October 2017 - Ccwg-auctionproceeds

Proposed Agenda - CCWG Auction Proceeds Meeting on 19 October at 14.00 UTC
by Marika Konings Oct. 19, 2017

Oct. 19, 2017

Dear All, Please find below the proposed agenda for the next new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting which has been scheduled for Thursday 19 October at 14.00 UTC. Call details have been distributed separately. If you did not receive the call details and/or require a dial-out, please contact gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>. Best regards, Marika Proposed Agenda – new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG Meeting – 19 October 2017 1. Roll Call 2. Welcome 3. Review of open and interoperable Internet description (to be distributed shortly) 4. Review of examples (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zQ66hCxrboAJPKeuU6nHwzHQwmU6g_3kS0JUSSC…) 5. Next steps in relation to charter question 7 ‘(‘Should ICANN oversee the solicitation and evaluation of proposals, or delegate to or coordinate with another entity, including, for example, a foundation created for this purpose?’) 6. Planning for ICANN60 7. Confirm next steps and next meetings (Thursday 02 November 2017 - 8:45– 10:15 Working Group F2F Meeting in Hall B Section B/C and 13:30 – 15:00 Working Group F2F Meeting in Hall B Section B/C) Marika Konings Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings(a)icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-…>.

10 15

Example of ICANN study based on ICANN's broader mission
by Nadira Alaraj Oct. 16, 2017

Oct. 16, 2017

Dear CCWG-AP members and ICANN staff, I thought to share with you below the announced study on the Digital Economy in the Middle East conducted by ICANN Middle East Global Stakeholder Engagement office. I think this study works as an example on the debated issue of the range of projects that AP fund could support. This study, doesn't support directly ICANN core mission on DNS but it handles the broader digital economy which I believe if is away with some margin from ICANN core mission. An issue to think about. Best, Nadira ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Fahd Batayneh <fahd.batayneh(a)icann.org> Date: Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 1:14 PM Subject: [MEAC SWG] ICANN Releases a Study on the Digital Economy in the Middle East, North Africa and Turkey To: MEAC-SWG <icann-meac-swg(a)googlegroups.com> Friends and Colleagues, ICANN Releases a Study on the Digital Economy in the Middle East, North Africa, and Turkey. You can read the PR and find a link to the study report as well as a blog from the author; Dr. David Dean, at https://www.icann.org/resources/press-material/release-2017-10-09-en. Thank you, *Fahd Batayneh* ICANN -

6 6

Input needed - review of examples - deadline 15 October
by Marika Konings Oct. 13, 2017

Oct. 13, 2017

Dear All, As per action item #1 of our last meeting, please find attached the latest Word version of the assessment of examples of fund allocation document. As noted in the document, the objective is to review and analyze the examples that have been provided to date in relation to new gTLD Auction Proceeds allocation. As ultimately allocation needs to occur consistent with ICANN’s mission as well as the objectives set by the CCWG, you are requested to indicate for each of these examples with which part of ICANN’s mission it is considered consistent as well as which part of the proposed objectives. You may also indicate if you do not consider the proposed example consistent with either ICANN’s mission and/or the objectives. You also have the ability to add examples currently not covered to the table. To facilitate your review, ICANN’s mission as well as the CCWG proposed objectives are listed with reference numbers that you can use to fill out the table. Note that ‘notes/comments’ column can be used for any additional input you wish to provide. You can include your feedback in the attached document or use the google doc version (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zQ66hCxrboAJPKeuU6nHwzHQwmU6g_3kS0JUSSC…) The deadline for input is 15 October. Thanks, Marika Marika Konings Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings(a)icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-…>.

2 4

FW: [Ext] ICANN News Alert -- ICANN Reserve Fund – Public Comment on Rationale and Target Level
by Marika Konings Oct. 13, 2017

Oct. 13, 2017

FYI – for those of you interested in this topic. Best regards, Marika From: ICANN News Alert <no-reply(a)external.icann.org> Reply-To: "no-reply(a)external.icann.org" <no-reply(a)external.icann.org> Date: Friday, October 13, 2017 at 01:52 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org> Subject: [Ext] ICANN News Alert -- ICANN Reserve Fund – Public Comment on Rationale and Target Level [CANN][icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.icann.org_&d=DwMFaQ…> News Alert https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-3-2017-10-12-en[icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_news_ann…> ________________________________ ICANN Reserve Fund – Public Comment on Rationale and Target Level 12 October 2017 Open Date: 12 October 2017 Close Date: 30 November 2017 Originating Organization: ICANN Finance Categories/Tags: * Accountability/Transparency * Strategy * Operations/Finance Brief Overview: ICANN's Reserve Fund was established in 2007 with a target level of a minimum of 12 months of Operating expenses. Since then, the ICANN Organization and its risk profile have significantly evolved. An updated rationale for the existence of the Reserve Fund and for its target level is offered for public comment. Link: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/reserve-fund-2017-10-12-en[icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_public-2…> This message was sent to marika.konings(a)icann.org from no-reply(a)external.icann.org ICANN News Alert ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 [http://app.icontact.com/images/iContact-footer-logo-TRY.png][icontact.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icontact.com_signu…> Manage Your Subscription [app.icontact.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__app.icontact.com_icp_mm…>

1 0

Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] FW: [Ext] Re: Notes and action items from today's meeting
by Marika Konings Oct. 9, 2017

Oct. 9, 2017

Thanks, John for sharing this info. It sometimes helps to switch browsers if you are having difficulty getting in. Also, Adobe recently released an update to its plug-in which may require installation for some of you. To check if you have the correct settings, you can use the following site: https://admin.adobeconnect.com/common/help/en/support/meeting_test.htm. It also provides some further guidance if you are still encountering issues. Best regards, Marika On 10/6/17, 17:31, "John R. Levine" <johnl(a)iecc.com> wrote: On Thu, 5 Oct 2017, Marika Konings wrote: > Dear Kavouss, > > As requested by Ching, we’ve reached out to our colleagues in the tech-support department who shared the following: FYI, I tried to call in via Connect about half way through the meeting and Adobe Connect just hung. After repeated retries it finally worked about two minutes before the meeting was over. I was able to call in over a VoIP phone on the same Internet connection so it seems unlikely that the problem was at my end. R's, John

1 0

Notes and action items from today's meeting
by Marika Konings Oct. 5, 2017

Oct. 5, 2017

Dear All, Please find below the notes & action items from today’s meeting. Best regards, Marika Notes - CCWG AP Meeting – 5 October 2017 These high-level notes are designed to help the CCWG navigate through the content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the transcript and/or recording. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately and are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/x/DLHDAw<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_…>. 1. Roll Call * Attendance will be taken from AC room * Please remember to state your name before speaking for transcription purposes and keep your phones and microphones on mute when not speaking 2. Welcome / DOI * Call today chaired by Ching as Erika is travelling * Please remember to keep your DOI and SOIs up to date 3. Presentation from ICANN Finance & Legal on the different options that have been discussed in relation to charter question #7 – should ICANN Org have a role in the solicitation and evaluation of proposals (e.g. through internal structure - new unit, within ICANN; externally - new built entity that would only focus on this work; externally - working with already existing entities) * See slides distributed prior to the meeting. * Hold questions until the end as some may be answered throughout the presentation. * Recall that a survey was conducted on this question but responses did not provide a clear path forward. As a result, this presentation was requested to help inform the CCWG deliberations. * Question #7: different options on ICANN's role in the solicitation and evaluation of proposals, and disbursement process. * Presentation provides overview of ICANN's resource impact under different scenarios: Internal to ICANN (new dept? new foundation?), Hybrid - ICANN and Outsourced (each distribute), fully outsourced - with oversight, fully outsourced - with no oversight. * Guiding principles across scenarios: ensuring mission is respected, ensuring fiduciary responsibility of ICANN Board and officers, ability to hold both distributor of funds and fund recipients accountable to ICANN community. * Scenarios - resource impact: where are resources used across the disbursement process? Is it different if it is internal to ICANN or external or a mix? Across all three first scenarios, ICANN would need to devote resources. * Comments & questions: * "Oversight" in option 2 or 3 should not mean '"Service Contract". That would bring many 501c-look-a-like (charity-) organisations in trouble and as such become disqualified to take a role in this process. * When you say ICANN resources to support those 4 lines, you mean a portion of the auction proceeds, or do you mean that ICANN is committed to devote resources for those key elements? Cost incurred by ICANN but borne by auction proceeds? Yes, correct, when reference is made to costs pertaining to the disbursement process, these would need to be borne and covered by the auction proceeds. Similar to how this was managed for the new gTLD program - costs of ICANN resources is carved out of ICANN's operations and budget and allocated to the new gTLD application program and covered by the applicant fees. Same approach would be taken here - evaluate % of resources dedicated to auction proceeds which would then be covered by auction proceeds funds. Cost would not be double counted. * Assumption that column four is there not because it is being advocated but to demonstrate that it is not viable? Yes, correct. * Consider having 5 rows instead of 4 as one part is currently missing namely review of technical outcomes of projects (ongoing monitoring & review of funded projects, outcomes). This would entail significant resources / expertise. This is currently covered in row 3 - disbursement process and monitoring. * In scenario 2 and 3, ICANN would need to involve external resources to facilitate oversight (e.g. accounting, audit). Mechanisms of oversight would entail a certain number of work that would likely duplicate the work of the provider. May need clearer descriptions to fully understand. * There's really not enough information available at this time to identify what arrangements/agreements would have to be in place between ICANN and an external distributor of funds. * What mechanisms would exist for recourse if following assessment / monitoring that funds were disbursed not meeting the original intent and not meeting the purposes? Ongoing monitoring may help in that regard. * Involvement of ICANN in different options is likely different. * Need to be careful to not go into an option that involves heavy spending. Most funds should go into projects not administration. Scenario 2 and 3 - if there is a fundamental difference between those two options in set up costs? * Need to account for the timing issue. By introducing intermediaries we may be increasing the risk of something going bad or out of scope. * Would outsourcing increase the risk of affecting ICANN's tax status if things go bad? Need to ensure continued oversight to minimize this risk. Grant agreements would also cover this. * There is nothing that supports the idea that outsourcing will be more expensive. Outsourcing with an experienced organization may cost less in the long run and be more transparent. * Clarity of roles between ICANN and potential partners would reduce likelihood of overlap and duplication of costs. * In scenario 1 or 3 it may be easier as main bulk of work takes place by one player (ICANN or third party), while in scenario 2 it would be a mix. As WG narrows down and more clearly defines purposes and directions it will become easier to produce estimates, models and structures that will help qualify the costs. 4. Continue deliberation on charter question #7 - Should ICANN oversee the solicitation and evaluation of proposals, or delegate to or coordinate with another entity, including, for example, a foundation created for this purpose? * CCWG may have better understanding now of the different scenarios. * Not rushing for any kind of decision at this point. Objective is to be able to identify preferred option to allow for further exploration of charter questions to determine whether or not that model turns out to be suitable or not * Consider running another survey asking the CCWG to rank the three options to determine whether or not there is a clear preference for a certain option. As noted, this is not a final choice, it is merely to see if it is possible to make a determination to which option to focus on in the next steps of the deliberations. * Need more information before launching the survey - hold on for now and discuss further at the next meeting. 5. Update on open and interoperable Internet definition by small drafting team * DT is getting close and is expected to provide an update on the latest draft shortly. 6. Confirmation of CCWG meetings at ICANN60 (Thursday 2 November from 8.45 – 10.15 and 13.30 – 15.00) Action item #1: CCWG members and participants to respond to the doodle poll to indicate availability for this meeting (see https://participate.icann.org/newgtlds-auction) 7. Confirmation of next steps & next meeting (Thursday 19 October at 14.00 UTC) Marika Konings Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings(a)icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-…>.

4 4

Recordings, attendance & AC Chat from CCWG Auction Proceeds call on Thursday, 5 October 2017 at 14:00 UTC
by Julie Bisland Oct. 5, 2017

Oct. 5, 2017

Dear all, Please find the attendance of the call attached to this email, and the AC Chat, MP3 and Adobe Connect recording below for the CCWG Auction Proceeds call held on Thursday, 5 October 2017 at 14:00 UTC. Mp3: https://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-auction-proceeds-05oct17-en.mp3 AC Recording: https://participate.icann.org/p1sii62w2hh/<https://participate.icann.org/p1sii62w2hh/?OWASP_CSRFTOKEN=ba32205baa7d5c6f…> The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group…> ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-auctionproceeds/ Wiki agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/bWzwAw Thank you. Kind regards, Julie --------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for Thursday, 5 October 2017 Julie Bisland:Welcome to the CCWG New gTLD Auction Proceeds call on Thursday 05 October 2017 at 14:00 UTC. Julie Bisland:Agenda wiki page: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_… Olga Cavalli:Hello all, good morning from Buenos Aires! Ching Chiao:Good morning Olga. Good to have you Julf Helsingius:Good <timeofday> Marc Gauw:Hello from stormy Amsterdam Manal Ismail:Hello everyone :) !! Ching Chiao:Hello Julf, Mac Alberto Soto:Hello everyone !! from Buenos Aires Joke Braeken:We will do so Ching Nadira AL-Araj:Happy day to all Sylvia Cadena:Hi everyone from Brisbane :) Vanda Scartezini:hi everyone - in a very noise environment ..sorry. will be mute enoss:[apologies for arriving late] Mary Uduma:Hi Everyone Wale Bakare:Hi all Sylvia Cadena:@Julie @Marika can you please organize to call Carolina Caeiro? She is trying to connect but she says Adobe doesn't let her in enoss:and hello from sunny toronto. beautiful fall day Marika Konings:@Sylvia - if you or she can provide us with her number we can dial out to her. Sylvia Cadena:Just send it to Julie Sylvia Cadena:Thanks Marika Marika Konings:Great, thanks Sylvia Wale Bakare:Please, can Staff send code for this call, for dial out participants Vanda Scartezini:Elliot - spring time here and as always sunny day Marika Konings:changing browsers may sometimes help with getting into Adobe. Marika Konings:@Wale - participant code is AUCTION jian Zhang:gt in Wale Bakare:Thanks, Marika jian Zhang:got in, but the voice is quite unstable Daniel Dardailler:sorry to be late, connection pbs on my side Marika Konings:as a reminder, call details as well as adobe connect room for every meeting are circulated prior to the meeting (plus several reminders) by the GNSO Secretariat (Julie Bisland, Terri Agnew or Nathalie Peregrine) to the ntfy-ccwg-auctionproceeds(a)icann.org<mailto:ntfy-ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> mailing list. Marika Konings:also, the adobe connect room link is always the same, so you may also want to save it separately so you always have it handy at the start of a meeting :-) Stephanie Perrin:I apologize for being late. Carolina Caeiro:Hi all, I was able to connect via Adobe Connect so I hang up the phone. Many thanks for all the assistance Julie Bisland:you're welcome, Carolina! Manal Ismail:Many thanks for slide 5 .. extremely useful and informative .. enoss:as noted on email, I think a temperature of the room wrt who wants 1/2/3/4 would be useful. maybe others are not decided on that so it is better to do that after this presentation Ching Chiao:@enoss -- we will talk about that later , a 2nd survey on charter question 7 Marilyn Cade:Sam, while I appreciate the exploration of the fourth column, I do not support it. this avoids the accountabilty to ICANN which I think we all consider a baseline. Creating an independent Foundation, is this 3? A foundation that is independent, without ICANN doing much, only assessing affiliation with its mission? Vanda Scartezini:+ 1 Marilyn Sylvia Cadena:Agree with Marilyn. Better to focus on the first 3 columns. The 4th one is just not goig to work Marilyn Cade:Thanks Eliott, but I am not sure what you mean by "temperature of the room". We both know that many in a room might vote one way, and then, when informed, say: wait, didn't understand we were creating a legal liability for ICANN. so we want to not do that. Stephen Deerhake (.as):+1 Marilyn Alan Greenberg:My understanding was that Col 4 is there simply to make it clear that it is NOT an option (since no way to audit). Hadia Elminiawi:+ 1 Marilyn, though i prefer focusing on the first two Sylvia Cadena:@Sam when you say ICANN resources to support those 4 lines, you mean a portion of the auction proceeds, or do you mean that ICANN is committed to devote resources for those key elements? Vanda Scartezini:good question Sylvia Sylvia Cadena:Or do you mean a portion of the auction proceeds? Nadira AL-Araj:Notice the column 3. vs. column 4. which makes column 4 is not an option Alan Greenberg:I think we have already decided that all "costs" associated with funds will be born by the funds and not ICANN operational budgets. Marilyn Cade:I spend a lot of time exploring a foundation for single letters for com and .net. I really want us to explore an independent and accountable foundation. Sylvia Cadena:That was my understanding Alan, but I am not clear because Sam is saying ICANN (not the auction funds) Manal Ismail:I also believe that column 4 is not an option but understand that this is theoritically speaking .. i.e. just a listing of all possible (not necessarily practical) options .. Alan Greenberg:+1 Manal. Vanda Scartezini:yeah no reason to have column 4 Marc Gauw:Watch out: "Oversight" in option 2 or 3 should not mean '"Service Contract". That would bring many 501c-look-a-like (charity-)organisations in trouble and as such become disqualified to take a role in this process Wale Bakare:I would render sub-column, the External Resources of Col 1 non-existing Vanda Scartezini:thanks for raise this MArc Daniel Dardailler:I think there is a timing issue that needs to be considered in each valid scenarii (first 3). The "allowed" scope of funding being likely to evolve, having intermediaries will lead to delays in reacting to these changes and bring more fiduciary risks for ICANN enoss:@marilyn I was acknowledging in my comment that people may want to hear the presentation before having a view. I took your comment to simply reinforce that.. does that make sense? Daniel Dardailler:e.g. an fund recipient has signed a 3 year contract with the intermediary funding agency to work on some scope, and a year after, ICANN declare this scope is now out, but there is this contract going on.. Sylvia Cadena:Thanks Xavier, clear on the purpose of column 4 on the slide and also that when you say ICANN you actually mean the Auction Fund (to cover costs). Ching Chiao:+1 Sylvia Julie Bisland:Reminder: please mute your line if not speaking Hadia Elminiawi:yes Sylvia Alan Greenberg:So in the case where the auction funds are transfered to another body, either some would be retained by ICANN to cover costs, or a charge would be levied by ICANN to the body holding the funds. Daniel Dardailler:(I rejoined by phone, the voip was too bad) Jonathan Robinson:@Slyvia. Good point. Monitoring & Review. Kavouss Arasteh:I DISAGREE with the conduct of the meeting. I was the second on queue after Alan I Was pushed to fifth WHY? Jonathan Robinson:Ongoing monitoring & review of funded projects. Outcomes. Sylvia Cadena:Sorry Kavouss, I think your hand was dropped. My apologies. Sylvia Cadena:I was not paying attention to who was before. Marika Konings:@Kavouss - there is no ability for us to change the order of speakers. It is in the order in which hands are raised. Maybe your hand got inadvertently dropped and as a result you got added to the back of the queue? Mary Uduma:+1@Alan Kavouss Arasteh:Who manage the adobe? Kavouss Arasteh:Why a type of discrimiation was made pushing me out from the Queue and .... Marilyn Cade:I will have to drop off in 15 minutes to move to a different call. I saw Kavoss asking before I did. Marika, perhaps you might want to just check on who can stay around. I cannot due to another commitment, but if I cannot speak, I will post my comments. Marilyn Cade:Kavouss, my experience is taht the technology is not perfected. :-) Marika Konings:@Kavouss, as explained, there is no way for staff or anyone else to change the order of hands raised. Your hand may have dropped and as a result added inthe back of the queue. Marilyn Cade:Maye we can move youup in the discussion. Sylvia Cadena:Thanks Xavier. It is not clear on the slide. It will be good to clarify that so the table does not refer only to the disbursement processes. Marilyn Cade:After all, to ICANN, we do not yet have a governmetn speaker, and you migth be our first in this discussion. Mary Uduma:since ICANN had incurred some costs from the beginning of the Auction process, it goes without saying that some part of the proceed would be retained by ICANN to recover all costs. Stephanie Perrin:By all means, Kavouss can go ahead of me Stephen Deerhake (.as):Marilyn, I'm not ready to publically comment on this from a ccTLD perspective... Mary Uduma:Whichever options that would be adopted. This is in support of Alan's last post. Stephanie Perrin:absolutely Sylvia Cadena:Your hand was dropped off. Marilyn Cade:I think that perhaps my view that we should seriously examime a separate foundation with accountabilty to key criteria established that meets the requirements of ICANN... as we estblish it Daniel Dardailler:(has this situation ever occured ? if not, I'd just move on, rather than try to rationalize, it was a bug) Marilyn Cade:I stepped aside not to speak, to make sure that those not yet heard could speak, Kavouss, as I hoped to listen to you. I was not taking a slot, as I wanted to hear from any government or any ccTLD as these views have not been heard. Marika Konings:@Daniel - yes, it sometimes happens when a persons connectivity drops. Mary Uduma:Kavouss, kindly accept the apology and still take the Mary Uduma:floor Marilyn Cade:I hope to hear from al, and with apoligies, I will have to drop off in 7 mintues. I have posted my suggestion that I prefer an independent foundation, with requirements provided for adherance to the ICNN mission and core values. I will be advancing that in a discussion within the BC, to see if we are supporting any of the optoins. Wale Bakare:The problem is probably caused by Adobe Connect and perhaps connectivity Manal Ismail:+1 Stephanie on the difference between columns 2 & 3 .. Marc Gauw:Stephanie: please do not talk about 'agencies' or 'contracts'... this disquaifies the charity-organisations from joining this process Ching Chiao:+1 Stephanie Sylvia Cadena:+1 Stephanie Marilyn Cade:So many appreciations for the ICANN staff presentation and for the great work of this CCWG-Auctions Proceeds. Sylvia Cadena:It doesn't Marc. There might be intermediaries, there might be different types of mechanisms (contracts, grant agreements, MGCs, etc) Nadira AL-Araj:To my understanding column 2 will need a MOU to enable the Hybrid while column 3. it will need a full contract with ICANN Marc Gauw:@Sylvia: tax-exempted organisations have to be carefull with the wording ... Stephanie Perrin:Thanks so much Xavier, great explanation Samantha Eisner:@Nadira, there's really not enough information available at this time to identify what arrangements/agreements would have to be in place between ICANN and an external distributor of funds Hadia Elminiawi:Thanks Xavier - very clear Mary Uduma:From, .ngccTLD, we Hadia Elminiawi:kavouss i think there is a problem with your connection Marika Konings:It is likely linked to your connectivity. Daniel Dardailler:I'm raising my hand to check adobe and to ask a question ;) Mary Uduma:Chair, please allow Kavouss to speak, please. Stephanie Perrin:I have ver low bandwidth where I live, and it seems to be the nature o Adobe that when there is a microdrop (one that does not show up enough to show a lost connection flag) my hand will drop off. Nadira AL-Araj:@Samantha, agree but I was trying to add the agreement aspect. Ching Chiao:Yes, Kavouss is the next Sylvia Cadena:+1 Alan. Ching Chiao:I feel sorry too that Adobe seems to have issue like this Stephanie Perrin:So I sympathize with Kavouss, and suggest that he comment in the chat if possible (eg. I am after Alan) because there is no notice of the sudden disappearance Marilyn Cade:can we hear from Kovouss and others rfrom governnments? They have not yet been heard, and technolocy has defeated us. Ching, you can, as chair, move something up. Sylvia Cadena:Marilyn, he is next. Xavier is answering Alan. Wale Bakare:it is likely the Adobe Connect since one or two features not appearing for users Sylvia Cadena:Chig has already said Kavouss turn is after Alan. Ching Chiao:i m joggling adobe windows here so bare with me ... Ching Chiao:yes Kavouss is next Mary Uduma:Stephanie, please allow Kavouss to speak. His hand was one of the first I saw as soon as Xiaver finished his presentation. Sylvia Cadena:I think that is an old hand Stephanie, isn't it? Stephanie Perrin:That was an old hand Mary, sorry Daniel Dardailler:(let's use a local blockchain to solve the adobe queue bugs: "I agree that Kavouss why ahead of me") Alan Greenberg:Based on my experieince, if we do not allow and EXPECT some rate of failure and not meeting expectations, we will not be using funds well. To be effective overall, we MUST take chances. But that is not related to a project being approved out of scope. Sylvia Cadena:+1 Alan Sylvia Cadena:Can we please focus on the topics? Sylvia Cadena:I am sorry but it is 1:00 am for me here Sylvia Cadena:There are technical issues for everyone of us, and we all want to hear from you. Sylvia Cadena:Agree Kavouss. No double dipping we called in Australia. Wale Bakare:That's one of the expectations attributed to wireless service - reliability Marc Gauw:@Peter: +1 Kavouss Arasteh: Are we discussing which senario we opt? Julf Helsingius:volume is very low Stephanie Perrin:I certainly think that option 3 will inevitably be significantly more expensive than option 2, even with nothing going wrong. Hadia Elminiawi:+1 Peter knowing the costs associated is necessary Alan Greenberg:@Kavouss, some people are voicing opinions but we are not formally talking about the choice yet. Nadira AL-Araj:@Sylvia, regarding the double dipping, if ICANN employes someone to the purpose of this project, then that will eleminate the double dipping. Manal Ismail:Daniel's voice is very faint .. Kavouss Arasteh:If we discuss which option is to be opted I am in favour of senario 2 and I will explain later on why Sylvia Cadena:Sure @Nadira, but it needs to be clarified. There are universities -for example- that allow something called "salary topping" depending on the funding they raise for university research so they earn more if they have more projects Sylvia Cadena:So it is better to word it clearly Daniel Dardailler:Alan: not only we can find out of scope issue after the fact, but in some cases, we can't stop them Nadira AL-Araj:+1 Sylvia Kavouss Arasteh:Senario 4 to be excluded for a clear reason that outsourcing without oversighting is defficient Marc Gauw:So "Would outsourcing increase the risk of affecting ICANN's tax status if things go bad?" Not necesarily.. Sylvia Cadena:There is nothing that supports the idea that outsourcing will be more expensive. No evidence or quotes to have that for certain. Marc Gauw:+1 Kavouss Arasteh:Senario 1 is to reply to ICANN which is not prudent then I opt for hybrid or Seraio 2 enoss:I am hoping there is more discussion about these options as I am a strong proponent of 1 and, just given the nature of the information presented, that was not discussed here Daniel Dardailler:Sylvia, I can think of some costs (like training staff to be ICANN missionsavvy) that would be more effectively done within ICANN Sylvia Cadena:A lot of donors like WB, ADB, JICA and many Foundations outsource parts of their processes because it is cheaper for them rather than doing it directly Nadira AL-Araj:Outsourcing with an experienced organization usually less cost on the long run and even more transparent. Sylvia Cadena:+1 Nadira Marc Gauw:@Samantha: That is no problem ! That is covered in the grant agreements ! Sylvia Cadena:Sure @Daniel, but I dont think we can "decide" on a single type or mechanism/arrangement Sylvia Cadena:+1 Marc Marc Gauw:If the grant taking party spents the money out of scope, then they simply should be forced to wire the money back Wale Bakare:The option this group would prefer IMHO need to be properly discussed, for decision to be taken by this group. Sylvia Cadena:No grant agreements can be changed retroactively. Sylvia Cadena:That will be terrible bad practice enoss:we do not need to CHANGE mission, we just need to be "consistent" with mission enoss:those things are very different and we should not think of that as being too steep a hill Stephanie Perrin:To reiterate Elliot's point, the mere fact that the xs show up as no seems to indicate a lack of monitoring and oversight, which is not the case. We already have plenty of mechanisms in the MS model to achieve oversight. Wale Bakare:Let this sub-group have this page ( Resource Impact )posted on the mailing list for discussions/comments enoss:I must leave. thanks all Wale Bakare:then we can decide which options - 1, 2 or 3 Daniel Dardailler:I wasn't talking about a change in the ICANN mission but a change in the interpretation (by ICANN) of what is inline, or in service, or whatever, with the mission Daniel Dardailler:(what Xavier is explaining if business as usual for grants: using timesheet, analytical accounting, etc) Marilyn Cade:WITH APOLOGIES, I AM NOW RETURNED. Stephanie Perrin:great, just in time Marilyn! Daniel Dardailler:Are there other criteria to consider that are less quantifiable ? e.g. the willingness of the ICANN community at large to take over another "role"with more staff vs. keep ICANN as small as possible ? Sylvia Cadena:Yes @Daniel no need to over complicate things Daniel Dardailler:from the outset, the first choice seems like the one best positioned to control the fiduciary responsibility Marc Gauw:I can indicate with the current info Nadira AL-Araj:Yes, Marika, there could be the combination of the three options based on certain proposed budget Sylvia Cadena:Please, add your comments to the examples doc. It is quite useful exercise Wale Bakare:Would this scenario work - ICANN and the community ( of course, it is subject to individual's expertise as relate to project similar to the Auction Proceeds) work together? Xavier Calvez:To be clear, we also have not yet described any model. The scenarios we have described have only been created for the purpose of answering question #7, and a much more comprehensive description of each model to be able to elect a preference. Stephanie Perrin:We are unable to figure out the ball park for costs until we have a better idea of scope and size, in my view. Marc Gauw:@Kavouss: it is just a 'indication-check' Marika Konings:Note that development of models is part of the next phase of the CCWG's work. Sylvia Cadena:+1 Kavouss. Important to note that the outsourcing costs will be very different depending on the region, the tasks, language support, etc Daniel Dardailler 2:bye bye, I have to run Alan Greenberg:Have to go. Kavouss Arasteh:have to go Daniel Dardailler 2:(I'll stay on the phone til I start driving ;) Stephanie Perrin:We could ascertain rates of outsourced contracts for similar activities (eg same ample size of audit checks, same level of costs) Julie Bisland:Reminder: The next CCWG New gTLD Auction Proceeds call will be held on Thursday 19 October 2017 at 14:00 UTC Nadira AL-Araj:Thanks Ching Chiao and all Sylvia Cadena:I think the survey needs a bit of work to have questions that really shows opinions or preferences Kavouss Arasteh:ranking from accountability point of view only Kavouss Arasteh:Further discussion before a new survey Kavouss Arasteh:No survey at this point of time Manal Ismail:+1 Kavouss further discussion on the mailing list would be useful .. Carolina Caeiro:Thanks all Sylvia Cadena:Thanks Ching for chairing the meeting. Vanda Scartezini:agree with Sylvia . we can join some effort to formulate some points Carolina Caeiro:I have to jump off Sylvia Cadena:Appreciate your patience and kindness. And also the support from ICANN staff Hadia Elminiawi:Thank you all bye Julf Helsingius:Thanks everybody! Becky Burr:bye all Xavier Calvez:Thank you Marc Gauw:Bye bye Manal Ismail:Thanks Ching, Xavier, Sam, Marika and everyone .. Bye .. Sylvia Cadena:Bye everyone Ching Chiao:thank you Xavier and Sam Ching Chiao:thanks all Peter Vergote (ccNSO):Bye all Joke Braeken:thank you all. bye Mary Uduma:Bye All.

1 0

Apologies for today's call
by Erika Mann Oct. 5, 2017

Oct. 5, 2017

Hi AP-friends - unfortunately I have to travel today and will not be able to join you. Ching (and Marika) will guide you today. Good luck! Erika Erika Mann erika(a)erikamann.com +32 498 121354

4 3

Proposed Agenda - new gTLD Auction Proceeds Meeting on 21 September 2017
by Marika Konings Oct. 5, 2017

Oct. 5, 2017

Dear All, Please find below the proposed agenda for the new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting which is scheduled for Thursday 21 September at 14.00 UTC. Note that we are awaiting confirmation for agenda item 3 whether Xavier is available to provide this update – if not, it will be deferred to the next meeting. Also, please take some time to review and contribute to the google docs for agenda item 4 and 5. Thanks, Marika Proposed agenda for CCWG AP meeting – Thursday 21 September at 14.00 UTC 1. Roll Call 2. Welcome / DOI 3. Presentation from ICANN Finance & Legal on the different options that have been discussed in relation to charter question #7 – should ICANN Org have a role in the solicitation and evaluation of proposals (e.g. through internal structure - new unit, within ICANN; externally - new built entity that would only focus on this work; externally - working with already existing entities) 4. Review assessment of examples of fund allocation (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zQ66hCxrboAJPKeuU6nHwzHQwmU6g_3kS0JUSSC…) 5. Review latest definition/description of Open Internet (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HV3dzTkKIYCyiRbzPW3Uk3MctwK0BQTth39DitI…) 6. Review updated work plan (see attached clean and redline version) 7. Confirm next steps & next meeting (5 October 2017 at 14.00 UTC) Marika Konings Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings(a)icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-…>.

7 6

Proposed Agenda CCWG AP meeting on 5 October at 14.00 UTC
by Marika Konings Oct. 5, 2017

Oct. 5, 2017

Dear All, Please find below the proposed agenda for the next new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting which is scheduled for Thursday 5 October at 14.00 UTC. Best regards, Marika Proposed agenda for CCWG AP meeting – Thursday 5 October at 14.00 UTC 1. Roll Call 2. Welcome / DOI 3. Presentation from ICANN Finance & Legal on the different options that have been discussed in relation to charter question #7 – should ICANN Org have a role in the solicitation and evaluation of proposals (e.g. through internal structure - new unit, within ICANN; externally - new built entity that would only focus on this work; externally - working with already existing entities) 4. Continue deliberation on charter question #7 - Should ICANN oversee the solicitation and evaluation of proposals, or delegate to or coordinate with another entity, including, for example, a foundation created for this purpose? 5. Update on open and interoperable Internet definition by small drafting team 6. Confirmation of CCWG meetings at ICANN60 (Thursday 2 November from 8.45 – 10.15 and 13.30 – 15.00) 7. Confirmation of next steps & next meeting (Thursday 19 October at 14.00 UTC) Marika Konings Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings(a)icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-…>.

6 7