NOTES | UAC | Wednesday, 26 March 2025 (13:00 UTC) 1. Welcome Welcome by Abdalmomen 2. Admin matters a. UAC welcomes new members Ann Ibrahim (.nz) Andrew Lewela (.ke) Ann introduces herself. Andrew sent his apologies due to travel. Abdalmonem reminds her about the UA library, and invites UAC members to suggest new content for the library. b. Statement of Interest updates Fill out the ccNSO Statement of Interest form: https://forms.gle/79Jw4wSnNhn5W4Z46 Once processed by the Secretariat, you can check your SOI here: https://community.icann.org/x/doAFEg Read here the ccNSO SOI Guideline: https://ccnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/field-attached/ccnso-internal-pr... c. Meetings up to ICANN83: Confirm frequency and proposed rotation slots Timezone distribution UAC membership: https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meetingtime.html?iso=20250409&p1=53&p... Proposed rotation: 6 or 7 UTC and 14 or 15 UTC Abdalmomen: 7, 14, 15 UTC works for all. Preference by the members for 13 UTC Bart: let’s do 7 and 13 UTC 3. Looking back at UAC during ICANN82 a. UAC update during ICANN82 prep week Abdalmomen: this time no time for UAC updates. The main focus was the promotion of the icann82 session. Hopefully more time for updates next time b. UAC working session on Sat, 8 March See notes: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sVFwdxOU0f67tEB2TjJC1ZkFDLd9MB0HLjA60gvb... c. Session on drivers for UA on Wed, 12 March Abdalmomen reflects on the agenda for UA during ICANN82 Concern regarding the drivers session: end of the day, and of the meeting. Fair number of participants, both on site and remotely. 60 min. Was not enough. We need more engagement, especially during block 5. The format was more suitable for the session at the start of the day. Bart: scheduling is something for MPC to consider. Results mentimeter polling https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RBZMfoVBJDMbFjGYhmvDR4GZRbjnlkdE/view?usp=s... Bart speaks to this. Results in line with the idn world report and the idn ccTLD surveys. Regina: i am not neutral. It was good, in terms of info-sharing. Always tricky regarding the consultation. Who answered? Who have they represented? More feedback from several people with same affiliation? Bias? Hard to measure. This session is orientation-focused, and we can adjust the EURid survey. Bart: digital inclusion, languages … indeed an interesting angle. Supported by both the presenters and the respondents to the survey. Maria: survey was ok for this session, awareness was also good. Excellent contributions by CODI and UNESCO. If we want to get feedback that we can use for planning purposes, this survey via mentimeter polling was not enough. Bart: This was just a consultation. Qualitative way of getting feedback. This gives you the direction to look for more measurable approaches. 4. Planning for ICANN83 a. From UAC discussion on Sat, 8 March: UA and ccTLD governance models See notes: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sVFwdxOU0f67tEB2TjJC1ZkFDLd9MB0HLjA60gvb... Bart: original intention was to focus on drivers for UA at ICANN82, and follow up on blockers for UA at ICANN83. During the working session in Seattle, the focus shifted slightly. UASG representatives spoke about the role of governments in either driving or blocking UA readiness, and the cooperation of ccTLDs. Bart speaks to 11 December discussions on blockers and drivers for UA readiness. https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/ccnsowkspc/pages/108416108... We briefly spoke about this during the working session in Seattle. Can we use the same approach for Prague? Nice way of bringing attention to the blockers. With this in mind, we started discussing the role of governments, cooperation with ccTLDs, in the context of digital inclusion. Abdalmonem: joint session between GAC and ccNSO to explore gvt rules to assist ccTLDs to go for UA adoption. Explore the drivers, identify the blockers, and how to overcome them. Bart: maybe. The first step is probably to reflect on whether this is a topic for the Prague meeting? Then determine whether it warrants a joint session Abdalmomen: preference for a joint session in the GAC room. Gvt reps are routine people. But: communique drafting by GAC takes up a lot of time. Reach out asap. Bart: we had a solid session in Seattle. Support and leadership agreed not to do such a session in Prague. Could be a topic for a joint session at ICANN84. You could also invite people from the UA GAC WG to contribute to a UAC session as part of the members meeting. But before we speak about the way to do this, let’s first go back to theme. Is the theme something to consider for Prague? Sabrina: yes. Lots of meaningful discussions to be had under this theme. CIRA would be in a good position to deliver a presentation. CIRA joined SITEL over the past year. In this work, we support the gvt of Canada regarding ITU efforts. We would be happy to speak to that initiative. Regina: i support. Makes sense from multiple view points. Chicken and egg, cctlds can support the local communities, but the barriers prevent it to be a business case. Do gvt want to do sth from the policy viewpoint, to support this? Here in CZ the regular service from the community showed no interest in IDNs. maybe we could reflect on this, and get support from the local gvt? There will be EC representatives, they might also have input in terms of policy. Thus it tackes europe, but more countries Bart: so various angles. Regina: usefgul, even if the gvt say there is no interest. Then it is up to the technical Bart: the role of gvt: blocker or driver? Regina: views from the technical community, vs gvt roles Maria: in some countries gvts are keen to support local languages. They could be engaged in UA discussions. Some gvt are not so active in terms of providing support, regulations to support local language. Here registries have a hard job. It would be nice to gather different cases, where there is support for local languages. What can be done in practice? I look forward to hearing more about such cases. Useful for us, but also for others. In China and India, UA is even included in the national projects. Everyone knows what is the high priority. I like when people give info about national docs that include such formulations regarding IDNs, UA. e.g. WSIS docs, UNESCO docs etc. not easy to find them, and they are not easily searchable. Those docs might fit nicely into the UA library. Bart: question for Seda. do you have links or an overview of some of these relevant docs? UA ITU work for instance? Seda: yes, happy to share. Both ITU and WSIS. Bart: please send to mailing list. Maria: regarding the GAC WG. initiated, but the group is not really active. They do not understand what they need to do Abdalmomen: 100% correct. But …. Since ICANN82 the dialogue started again, we spoke with GAC staff to reactivate the WG. ongoing work. Issues that could be connected with the communities. Bart: do you support to explore in Prague the role of governments in UA readiness? Maria: red mark. We promised to explore barriers. Bart: good point. The role of gvt is 2-sides. We will do our best to not add you in the schedule during the final block on day 2 Regina: yes, we promised to do barriers, but also good to reflect on the discussions in Seattle. Bart: let’s revisit at the next meeting. Maria: people have other priorities. Not high priority for the entire community. Bart: food for thought. Assuming we have more than 60 min, we could use part of the session to check the relevancy of the blockers. Then combine it with the different roles of gvts. Start with blockers, consult the community, and then move into the role of gvt and UA awareness. Afraid that if we focus too much on blockers, we end up with a negative session. Cannot be the intention. Seda: * Building the Information Society: A Global Challenge in the New Millennium Declaration of Principles at the Geneva Summit 2003<https://www.itu.int/net/wsis/docs/geneva/official/dop.html> * A key principle in WSIS Geneva Declaration<https://www.itu.int/net/wsis/docs/geneva/official/dop.html> in 2003, leading to a commitment “towards multilingualization of the Internet” in the WSIS Tunis Agenda<https://www.itu.int/net/wsis/docs2/tunis/off/6rev1.html> in 2005. * Advance the introduction of multilingualism in domain names, and e-mail addresses, by implementing programmes and strengthening cooperation for their global deployment. * UNESCO, in its recommendations on multilingualism and universal access to cyberspace<https://www.unesco.org/en/legal-affairs/recommendation-concerning-promotion-...> 2003 asked to alleviate language barriers on the Internet by access to content, capacity-building, national policies, and collaborative research and development on, and local adaptation of technology with extensive multilingual capabilities. * More recently, Global Digital Compact<https://www.un.org/global-digital-compact/en> asks to make digital technologies more accessible and affordable to everyone, including in diverse languages and formats 5. AOB Let’s revisit the approach for the ICANN83 session at the next meeting 6. Closure Wed, 26 March at 13 UTC Wed, 9 April at 7 UTC Wed, 23 April at 13 UTC Wed, 7 May at 7 UTC Wed, 22 May at 13 UTC 9-12 June 2025 (ICANN83) Joke Braeken joke.braeken@icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org>