We need to undergo this review, done by independent examiner. We need to have a working party: 1 councilor from each region + 1 NomCom Council member.
Working Party to be in place by the end of next week.
Peter Van Roste:
I am invited to the RIPE roundtable in BRU on 24/01.
Discussing accountability of different communities. Also GAC reps there. They asked me to talk about accountability and organisational reviews in ccTLDs. Jean-Jacques Sahel is covering accountability reviews. Might be good to update them on the ccNSO review. Are any slides available?
Bart:
on previous call we shared some slides we received from ICANN staff. This is public. On the ICANN website there is a high level overview of reviews. First step: council members who will participate need to get up to speed, then we can have a meeting with the board committee (OECD). Doubt we could organise a call before the 24th. This meeting with
OECD will define the scope of the review itself. We are well ahead of the curve at this stage.
7) Clarification processes and procedures Specific Reviews
answering Byron's question:
Katrina will submit names of 3 selected candidates + the additional 3.
The process is not clear. This is a problem. Supposed to be described in Operating Standards, but these are not in place yet. Katrina tried to ask for more info on the current status from Karen. She was OOO this week.
The call for volunteers to join SSR2 was launched under the old bylaws. The selection process and all upcoming steps are supposed to be handled according to the new bylaws, and this is where we need to operating standards.
a second call was launched: registry directory services (old WHOIS). Some candidates already sought ccNSO endorsement. We already speak about the content of the work, whereas the process itself is not clear.
Bart:
I will pass the bit from the old bylaws on the operating standards. It is not just the nomination and selection process that is guided by the OS, but also the mode of working.
SSR review and the directory services will take place for a year, in parallel. Then the next 4/5 years nothing will happen in this area. Both reviews are in a "frameless world".
Byron:
question answered, thank you.
8) Updates CSC, RZERC and EC AC
8.1 Update CSC – Byron Holland
Byron:
we have just received the most recent report from PTI. Very recent. They have met their SSLA to 99,4%
CSC will meet on Monday, for a follow up with PTI. Nothing negative to report from a daily operating perspective. Annual survey: needs to meet the need of the community. Mandate requires us to focus on next set of items on our agenda. Update in CPH to broader ccNSO and other groups
We get what we need from staff in a timely manner. Adequately/promptly attended to our requests.
Answer to question from Stephen: CSC has not commented on the budget as a group. but individual members did. We will discuss the budget in the meeting with PTI on Monday.
8.2 Update EC AC/ GRC related work – Stephen Deerhake
did outreach to ECA reps. Reached out to John Jeffrey and Xavier Calvez. no formal actions taken by ECA. no requests received from any other SO/AC.
Annex D.
Guideline to be split into several different guidelines (as specified in Annex D)
GRC agreed to focus immediately on the Rejection Decision Guideline. PTI FY18 budget development is well under way. ccNSO needs to be able to react.
Concerns:
- timelines imposed by bylaws require us to adjust our decision-making process
- ECA needs to self-organise.
- Lack of communication between ECA decisional Support members
Questions?
Katrina: lack of communication between members: do we have enough support from ICANN staff?
Byron, Demi and Katrina could raise this in the call with Göran tomorrow.
Stephen:
Mailing list needed. need to self-organise sooner rather than later.
The FY18 PTI budget will pop up, and the EC will be asked for objections. Concern is that communities are not ready to react. Default: ICANN prevails, unless community acts within the timeframe and acts under requirements of Annex D. We are not ready yet to do so. Please nudge ICANN. I hope to hear back from GNSO in next couple of days. We need to push on this hard before CPH.
Katrina:
To be discussed in CPH as well, and during all the meetings with other SO/ACs (ALAC, GNSO)
8.3 RZERC No update (no change since previous meeting)
9) WG updates
9.1 Update CCWGs
o CCWG Accountability (written update Mathieu Weill, will be send over the course of the week)
o CCWG Use of country and territory names (written update)
o CCWG Internet Governance (Young Eum Lee)
9.2 Update GRC (Katrina Sataki)
9.3 Update Programme WG (Alejandra Reynoso)
short update. Last week meeting with ICANN meeting team. GAC raised a concern to have HITS on Wednesday: because that is when they have their drafting session (GAC submitted 2 HIT proposals)
Alejandra tried to avoid conflict with Tech Day. Tech Day scheduled - during block 3 - a DDOS session. Alejandra liaising with Eberhard whether this HIT is a conflict with Tech Day or not. Underserved regions: not a HIT.
Council meeting: on Wednesday block 5, unless something changes to the main ICANN block schedule. HIT by ccNSO & GNSO on Thursday morning, block 1. Session leaders have not yet confirmed their availability for Thursday morning. Maybe we can move it back to Wednesday?
10) Council Updates
10.1 Chair Update
10.2 Vice-Chair Update
10.3 Councilors Update
10.4 Regional Organizations Update
to be submitted to the mailing list. We are running out of time.
11) Liaison Updates
11.1 GNSO Update (Patrick Myles).
11.2 ALAC Update (Interim: Maureen Hilyard, circulated).
12) Next meetings
• 9 February 2017, 11:00 UTC
(not noon, was a mistake)
• Copenhagen meetings
o Sunday, 12 March 2017, Workshop and prep meeting f-2-f meeting, Copenhagen ICANN 58,
noon local time, lunch included.
♣ Workshop to discuss:
• Roles and responsibilities ccNSO Councilors, includes prep chair and vice – chairs election, membership standing committees
• Annual Work Plan
♣ Prep meeting:
Prep discussions and assignment of leads on core topics meeting.
o ALAC-ccNSO Council meeting (tentatively) Sunday 12 March 17.00 local)
o ccNSO-GNSO Councils meeting, Monday 13 March, 12.15-13.45 local time (lunch meeting).
o Board- ccNSO meeting TBC’ed.
o ccNSO-GAC meeting, tentatively Tuesday 14 March.
• Council meeting 15 March 17.00 Local time,
alternatively Thursday 16 March 9 am local time.
Meetings for the rest of the year to be fixed as well. Overlap with RO meetings to be avoided.
13) AOB
Nigel:
will send an email.
14) Closure
Thank you.