ACTION ITEMS Action item #1 Kim will circulate a calendar invite to Council for the At Large Policy Session. (completed) Action item #2: Secretariat and Stephen to invite Eberhard to the June Council meeting. Action item #3 1.Secretariat to create Triage Skype group 2.Secretariat to set up a meeting for the Triage Committee, post ICANN71 Action item #4 Secretariat to create single location for written WG updates, with focus on past and future achievements of their respective working groups. Councillors who where appointed as WG Liaisons to assist in terms of content. NOTES Welcome by Alejandra 1. Upcoming Roundtable CEO- SO/AC chairs: ICANN71 and a Preview of SOAC Activities Update. What should we mention/discuss? Note item 5 of the included Roundtable agenda. Any comments from Councillors? Link to the ICANN org survey can be found at the bottom of the page: https://71.schedule.icann.org/ i. In light of the preliminary survey results, what level of global representation do you think is necessary in order to go forward with a hybrid meeting? Stephen: yes to hybrid meeting. Hopefully the pandemic situation improves even more. Irina: agrees Alejandra: any concerns regarding remote participation? If remote participation is as good as it is now Stephen: it creates unbalance. But that has always been the case Alejandra: we learned a lot with remote participation Global representation? Just the same. Timezone rotation. What we cannot have is a different experience for remote and on-site Irina: ICANN should go for hybrid meeting If icann introduces rules on who can attend, they should be equal. If all vaccinated people can attend, then any vaccine accepted by local gvts should be accepted. Fair treatment for all Sebastien: we did many meetings with attendance and remote participation at the same time, now is the inverse. Not what we used to do, and not what we do now. Whole days like we used to do is not easy. Heard from several larger companies that there are no travel budgets for the rest of the year. Nick: Planning travel and accommodation is going to be the difficult thing - it's impossible at the moment and quarantine requirements etc could change any time. So I think it will be US vs the RoW if it's hybrid I would love to go to Seattle and I will if it's at all possible, but at present it's impossible and we won't know for sure until later on in the summer. Stephen: non-North Americans have more difficulties attending Jordan: hybrid meeting does not work. Makes it worse. Most people will not be able to travel yet. Would rather wait a bit longer. Too soon. Most people cannot travel yet, have no budgets etc Pablo: time we meet face to face. But understands the concerns by Jordan and Nick. not easy for non-North American residents. Remote participants already had disadvantages and they will most likely be the ones that have even more challenges with the hybrid format. Javier: I understand all stated concerns. But my position is to start meeting in person as soon as possible. That will also help the subsequent meeting after the first. Irina: the biggest challenges from Russia is the US Visa. american embassy has cut down the number of employees. Only visas for diplomats. Simply to submit a visa application is not possible at the moment in Moscow. Happy to help. Will look for other opportunities. Help from ICANN is appreciated. Nick: guess if ICANN are able to say with a high degree of confidence at the time they make the decision that say more than 50% of the usual participants will be able to attend then they should consider it ii. What will you and your various session chairs need to run your meetings in a hybrid format, especially if you (or another session leader/moderator) cannot travel to the US or wish not to do so? Alejandra: equal experience for both remote and on site participants iii. What will be the likely impacts (e.g. on effectiveness) on your groups, if some attendees that may otherwise need to be there in person (e.g. Council members or session leaders) are not physically present? What can be done to mitigate any potentially negative impacts? No comments from Council iv. Is there any specific type of feedback that is not covered by the survey but that you think we should try to draw out (if possible) during the ICANN71 session on this topic? Alejandra: good questions in the survey Nick: They really need a good story about why access and participation between the US and everyone else is on an equal footing, that's going to be really difficult Biyi: Different countries have different restrictions and many are easing the restrictions depending on their country's peculiar experiences. I think a hybrid would work. We need to start getting our lives back Jenifer: I vote yes Seattle in person meeting. It’s been a long year. Now, as we walk, cautiously, back into the “real world” we need to continue with our work. Laura: If we don't try we will never know if and how it works Sean: , I am more concerned about the drop off of people in the US taking vaccines vs RoW Pablo: ICANN72 will serve as a test-bed and will pay close attention to identify the experienced challenges given Puerto Rico will experience similar difficulties. . As host of the ICANN73 meeting we will work closely with the State Department to find ways to help individuals experiencing challenges with their visas. 2. Result Roundtable 1 on WS2 Implementation: support proposal? Concerns, if any, with proposal (see slides as circulated and summary notes). Jordan: few people who paid attention to WS2. cross-community WG with knowledgeable people, might be useful. Do not reinvent the wheel. Help coordinate the implementation work and make sure icann keeps implementing Alejandra: few people that would qualify. High effort. See where other SO/AC chairs are with implementation. We need more details. But we would be inclined to participate 3. Latest ccNSO review, prep for decision. Letter form Larisa Gurnick was circulated to the Council separately. The ccNSO Council will be asked to confirm the status of the implementation work contained in the overview. As stated in the letter, after the ccNSO Council has confirmed the status the overview will be forwarded to the Board Organizational Effectiveness Committee for their consideration. Irina made comments about certain parts being outdated Alejandra: we need to confirm we agree with the document. Does not make sense to update. Will be outdated soon again. 4. Preparation ALAC session on ccTLD Governance sessions Invite community to attend https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Meetings+-+Tuesday%2C+1... Link to the public schedule with details for that session: https://71.schedule.icann.org/meetings/j9rqscxSNsvWGneez#<https://71.schedule.icann.org/meetings/j9rqscxSNsvWGneez> Here is the link to the ICANN68 Governance Session: https://68.schedule.icann.org/meetings/qeFv9gaJhJ2NAQnWa Alejandra recommends Councillors to attend the session. Katrina will be presenting. Have a look at the questions from the audience and be ready to provide feedback. The intention by At Large is to potentially have a follow-up at ICANN72. Action item #1 Kim will circulate a calendar invite to Council for the At Large Policy Session. 5. Preparation Council meeting: Thanks for the voting on the seperation. 18 votes in favour. 7 days will be over on Friday. Tomorrow, final report will be sent to Alejandra, with Council in copy. Alejandra will need to inform GAC and ask their opinion and advice. Will be part of the Council meeting agenda on 17 June. Draft resolution will be one single recommendation to adopt the final report, and recommend the Board to adopt the policy as included in final paper of the working group. Does council want to invite the chair and vice chair of the WG to speak to this? Policy session will include a section on the retirement PDP to alert the community the members vote is coming See heads up to members here: https://ccnso.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-03jun21-en.htm Quorum requirement, and minimum amount of members that need to vote in favour, as stated in the bylaws. Stephen: thanks for unanimous support of the separation part 1 from part 2 in ccPDP3 Alejandra: no objections to invite chair and vice chairs. Important milestone. In favour Bart: 5 min introduction, all aware what Council is voting on. Action item #2: Secretariat and Stephen to invite Eberhard to the June Council meeting. a. Decision-making on ccPDP3 Retirement: what can you expect? b. Decision-making on work plan: what can you expect Baseline of what will happen in coming 2 years. June meeting: go over the baseline doc again, and suggested is that Council adopts the work plan. Quarterly work plan. Triage to develop its procedures and inform council on progress of the various groups Jordan: agrees. Secretariat will help to set up skype group, and set up a meeting after ICANN71. Bart: Updated version to be expected by end of this week, early next week Action item #3 · Secretariat to create Triage Skype group · Secretariat to set up a meeting for the Triage Committee, post ICANN71 6. GRC 2.0: How to organize the continuous organizational improvement process. What do you expect the GRC to do? What is role of Council? Expansion of GRC mandate to include: a. working with other committees to discuss implications of those committees work on the guidelines, and how the ccNSO has organized its work. Is mandate of the group still relevant, appropriate, needs improvement? b. review with the council and make suggestions on an annual basis c. perform such additional duties as delegated to the GRC from the council Next steps: provide Direction to GRC & review GRC charter? Alejandra: potentially review of the GRC charter needed. Sean: stalled situation. Looking at activities of GRC, the 3 bullets are a clarity what the GRC does. Not so much an innovation. Do not create overlap. Not same people do the work in all the groups. Hopefully new people to be interested and involved in the work of the groups (triage, oisc, grc). Get more support from the ccTLD community, less overlap in membership. Alejandra: do you agree in this evolved role of the GRC? Stephen: council needs to review its standing Council agrees with green ticks 7. CSC Effectiveness review: scope, and next steps 8. AOB * ICANN org prep week Irina compliments Alejandra on her participation in the UA-session * Written WG updates Sean likes the format. You need to prepare ahead of time, and can address concerns during the meeting Get written updates out sooner, to have more time to Councillors to read them Irina and Jordan agreed with the written format Laura: Useful too and they make us optimize the meetings, knowing we have them by email Alejandra: one location where we have them all? Laura and Jordan agree Alejandra: focus on what the groups did, and what they are planning to do See how council can help Action item #4 · Secretariat to create single location for written WG updates, with focus on past and future achievements by the WGs. Liaisons to assist in terms of content. Joke Braeken ccNSO Policy Advisor joke.braeken@icann.org