NOTES ICANN85 | Council Prep [C] Saturday, 7 March 2026, 09:00-10:00 local https://sched.co/2GwYC ________________________________ 1. Welcome Welcome by Alejandra 2. Roles and responsibilities<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1fmToQ3l3nrj78jgwy8RpFGLF4qfq7jrW/edi...> Notes taken in the google doc Action item #1 Check with Jenifer if she wishes to continue on the Triage Committee, Travel support Committee. (confirmed) Action item #2 CSC Selection Committee: see confirmation from Jaijit, Olga, Jiankang if they wish to continue on the committee a. Election: chair and vice chairs<https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/resources/roles-responsibilities-council-...> Bart: first call for nominations. Then a vote, in case more than one candidate. As Alejandra is a candidate, she needs to step down and one of the vice chairs formally takes over to conduct the process. Next, the vice chairs will need to be nominated, and selected - if needed. Vote on paper. Vice chairs need to be from different regions Jordan: how does that work, the voting for those not here? Bart: they will need to tell me. But hope you nominate just one candidate. We can do a mentimeter poll as well. 3. Relevant sessions at ICANN85<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OSKx-t9u7B6xxogg78hH1f2yWNSzDtsJKLTLSXhS...> Notes directly taken in the google doc Councillors are invited to take notes directly in the document, if any. 4. Future Root Server Governance Council: way forward, up to 6 ccNSO appointees. a. What will be the term? Will the term be staggered? b. What are the expected qualifications of members of the Council? Any diversity requirements? c. Who will appoint/select the members? (ccNSO Council /ccNSO members) d. Who will initiate the process? (ccNSO Council, the new Governance Council, ICANN) Peter: The RSS GWG finished the draft report, sent to the Board. The functional model will be presented in a session on Tuesday. There are procedural details still to be clarified in the initial phase of the functional model. Some functions will deal with the governance question, including accountability matters. There is a Council for this governance structure. Balanced voting power, by numbers. If the root server operators have 12 seats, the SO/ACs do need to have 12 seats too. Also affects DNS resolver operators. There is no structure for those yet, versus ccTLDs and gTLDs. Partially a technical function, the governance aspect is important too. Watch what is happening in the community. The Board has a Board Technical Committee. We should think in a similar direction. For the liaisons, and for council, it might be a good idea to have a sounding board in council for the appointees. Nigel: like Peter’s suggestions. Far-reaching consequences for all TLD managers. It needs the legitimacy of the ccTLD managers oversight. Perhaps ask the members for input, and then Council can assess and formulate a recommendation. Alejandra: good idea. I know it is not set yet. ccNSO to appoint the people. Peter: regardless of the ccnso membership Alejandra: not an open call for volunteers Bart: see how CSC is structured. Where the call for volunteers comes from icann, to the ccnso. Who originates? Who manages finally? Important for the oversight. Peter: still to be determined. Everton: what if council does not find enough volunteers? What happens then? Are Councillors eligible? Alejandra: process not defined yet. We are just brainstorming on potential options. We do not know yet what we need. Perhaps too time-consuming, and a potential COI, when being both on the ccnso council and the other council. Nigel: We focus too much on the detail. Overall structure needs to be created, and we need to engage with the membership. Then we can worry about the elections/appointments. This can all come once we have the overall structure. Jordan: idea is to start sensitising council? Or what to achieve? Alejandra: just brainstorming. Start thinking on how to address. Bart: timeline? Peter: geopolitics kick in. not surprised if it took more than a year. However, ccTLDs and gTLDs could be contacted in advance. We’d better be prepared. Think about the skillsets. DNS engineers are useful, but this is also very much a governance and policy topic in a technical sphere. Makes it harder to find candidates. Equivalent to the Board Technical Committee in the ccNSO Council. To act as a link between this and other liaisons we have. Bart: what are the steps? It is now with the board. Is there a public comment needed? Peter: whatever the board initiates will probably have a public comment too. Will there be a bylaw change? Peter; depends on how the structure will be set up. RZERC is not mentioned in the bylaws. We should be involved in the board considerations too. Jordan: sounding board sounds like a good idea. Given the governance powers, either an icann bylaw change, or setting up a new organisation. Alejandra: to be continued. 5. Council meeting on Thursday Alejandra: draft will be circulated shortly. Thanks to remote Council members to join today. Ready for the week to start. 6. Closure Bye all Joke Braeken joke.braeken@icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org>