May 2017 - Ccwg-auctionproceeds

Your input request - draft survey to gather input on charter question #2
by Marika Konings June 1, 2017

June 1, 2017

Dear All, As discussed during our previous meeting, a next step in addressing charter question #2 (see template attached) could be by soliciting CCWG input through a survey. Staff has worked with the leadership team to prepare a first draft of such a survey for your review: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Preview/?sm=dfpUrnoXn7_2BjCR6XiLIJ6MYfkl50X1…. Note, that this is just a preview, no responses are recorded. You are encouraged to share any feedback you may have on the survey by Wednesday 7 June at the latest. The idea is to launch the survey shortly after the next meeting so that everyone has sufficient time to provide their input ahead of ICANN59. 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-…>.

4 7

For your review - updated letter to chartering organizations re. work plan
by Marika Konings June 1, 2017

June 1, 2017

Dear All, Please find attached for your review the updated letter to the charter organizations concerning the work plan and approach for dealing with the charter questions. This version includes the revisions discussed during last week’s meeting. If you have any further comments and/or edits, please share these by Friday 2 June. Following that, staff will go ahead and submit the letter on behalf of the CCWG leadership team to the chartering organizations. Best regards, 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-…>.

4 6

Updated templates posted
by Marika Konings May 30, 2017

May 30, 2017

Dear All, Please note that the updated templates for charter questions 4, 6 and 8 have now been posted on the wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/PNrRAw. These now include the notes from last week’s meeting. If you have any further comments or input, please share those with the mailing list. Best regards, 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 1

Recordings, Attendance & AC Chat from CCWG Auction Proceeds call on Thursday, 25 May 2017 at 14:00 UTC
by Julie Bisland May 25, 2017

May 25, 2017

Dear all, Please find the attendance of the call attached to this email and the MP3 recording below for the CCWG Auction Proceeds call held on Thursday, 25 May 2017 at 14:00 UTC. Mp3: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-auction-proceeds-25may17-en.mp3 AC Recording: https://participate.icann.org/p78jaobmeye/<https://participate.icann.org/p78jaobmeye/?OWASP_CSRFTOKEN=4020b23172121acd…> 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 page: https://community.icann.org/x/YAvfAw Thank you. Kind regards, Julie Bisland ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for Thursday, 25 May 2017 Julie Bisland:Welcome to the CCWG New gTLD Auction Proceeds call on Thursday 25 May 2017 at 14:00 UTC for 90 minutes. Mary Uduma: Thanks Julie. was just trying my connectivity, here. will be back in 30 mins hadia Elminiawi:Good afternoon from Cairo Julie Bisland:Hello Hadia hadia Elminiawi:Hi Julie Julf Helsingius:Good afternoon Olga Cavalli - GAC Argentina 2:Hello all from Buenos Aires Julie Bisland:Hello Julf and Olga. Welcome all! Olga Cavalli - GAC Argentina:thanks! today is our national independence day! Julf Helsingius:And Amsterdam is recovering form ManU-Ajax football finals last night Manal Ismail:Hello everyone :) !! Ching Chiao:Hi all Vanda Scartezini:hi everyone! Ching Chiao:dialing in elliot noss:good day Julf Helsingius:Oh, and Happy Towel Day! Erika Mann:I'm here . Will change location. Internet is bad today. Erika Mann:I'm here Erika Mann:We have Trump Vanda Scartezini:kkkkk Julf Helsingius:Erika: Loud and clear Maureen Hilyard:Very clear Erika Ching Chiao:Erika we can hear you very well Zain Khan:Hello amigos! Im here now :) Sebastien (ALAC):ALl is good Erika Erika Mann:Thank you all! Asha Hemrajani:Good evening from Singapore, sorry I am a bit late Ching Chiao:Good evening Asha. Good to have you :) elliot noss:I liked manal's changes, particularly wrt our need for clarity on the mission (objective of fund) elliot noss:hi asha Asha Hemrajani:你好 Ching Asha Hemrajani:Hi Elliot Manal Ismail:I'm sorry Marika no I didn't see yit .. Stephanie Perrin:My apologies for being late. Vanda Scartezini:makes sense Erika Erika Mann:Have I lost you? Manal Ismail:I hope my point is clear and am sure Marika will do a great job :) .. don't want to waste time in word smithing .. happy to take it over email .. Vanda Scartezini:looks clear for me Maureen Hilyard:The additional text will help to clarify our process Ahmed Bakht:+1 to Manal hadia Elminiawi:+1 Erika , postpone the answer to the question Vanda Scartezini:+ 1 erika, it is too open now for find a commum solution Ahmed Bakht:+1 hadia Elminiawi:to early to answer the question now Stephanie Perrin:Agree to defer Nadira AL-Araj:It would be better to have a wider perpsective on the different models available Maureen Hilyard:+1 Erika until we get further clarity Stephanie Perrin:We can certainly generate a parking lot of questions as they come up Julf Helsingius:agree hadia Elminiawi:+1 stephanie Vanda Scartezini:+1 Staphanie - parking lot is a good idea and make it easy to find Marika Konings:This is from the response to the Board: Concerning the suggested nominal goal for the overhead is no more than 5% by theICANN Board, the CCWG will definitely consider this input when it considers the relevantcharter questions as well as the elements the Board has suggested the proposedmechanism and/or process should include. Several CCWG members/participants didpoint out, however, that the overhead costs will depend on the actual mechanismrecommended as a result of the CCWG deliberations and may therefore vary from the5% recommended by the ICANN Board. Nadira AL-Araj:A these points are good to prepare a framework to how to deal with the beneficiaries Ahmed Bakht:Comments from both sides are strong, however, my vote is for giving preference to developing economies because they already have certain constraints John Levine:It's OK to make it a consideration, very bad idea to reserve a fixed percentage Ching Chiao:agree with Alan hadia Elminiawi:+1 Alan to not restrict the use of the funds to any innovative possibilities Manal Ismail:Agree to keeping all doors open at this very early stage Vanda Scartezini:agree with Alan + also underserved groups inside developed regions Mary Uduma:+1@Alan and Manal Manal Ismail:+1 Elliot Ahmed Bakht:Seems some sound issue Asha Hemrajani:I would like to understand what everyone thinks about "giving priority/preference" to any one particular sector Nadira AL-Araj:One of the scenarios might come as recommendation from this group is to give the framework to an independent financial well established organization to deal with this fund according to the recommendations. So it is better to keep everything is open as both Alen and Erika has mentioned. elliot noss:remember I am only limiting the comments to i) beneficiaries >> organizations and ii) those in need elliot noss:I see nothing limiting there Becky Burr:maybe we should think about this in a different way. The use of the funds has to be within ICANN's Mission, in addition, our Core Commitments require ICANN Seeking and supporting broad, informed participation reflecting thefunctional, geographic, and cultural diversity of the Internet at all levelsof policy development and decision-making to ensure that the bottomup,multistakeholder policy development process is used to ascertainthe global public interest and that those processes are accountableand transparent; Stephanie Perrin:I think that when we get down to the nitty gritty of evaluating the proposals, points would be given for local projects, in underdeveloped regions (covers all options there) and projects executed by locals. Stephanie Perrin:However I agree with Elliot that we need to bake that notion into the purpose Asha Hemrajani:So Elliott & Alan as a follow on from your comments, would you not support "giving priority or preference to any one particular group. Is my understanding correct? elliot noss:@asha I would give preference to those in need. this is NOT limiting. it is descriptive elliot noss:does anyone think differently? Ching Chiao:yup i agree with the need-based approach elliot noss:I am comfortable not leaving this open to someone doing cool research in the DNS in silicon valley which could be not for profit (as an example) Asha Hemrajani:@Elliott ok now I see what you mean. "those in need" is very broad and giving preference to "those in need" does not restrict. Asha Hemrajani:Thanks Alan, that is exactly what I wanted to clarify (from your perspective). Nadira AL-Araj:+1 Alan, those what we have to focus on the time being to define the general purpose of this fund Asha Hemrajani:Thanks Alan, you got my question. Maureen Hilyard:I agree Erika to delay this decision I thnk that it is important that clear criteria and guidelines are required but these have yet to be established Erika Mann:Hadia! hadia Elminiawi:i am talking Becky Burr:most effectively and consistent with ICANN's Mission, Commitments, and Core Values, including seeking and supporting broad, informed participation reflecting thefunctional, geographic, and cultural diversity of the Internet Vanda Scartezini:totally agree with Alan... good projects shall have opportunity - so no limitation by now hadia Elminiawi:ok Manal Ismail:can't hear u hadia .. Marika Konings:@Hadia - your mic doesn't appear active. hadia Elminiawi:Ok ill type my chat Erika Mann:We can't hear you!!! Marika Konings:Make sure it is connected (click on the phone symbol at the top). Alternatively we can also dial-out to you. elliot noss:no elliot noss:you misdescribed what I said erica hadia Elminiawi:apparently I have a problem with my mic Stephanie Perrin:+1 must be for those in need, not simply cool ideas Julf Helsingius:"need" is just tricky to define Julie Bisland:Hadia, i've sent you a private chat if you'd like the operator to dial out to you. Nadira AL-Araj:@Elliot, Sometime, those in need might not lead to development Becky Burr:I agree that we shouldn't fund projects that the applicant already has the means to accomplish, but I don't exactly know what "in need" means in all contexts elliot noss:@nadira agree. as I know you know better than me, development is hard Nadira AL-Araj:@Ellliot then it is better to put a framework that lead to some developments to those in need. elliot noss:that was NOT what I said elliot noss:@nadira I love that idea. I look forward to hearing specifics there Stephanie Perrin:I agree that in "need" can be tricky, and we do not want to preclude the development of tools somewhere, to help those in "need". This is why baking th concept of underserved (need to find better words) is important. This is not a research fund, in other words, for economies where research funds are available. Manal Ismail:I think it should go to cool/creative/innovative ideas (whatever we want to call them) which need the funding irrespective of where they come from .. Vanda Scartezini:good point ALAN, new development , innovation may also be considered hadia Elminiawi:And what if you have two beneficiaries in need one from an underepresnted community and one from a well represented community and you can allocate the money to only one, Which one of the beneficiaries will you choose? Jonathan Robinson:What about something core to SSR such as Root Servers? Would that qualify? Strikes me that we need to keep an opening for core SSR issues in either an R&D or operational context Nadira AL-Araj:as you've worte @elliot is not easy, but make sure to make the recievers have sustianble programs in thier proposals. elliot noss:again, I did not say anything about undeveloped regions Stephanie Perrin:I think we can see that this is going to be a highly controversial topic, whenever we get to it. Julf Helsingius:stephanie +1 Asha Hemrajani:@elliot yes I know you didn't say undeveloped regions, I was referring to the text on the top line of this page Asha Hemrajani:"Should any priority or preference be given to organizations from developing economies, projects implemented in such regions and/or under-represented groups?" hadia Elminiawi:+1 core infrastructure projects Vanda Scartezini:guess we all agree the answer to this question is NO - Julf Helsingius:"parts of ICANN" is equally controversial Nadira AL-Araj:+1 Stephanie and that is why it is important to give it priority to discuss this issue Julf Helsingius:The more creative something is, the more likely it is to fail elliot noss:parts of ICANN is MUCH more controversial Asha Hemrajani:@elliot, we could consider adding something along the lines of "not funding projects that would normally be funded out of the ICANN budget" Asha Hemrajani:+1 Alan regarding operational funding Ching Chiao:If looking at the new gTLD process itself , we were talking about giving priority to certain "categories" of applicants. Eventually the prioirty (of delegation) was given to IDN applicants. Not necessarily related to the question here but a decision made before Alan Greenberg:I do support using some of the funds to build up the ICANN reserve (which implicitly frees up operational funding) but if we figure out how to di this (as suggested by the Board), it will be threough a different mechanism. elliot noss:if it is a problem, I am ok not to elliot noss:I don't want to push more Marika Konings:We would first need to make clear what the proposals are? John Levine:There are way too many worms in the can that reserve funding would open hadia Elminiawi:+1 Marika Ching Chiao:Erika -- could you repeat it again ? Jonathan Robinson:I am not 100% clear what the question is? Manal Ismail:same here .. Alan Greenberg:Not sure what question is in this case. Stephanie Perrin:Let's take the time to do a survey monkey, this is a threshold question in my view elliot noss:sure Stephanie Perrin:Exactly, it is good to understand the range of viewpoints as we go forward Asha Hemrajani:agree with Alan's point elliot noss:agree. we should call it program expenses Vanda Scartezini:yes there is two different question here Erika Mann:It's Xavier who is speaking hadia Elminiawi:I can't hear you anymore Erika Mann:You can't hear me? Ching Chiao:Erika we can hear you Erika Mann:Xavier? Nadira AL-Araj:Will be waiting for the clarification of what "overhead" in this question means. Thanks Marika Konings:See https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_… Marika Konings:and more specifically https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume… hadia Elminiawi:Thanks Marika Julie Bisland:Then next CCWG New gTLD Auction Proceeds call will be held on Thursday, 08 June 2017 at 14:00 UTC for 90 minutes. Julf Helsingius:Thank you all! elliot noss:bye all thanks Tripti Sinha (RSSAC) 2:Thank you Nadira AL-Araj:Thanks Marika, Erika and all hadia Elminiawi:thank you all bye Ching Chiao:Thank you all Manal Ismail:Thanks everyone .. Bye .. Maureen Hilyard:Thank you Erika and Marika Erika Mann:Bye, bye! Vanda Scartezini:great time to all Asha Hemrajani:Bye and thanks all. Zain Khan:Thank you! Ciao ciao

1 0

Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] [Ext] RE: Proposed Agenda - CCWG Auction Proceeds Meeting Thursday 25 May
by Marika Konings May 25, 2017

May 25, 2017

Thanks, Manal, much appreciated. Please find below a response to your question. Best regards, Marika From: "manal(a)tra.gov.eg" <manal(a)tra.gov.eg> Date: Thursday, May 25, 2017 at 05:30 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org>, "ccwg-auctionproceeds(a)icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds(a)icann.org> Subject: [Ext] RE: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Proposed Agenda - CCWG Auction Proceeds Meeting Thursday 25 May Many thanks Marika .. Please find attached minor suggestions to the letter .. I know that all bullets are ‘copy’ and ‘paste’ form the agreed diagram, but I had the feeling that, for a first-time reader, a few things might not be clear .. So: - In the introductory paragraph, I tried to clarify where the ‘initial responses’, referenced throughout the letter, come from; - I suggested some edits to bullet point one but I’m flexible; and - For bullet point 2 “Address any charter questions that have been identified requiring a response before commencing the next phase ”, I’m just wondering whether we mean here “questions that haven’t been responded to in the Initial Run Through” or something else? as I understand all questions would require a response before commencing the next phase, right? MK: As part of the approach for dealing with the charter questions, it was noted that some questions will require a response / agreement before the CCWG will be able to make a determination with potential mechanisms to explore further while others will need to be addressed in the context of the mechanism(s) the CCWG decides to explore further. For example, the question concerning the overall objective of fund allocation has been identified as one of those questions that needs a response. Similarly, the charter question concerning whether ICANN should oversee the solicitation and evaluation of proposals has been identified as one of the questions that would need to be addressed before considering potential mechanisms as it has a determining factor on which mechanism may be most suitable. Other questions such as overhead and conflict of interest are easier to address one a mechanism(s) has been chosen for further exploration. Does that make sense? Looking forward to our call today .. Kind Regards --Manal From: ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Marika Konings Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2017 3:42 PM To: ccwg-auctionproceeds(a)icann.org Subject: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Proposed Agenda - CCWG Auction Proceeds Meeting Thursday 25 May Dear All, Please find below the proposed agenda for the next new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting which has been scheduled for Thursday 25 May 14.00 UTC. Note that in relation to item 3, an updated version of the work plan has been included in the annex to reflect the meeting at ICANN59 and the cancellation of the meeting of 22 June. Best regards, Marika Proposed Agenda – new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG – Thursday 25 May at 14.00 UTC 1. Roll Call 2. Welcome / DOI 3. Input received on letter to chartering organizations concerning work plan and approach for dealing with charter questions (see attached) 4. Initial run through of charter question 4 (see template attached) 5. Initial run through of charter question 6 (see template attached) 6. Initial run through of charter question 8, if time allows (see template attached) 7. Identification of external experts - reminder (see https://community.icann.org/x/DAnfAw[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_…>) 8. Confirm next meeting – 8 June at 14.00 UTC (Note, this meeting is followed by a meeting on 15 June during which Xavier Calvez will provide a briefing on audit requirements. The meeting on 22 June will be cancelled due to its proximity to ICANN59) 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[learn.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses…> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages[gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gn…>.

2 1

Notes and action items from today's CCWG Auction Proceeds meeting
by Marika Konings May 25, 2017

May 25, 2017

Dear All, Please find below the notes and action items from today’s CCWG Auction Proceeds meeting. Best regards, Marika Notes CCWG Auction Proceeds Meeting – 25 May 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[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_…>. 1) Roll Call · Roll call will be taken from Adobe Connect · Please state your name before speaking for transcription purposes and remember to mute your lines when not speaking 2) Welcome / DOI · Response to ICANN Board has been sent and has been posted under the correspondence on the wiki page (see https://community.icann.org/x/V7XRAw) 3) Input received on letter to chartering organizations concerning work plan and approach for dealing with charter questions · Draft was circulated to the list. A number of edits were suggested (see version shared during the call). · If there are no further comments / edits, the letter will be sent to the chartering organizations on behalf of the CCWG Co-Chairs. · Need to clarify #2 to make clear what is meant here (notion of gating questions that need to be addressed before CCWG can make a determination on which mechanisms have the most potential). Consider adding a 'further detailed response' to #2. Action item #1: Staff to add clarification after first paragraph to clarify how the CCWG has dealt with the charter questions to facilitate understanding of different steps as well as updating #2 as discussed. 4) Initial run through of charter question 4 · See template distributed. · May be difficult to discuss this without further details on the mechanism. May make sense to postpone this question until an exchange of views can take place with experts. Is it helpful to debate this question now or is it better to discuss it once the CCWG has had a chance to discuss this with experts from other organizations & a better understanding of how this has been dealt with in similar situations. · Also linked to question of overhead. 5) Initial run through of charter question 6 · See template distributed · Note that question has been answered from two different perspectives: 1) does it relate to those applying or 2) does it relate to where/target audience for projects, or both. Add this to sub-questions. · Link is also to charter question 2 - overall objective may determine to a certain extent the response to this question. · No % reservation at this stage, may only become clear at the moment of applications received whether something like that is needed. Fund allocation will be constrained by ICANN's mission so that will be determining factor. There are also underdeveloped regions within developed regions - those should not be excluded. · Need to be focused on beneficiaries not organizations. · Should be clear that funds are being used to e.g. .help people in need, disadvantaged, underpriviliged etc. to make sure that the funds are allocated to those that need it most or priority is given to those, but not restrict it in a geographic sense. May not be easy to identify 'need' though. · The use of the funds has to be within ICANN's Mission, in addition, our Core Commitments require ICANN Seeking and supporting broad, informed participation reflecting the functional, geographic, and cultural diversity of the Internet at all levels of policy development and decision-making to ensure that the bottom up,multistakeholder policy development process is used to ascertain the global public interest and that those processes are accountable and transparent. · At this point, don't set preferences or priorities in recipient groups - too prescriptive at this stage. · Will have to come back to this question at a later point in time. · Funds shoulds be easily accessible to those from developing countries. Mechanism shouldn't limit participation from developing world. · There may also be important research projects e.g. relating DNSSEC that would have an important impact on the impact which would not necessarily focus on those 'in need'. Those should not be excluded. We need to keep an opening for core SSR issues in either an R&D or operational context. · Shouldn't fund projects that would normally be funded out of the ICANN budget. Action item #2: Staff to update template accordingly. Action item #3: Elliot and Alan to frame their proposals in response to this charter question so that it may be possible to poll the CCWG on these proposals during a future meeting. 6) Initial run through of charter question 8, if time allows · See template distributed · Overhead has different meaning in different context - it may mean overhead for administering the program, but could also mean overhead for those administering projects that are funded. Important to be specific and define. · This topic will also be addressed during the briefing on 15 June on audit requirements. What is considered overhead? Xavier to work on a briefing document to address some of the comments / questions raised by the CCWG. Action item #4: Staff to update template accordingly Action item #5: Xavier to provide briefing document on audit requirements either pre- or post briefing on 15 June. 7) Identification of external experts - reminder (see https://community.icann.org/x/DAnfAw) See https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QtwFa9nCIMq8JYCtBHxAyQraWQ6M-iNNP4Kyq6q… Action item #6: CCWG to review list and to add experts and/or contact details 8) Confirm next meeting – 8 June at 14.00 UTC (Note, this meeting is followed by a meeting on 15 June during which Xavier Calvez will provide a briefing on audit requirements. The meeting on 22 June will be cancelled due to its proximity to ICANN59) 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-…>.

1 0

Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] [Ext] RE: Proposed Agenda - CCWG Auction Proceeds Meeting Thursday 25 May
by Marika Konings May 25, 2017

May 25, 2017

Thanks, Hadia. We’ll have this version up for display during the call. Best regards, Marika From: Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi <Hadia(a)tra.gov.eg> Date: Thursday, May 25, 2017 at 06:41 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org>, "ccwg-auctionproceeds(a)icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds(a)icann.org> Subject: [Ext] RE: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Proposed Agenda - CCWG Auction Proceeds Meeting Thursday 25 May Dear Marika, Apologies for the late contribution please find attached my comment to charter question 6 Thank you Best hadia From: ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Marika Konings Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2017 3:42 PM To: ccwg-auctionproceeds(a)icann.org Subject: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Proposed Agenda - CCWG Auction Proceeds Meeting Thursday 25 May Dear All, Please find below the proposed agenda for the next new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting which has been scheduled for Thursday 25 May 14.00 UTC. Note that in relation to item 3, an updated version of the work plan has been included in the annex to reflect the meeting at ICANN59 and the cancellation of the meeting of 22 June. Best regards, Marika Proposed Agenda – new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG – Thursday 25 May at 14.00 UTC 1. Roll Call 2. Welcome / DOI 3. Input received on letter to chartering organizations concerning work plan and approach for dealing with charter questions (see attached) 4. Initial run through of charter question 4 (see template attached) 5. Initial run through of charter question 6 (see template attached) 6. Initial run through of charter question 8, if time allows (see template attached) 7. Identification of external experts - reminder (see https://community.icann.org/x/DAnfAw) 8. Confirm next meeting – 8 June at 14.00 UTC (Note, this meeting is followed by a meeting on 15 June during which Xavier Calvez will provide a briefing on audit requirements. The meeting on 22 June will be cancelled due to its proximity to ICANN59) 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[learn.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses…> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages[gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gn…>.

1 0

Proposed Agenda - CCWG Auction Proceeds Meeting Thursday 25 May
by Marika Konings May 25, 2017

May 25, 2017

Dear All, Please find below the proposed agenda for the next new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting which has been scheduled for Thursday 25 May 14.00 UTC. Note that in relation to item 3, an updated version of the work plan has been included in the annex to reflect the meeting at ICANN59 and the cancellation of the meeting of 22 June. Best regards, Marika Proposed Agenda – new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG – Thursday 25 May at 14.00 UTC 1. Roll Call 2. Welcome / DOI 3. Input received on letter to chartering organizations concerning work plan and approach for dealing with charter questions (see attached) 4. Initial run through of charter question 4 (see template attached) 5. Initial run through of charter question 6 (see template attached) 6. Initial run through of charter question 8, if time allows (see template attached) 7. Identification of external experts - reminder (see https://community.icann.org/x/DAnfAw) 8. Confirm next meeting – 8 June at 14.00 UTC (Note, this meeting is followed by a meeting on 15 June during which Xavier Calvez will provide a briefing on audit requirements. The meeting on 22 June will be cancelled due to its proximity to ICANN59) 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-…>.

3 2

Announcement: Pre-ICANN59 Policy Update Webinar Thursday, 15 June 2017 at 10:00 UTC and 19:00 UTC
by Terri Agnew May 22, 2017

May 22, 2017

https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2017-05-22-en Please RSVP via <https://goo.gl/forms/LTVbnZ8zXIBp5fFm1> this form by 13 June 2017. You will receive remote participation details the week of 12 June 2017. The ICANN Policy Development Support Team will host a Policy Update Webinar on Thursday, 15 June 2017 at 10:00 and 19:00 Coordinated Universal Time (UTC), in preparation for the upcoming ICANN59 Policy Forum in Johannesburg, South Africa. The purpose of the webinar is to summarize policy activities across the ICANN policy development community and to brief the community on the Empowered Community consultation and cross-community sessions taking place in Johannesburg. Briefings on the Empowered Community Consultation and Cross-Community Sessions: * Special session on the Proposed Fundamental Bylaws Amendments * Next-Generation Generic Top-Level Domain (gTLD) Registration Directory Services (RDS) policy requirements * General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) * Geographic names * Operational side of ICANN's Operating Plan and Budget * Who sets ICANN's priorities? Updates on Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees: * Address Supporting Organization (ASO) and regional Internet registries (RIR) policy development * Country Code Names Supporting Organization (ccNSO) * Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) * At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) and At-Large Community * Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) * Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC) * Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) The two sessions are duplicates, scheduled to accommodate different time zones. Each session runs in English for 90 minutes. The webinar will be conducted via Adobe Connect along with a dial-in conference bridge for audio. Participants will have the opportunity to ask questions at the end of each session. During the course of the webinar, participants may submit questions using the chat function in Adobe Connect. Recordings of the webinars will be made available <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/presentations-2012-08-27-en> here. The Policy Development Support Team is always available to answer any questions via email at <mailto:policyinfo@icann.org> policyinfo(a)icann.org. Please RSVP via <https://goo.gl/forms/LTVbnZ8zXIBp5fFm1> this form by 13 June 2017. You will receive remote participation details the week of 12 June 2017. Ozan Sahin Community Engagement Support Coordinator Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct Line: +90.212.999.6218 Mobile: +90.533.641.0007 Email: ozan.sahin(a)icann.org <mailto:ozan.sahin@icann.org> Skype: ozan.sahin.icann www.icann.org

1 0

For your review - letter to chartering organizations
by Marika Konings May 18, 2017

May 18, 2017

Dear All, Please find attached the proposed letter to the CCWG Chartering Organizations in relation to the work plan and approach for dealing with the charter questions. You are encouraged to share any comments / edits you may have with the mailing list by Wednesday 24 May at the latest. Following that, staff will go ahead and submit this letter on behalf of the CCWG to the Chartering Organizations. Best regards, 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-…>.

1 0