NOTES |UAC | 26 Nov 2025 (13 UTC) 1. Welcome Welcome by Abdalmomen Apologies: Ann 2. Admin matters a. SOI update Any updates? none b. Action items Bart speaks to the action items · Staff will post the 3 outcome documents from ICANN84 joint session between UAC and GAC UA-IDN WG on the UAC wiki (completed) · Staff will share the additional document on the UAC mailing list, and seek comments from the UAC. Once finalize the doc can be published and distributed more broadly · Staff to reach out to Tech WG leadership team about the agreement to organise a joint session between Tech WG and UAC at ICANN85, on the topic of UA. ( agreed) · Staff to schedule next meetings until ICANN85 · Staff to send reminder about UA Day proposal submissions to ccTLD community · Seda to provide update on UA Day proposals vetting process at the next UAC meeting in 2 weeks time c. UA Expert Group update Sami: discussion regarding item 6 on the agenda. Finalising. Target is to have a complete discussion and working doc by March Bart: item 6? Abdalmomen: Registrars software to be 100% UA ready. Encourage tech providers Bart here is the charter document link (ua-ewg-18aug25-en.pdf<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ua-ewg-18aug25-en.pdf>)with all the 10 scope or theme details that are to be discussed and currently we are on scope 6 - How may ICANN org further encourage the DNS industry, including gTLD and ccTLD registry, registrars and resellers, to support UA in their systems during the registration process? d. UA DAY progress/ selection of panelists ( see overview): Regina, Abdalmonem, Sami Bart: see survey results Selected: Sami, Regina, Abdalmomen selected Note that only 6 responses were received. Congratulations to the 3. We will inform Ann about the outcomes. Thank her for volunteering Seda: about the process In addition to ccNSO, ALAC was also asked to nominate 3 people. Please send us an email about those that were selected. We will set up the review team. ccNSO, ALAC and UNESCO are part of the selection process. The first step is to come up with a consensus on the shortlisting criteria. We will review the criteria used in the past with the new team, and then score the proposals by 16 December. Proposals to be published on 22 December. Internal reviews before we announce them, and share details on the website. No conflicts, nominees not having submitted proposals. Seda: regarding statistics 66 proposals from all regions. Mostly AP, AP and LAC region. Adoption and demonstration type of events. Good balance with other events: curricula, strategic awareness. For the adoption type of events: mostly from AF and AP. 43 countries. Seda lists the distribution per region. Abdalmomen: number of countries same as last year? Why EU region only 3 submissions? Seda: EU has typically less submissions. Latin characters mostly. overall , less proposals. We announced the focus on adoption events. That might be a reason. Previously, mostly awareness events. We need to take it one step further Bart: suggestion to have a trend analysis over time, at a future meeting. UA events where people ask for assistance from icann, correct? There may be other events, which do not directly involve icann? Are you aware about other events, not icann funded? Seda: trend analysis typically at the end of the UA Day event. Can share the last UA Day Report, with progress over the past 3 years. We also received requests form other volunteer organisations, without support from icann, but still promoted on our website. We are happy to still accept those type of proposals. Some might ask for technical or speaker support. Anna: the number of countries is not equal to the number of events. One event is regional. Seda: idea is to have one regional event, per region. There are perceptions on the region. E.g. Turkiye: part of AP region, africa and middle east or Europe? Maria: we decided to have a regional event in Armenia. Armenia is AP region. There will be countries from Eastern Europe included too. Russia is EU region. Seda: Georgia proposal? Maria: not part of our local proposal. Not sure who submitted it Bart: suggestion to have a distribution per language groups QingCai: CNNIC made an academic proposal this time Sami: I support your idea of putting the proposals in groups. Script types being used. Arabic can be in Middle East, but also Africa or elsewhere. Abdalmomen: can Seda share progress on the unesco document? Bart: via e-mail please 3. Joint session UAC – Tech WG in Mumbai: on technical aspects UA: presentations and roundtable Block 2, 3 or 4. Request Tech leadership: presentation UA in India Bart: Tech Day audience is interested in new developments. Research and progress done. That is what they envisage. Tech leadership team also wants to focus on the host country, India. One of the reasons for putting UA on the agenda. Any suggestions regarding who could present? Eberhard wants to be informed. Abdalmonem: good idea to have India on the agenda. Lots of names: previous UASG members, those as member of the UA Expert WG. this is a technical session. Linked to scope 6 of the UA Expert Group. How to make your ccTLD UA ready? Ensure alignment. Ry and Rr software. Bart: of interest to Tech WG See joint session Tech WG and UAC in Dublin. The idea was to have a bit of discussion at the end. This could be one of the topics. Session also supported by presentations. Suggestion to brainstorm on the list, and add Eberhard in copy. See draft block schedule. DASC had 60 min Joke: potentially 2 additional plenary sessions. WSIS+20 and session with Board Abdalmomen: testimonial. Get attention for the audience about UAC Bart: agenda to be determined. The audience is a technical audience. Enhance UA at a more technical level Maria: I spoke with Vadim. Tech Day is usually about implementations that already happened. They share their experiences. In our case, regarding UA, we need to find speakers who can demonstrate such cases. Who already implemented UA and IDNs. that could be an issue. We need to find such registries. We want to talk about ccTLDs. Or RSPs. what is going on in their countries. Bart: focus on people with a clear interest in technical, operational aspects. What worked well? What needs improvement? Maria: do you know such ccTLDs? We are not yet ready. We do a lot. But not completely ready Bart: identify areas where you are ready, and identify what still needs to happen. Suggestion is to take this online. Discuss via the mailing list over the next 2 weeks. Make sure there is a rough idea by mid December. That allows us as staff to deal with the scheduling. UAC working session Sat, 7 March (block 4, 15:00-16:00 local time, UTC +5:30) Group agrees to have a working session Any concerns regarding the timing? None Abdalmomen: regarding the time. Can we meet one hour earlier? Nevermind. Let’s keep it as is 4. Update UAC work plan, following the sessions at ICANN82,83, and 84. Bart: update from Dublin work session. See final page of the doc Anna: what does it mean for UA Registries to be UA ready? Bart: why raised? Anna: we should explain this to registries. What should they do to be UA ready? Bart: this is your current workplan, and the status of the items on your workplan. Abdalmomen: survey. We might need to have a survey in the future. Previously, UASG did such surveys. Maybe in 2 or 1 years. Surveys among ccTLDs. Maria: ICANN had 2 surveys. About the UA roadmap, and adoption among registries. We should not have our own survey. But we should be involved in the icann survey. We can help with the question formulation. If we want to have out own survey, it should be different from ICANN. Bart: agree. And there is the eurid survey as well Maria: regarding the success stories. Hard for me in English. Bart: indeed. Think about the effort and the impact. It is easy to make suggestions, but to implement them? Maria: add case studies to the library Bart: or have a webinar, and add the recording to the library Bart: see table at the top of the doc. Action item: Staff to share the workplan doc as a google document. UAC members to review and add comments in the google doc. Discussion regarding content and next steps at the next meeting Bart: suggestion to revisit the 2 columns at the next meeting, and update the workplan based on the discussions in 2 weeks time. Maria: concerned about the formulation. Bart: UAC and governments. This comes form the summaries from last week. Maria: i liked the language from the other docs. Fresh language. But with whom do we want to share them? Very direct. Suggestions for gvt. They are probably not used to this type of phrasing. Can we handle these tasks? Do we have the resources? Bart: you hit the nail on the head. Who is going to do it? Maria: regarding the summary doc. It is different from the 3 other docs. Formulation is different. No comments on the mailing list. Do we want to share it? If yes, with whom, and when? Bart: the summary doc. Only when you give the ok. Shall we discuss it next week? Abdalmomen and Regina agree 5. AOB none 6. Next meetings 10 December | 08:00 UTC 14 January | 08:00 UTC 28 January | 13:00 UTC 11 February | 08:00 UTC 25 February | 13:00 UTC ICANN85 – 7-12 March Joke Braeken joke.braeken@icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org>