October 2010 - council - lists.icann.org

Voting Remedies due to Absencer
by Ken Bour 27 Oct '10

27 Oct '10

Hi Mary and Rosemary: Chuck Gomes has apprised me that there are no motions scheduled for this Thursdays GNSO Council meeting; therefore, there is no need to implement any voting remedies such as proxy. Since the subject of absence and proxy has arisen a few times, perhaps it would be helpful to use this opportunity to clarify the procedures that apply. I will briefly outline the steps below; however, may I ask that you also take a look at a visual map that Staff prepared which diagrams how the voting remedies work for various conditions such as absence or abstention. The procedures map is located at: http://gnso.icann.org/council/visual-procedures-map-en.htm and contains sample email contents for each of the various scenarios that can occur (e.g. planned absence, unplanned absence, abstention, vacancy). The procedures map and the related online Abstention Notification Form (http://gnso.icann.org/council/abstention-notification-form-en.htm) were both updated recently based on feedback received. A separate announcement will be sent out detailing the changes that were made. The GNSO Operating Procedures (GOP) do not provide an option for a sitting Councilor to transfer votes via proxy. That authority rests with the applicable SG or Constituency. To utilize the proxy voting remedy for a planned absence requires that: 1) The Councilor send an email (sample contents are provided in the visual map) to his/her SG/C outlining the reason for the absence and itemizing the motions for which a remedy is sought. [Note: if any of the motions qualifies for absentee balloting, they should be specifically excluded presuming that the absent Councilor would vote on them (electronically) within the 72 hour period normally allowed]. 2) An officer of the Appointing Organization transmit certain required information (ref. Section 4.5.4-b) to the GNSO Secretariat before the start of the meeting. The information can be provided via the online form as referenced above. 3) There are two important proxy requirements that are addressed in the online form: a. For each motion that is scheduled to come up for vote, the Appointing Organization must have established an affirmative or negative voting position per its Charter provisions; and b. For each motion, the Appointing Organization must affirm that is has directed the Councilor serving as proxy how to vote. In the specific case of the NCSG, Staff notes that the Appointing Organization differs between the Board appointees and those Councilors who were elected by the NCUC. For Mary, Bill, and Wendy, a voting remedy would have to be authorized by the NCUC Chair (or designated officer); whereas, for Rosemary, Debbie, and Rafik, there is a footnote in the GNSO Operating Procedures which stipulates that they are considered to have been appointed by the NCSG. If there were motions to be voted on this Thursday; then the above steps would have to have been completed before the start of the Council meeting in order for the identified Councilor to register the proxy vote. In some situations, it is recognized that it may be difficult for the proxy conditions to be satisfied. In those cases, another option that could be employed is the Temporary Alternate (TA) remedy. There is no requirement for a prior voting position or directing a Councilors vote; however, you should be aware that a TA cannot be a sitting (or term-limited) Councilor. All of the TA conditions are covered in the visual map as well as the GOP (see Section 4.5.3-c). If there are any additional questions, I would be pleased to try and answer them. The topic of voting remedies is due to be discussed (Item #5) on the Council agenda this Thursday. Fortunately, Ray Fassett, Chair of the GCOT, will be on hand to provide an overview, philosophy, and rationale for the procedures that have been adopted. Staff will also be available to answer any specific procedural questions that may arise. Finally, a short commercial advertisement: Staff has a standing offer available to any SG/C that would like to have a briefing or tutorial on the voting remedies procedures. Regards, Ken Bour

1 0

RE: Absence from Council
by Ken Bour 27 Oct '10

27 Oct '10

Rosemary: I have been apprised that there are no motions scheduled for this Thursdays GNSO Council meeting; therefore, there is no need to implement any voting remedies such as proxy. Rather than attempt to write out the procedures, may I ask that you take a look at a visual map that Staff prepared which diagrams how the voting remedies work for various conditions such as absence or abstention. The procedures map is located at: http://gnso.icann.org/council/visual-procedures-map-en.htm and contains sample language for the various emails that might be created under different scenarios. Staff has a standing offer available to any SG/C that would like to have a briefing or tutorial on the voting remedies procedures. Thank you, Ken Bour From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Glen de Saint Géry Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 11:17 AM To: Rosemary Sinclair; council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: [council] RE: Absence from Council Hi Rosemary, Thank you for your notification. Please find the link to the Absentee Advice and Proxy Procedures below: http://gnso.icann.org/council/abstention-notification-form-en.htm Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org <http://gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org Forwarded From: Rosemary Sinclair Hi Glen I have to go to NZ on Friday so will be on plane while Council meeting is on Would you remind me of the Absentee Advice and Proxy Procedures please? Cheers Rosemary Rosemary Sinclair Managing Director, ATUG Chairman, INTUG

1 0

Audited Financial Statements Posted
by Glen de Saint Géry 27 Oct '10

27 Oct '10

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-27oct10-en.htm Audited Financial Statements Posted 27 October 2010 ICANN's FY10 Audited Financials are now posted (http://www.icann.org/en/financials/financial-report-fye-30jun10-en.pdf [PDF, 221 KB]). In accordance with Article XVI of ICANN's by-laws, the statements are posted by the end of October and are available for review by the community. For the 11th straight year, ICANN has received an unqualified "clean" opinion from ICANN's independent auditors, Moss Adams LLP, the 11th largest accounting firm in the United States. The Community is invited to review ICANN's audited financials and to provide commentaries and/or questions. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

RE: Absence from Council
by Glen de Saint Géry 27 Oct '10

27 Oct '10

Hi Rosemary, Thank you for your notification. Please find the link to the Absentee Advice and Proxy Procedures below: http://gnso.icann.org/council/abstention-notification-form-en.htm Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org Forwarded From: Rosemary Sinclair Hi Glen I have to go to NZ on Friday - so will be on plane while Council meeting is on Would you remind me of the Absentee Advice and Proxy Procedures please? Cheers Rosemary Rosemary Sinclair Managing Director, ATUG Chairman, INTUG

1 0

FW: Rosemary Sinclair absence from council meeting.
by Glen de Saint Géry 27 Oct '10

27 Oct '10

-----Original Message----- Forwarded From: Avri Doria As per the proxy requirements for absence: Rosemary Sinclair will be absent from the upcoming council meeting. For any votes that may occur, the NCSG has assigned her proxy to William Drake. Thank you. Avri Doria Chair, NCSG Executive Committee Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

FW: Mary Wong absence from council meeting
by Glen de Saint Géry 27 Oct '10

27 Oct '10

-----Original Message----- Forwarded From: Avri Doria As per the proxy requirements for absence: Mary Wong will be absent from the upcoming council meeting. For any votes that may occur, the NCSG has assigned her proxy to Wendy Seltzer. Thank you. Avri Doria Chair, NCSG Executive Committee Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Updated GNSO Council Agenda for 28 October 2010 at 20 UTC
by Glen de Saint Géry 26 Oct '10

26 Oct '10

Dear All, Please find the updated GNSO Council Agenda for 28 October 2010 at 20 UTC. http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-council-28oct10-en.htm https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?proposed_agenda_28_october_2010 The updates items are : Item 3: Election of Council Chair & Vice Chairs (15 minutes) Item 4: Whois Studies (15 minutes) Item 7: Planning for Cartagena Meetings (15 minutes) 7.1 Overview of plans/schedule (Stéphane Van Gelder, Glen de Saint Géry) http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/gnso-draft-agenda-cartagena-26oct10-en.pdf Item 9: Other Business (5 Minutes) 9.1 Final Report on Proposals for Improvements to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement <http://gnso.icann.org/issues/raa/raa-improvements-proposal-final-report-18o…> http://gnso.icann.org/issues/raa/raa-improvements-proposal-final-report-18o… Agenda for GNSO Council Meeting 28 October 2010. This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures approved 5 August 2010 for the GNSO Council. http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-op-procedures-05aug10-en.pdf For convenience: * An excerpt of the ICANN Bylaws defining the voting thresholds is provided in Appendix 1 at the end of this agenda. * An excerpt from the Council Operating Procedures defining the absentee voting procedures is provided in Appendix 2 at the end of this agenda. Meeting Time 20:00 UTC See the following and http://www.timeanddate.com/ for other times: 13:00 PDT; 15:00 CDT; 16:00 EST; 17:00 Buenos Aires; 17:00 Brazil; 22:00 CET; 24:00 Moscow Friday, 29 October 01:00 Pakistan; 04:00 Hong Kong; 05:00 Tokyo, 07:00 Melbourne Dial-in numbers will be sent individually to Council members. Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if a dial out call is needed. GNSO Council meeting audiocast http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u Item 1: Administrative matters (15 minutes) 1.1 Roll call of Council members and polling for Disclosures of Interest * Per the GNSO Operating Procedures, Section 5.4, we are required to poll Councilors regarding "any direct or indirect interests that may affect a Relevant Party's judgment on an issue that is under review, consideration, or discussion" in this meeting. Here is the definition provided in the procedures: "Disclosure of Interest: Relevant to a specific issue at a specific time. A written statement made by a Relevant Party of direct and indirect interests that may be commercial (e.g. monetary payment) or non-commercial (e.g. non-tangible benefit such as publicity, political or academic visibility) and may affect, or be perceived to affect, the Relevant Party's judgment on a specific issue." The main issues for this meeting are * GNSO Prioritization * Election Procedures for Council Chair & Vice Chairs * Whois Studies * Voting Procedures when Councilors are absent &/or must abstain * Disclosure of Interest Procedures 1.2 Update any statements of interest Note that revised SoI"s were received from: * Terry Davis<http://gnso.icann.org/council/soi/davis-soi-19oct10-en.htm> * David Taylor<http://gnso.icann.org/council/soi/taylor-soi-21oct10.htm> 1.3 Review/amend agenda 1.4. Note the status of minutes for the previous Council meeting per the GNSO Operating Procedures: * 7 October 2010 meeting minutes <http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg09798.html%20%20> - Scheduled for approval on 28 October 2010. Item 2: GNSO Project Prioritization (20 minutes) 2.1 Refer to posted project ratings<http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/new-gtld-applicant-support-draft-recom…>: http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-work-prioritization-project-list-value-r… 2.2 Key points made in the 15 July Council meeting (from meeting minutes): * ". . . not a useful exercise, not much was learnt, should not proceed further with the prioritization exercise." * ". . . spending more time on the exercise will not accomplish useful results." * "It was a difficult exercise, policy matters were not prioritized and the core issue, management of the workload, still has not been resolved." * "The exercise was intended as a first step and not intended to solve the workload management; other steps are needed. The exercise contributed an important degree of common awareness and dissent to the group." * "The prioritization process could be improved with further input from the Councilors and stakeholder groups." * "The exercise is important and informative from a staff perspective and the Council needs to look at a two-step process going forward: step one - form a small team to improve the process used to date drawing on input received; step two - develop a process to manage the workload with input from staff of the resources being used to support each of the working groups, which will reflect both staff and community efforts." * "Support was expressed for continuing the prioritization work, but linking it to the overall ICANN Staff and Community workload and to the Budget process." * "The question of available resources should be looked at in context. The Vertical Integration working group as an example of one that would not normally have commenced with all the work before Council, yet it did and the community resources were available." * "Some believe that work should be prioritized but the methodology chosen is not the most appropriate or efficient." 2.3 Next Steps * Staff Utilization Analysis (Liz Gasster) Refer to: http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/gnso-council-resource-management-polic… * Results of Adobe Connect Poll regarding possible next steps: o Option 1: Spend no more time on prioritization - 5 votes (33%) o Option 2: Develop a plan for using the results to manage the workload in the near term - 2 votes (13%) o Option 3: Form a drafting team with the task of developing a new process - 0 votes (0%) o Option 4: Form a drafting team with the task of improving the process - 1 vote (7%) o Option 5: Other? (including combinations of options 2, 3, and or 4) - 7 votes (47%) * Discussion? * Action Items Item 3: Election of Council Chair & Vice Chairs (15 minutes) Refer to proposed procedures: http://gnso.icann.org/elections/draft-election-procedures-2010.htm 3.1 Brief overview of procedures (Chuck Gomes) 3.2 Discussion 3.3 Edits? 3.4 Any objections to using the procedures for this election cycle? 3.5 Should we consider referring the election procedures to the OSC & GCOT for further review with the goal of starting the chair election process earlier to increase the chances of the chair being elected before the vice chairs? Item 4: Whois Studies (15 minutes) 4.1 Status Report and presentation on Whois Studies (Liz Gasster) http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/presentation-whois-studies-oct10-en.pdf * Refer to redline version of Proxy/Privacy Reveal study (Study 4) RFP at http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-29sep10-en.htm 4.2 Staff analysis of Study #3 -- WHOIS Privacy and Proxy Abuse (Liz Gasster) http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/gnso-whois-pp-abuse-studies-report-05oct… 4.3 Discussion 4.4 Next steps? Item 5: Voting Procedures when Councilors are absent &/or must abstain (25 minutes) 5.1 Overview (Ken Bour, Staff; Ray Fassett, GNSO Council Operations Work Team (GCOT) Chair) 5.2 Discussion 5.3 Report from Operations Steering Committee/ GNSO Council Operations Work Team (OSC/GCOT) (Philip Sheppard, OSC Chair; Ray Fassett) 5.4 Next steps? Item 6: Disclosure of Interest Procedures (15 minutes) 6.1 Report from OSC/GCOT (Philip Sheppard, Ray Fassett) 6.2 Discussion 6.3 Next steps? Item 7: Planning for Cartagena Meetings (15 minutes) 7.1 Overview of plans/schedule (Stéphane Van Gelder, Glen de Saint Géry) http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/gnso-draft-agenda-cartagena-26oct10-en.pdf 7.2 Next steps? Item 8: Status of Continued Action Items (10 Minutes) 8.1 Drafting team for draft DNS-CERT/SSR WG charter (Chuck Gomes) 8.2 Standing committee to monitor GNSO Improvements implementation (Glen de Saint Géry) * Volunteers to date: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben (ISCPC), Tatyana Khramtsova (RrSG), Ray Fassett (RySG), Avri Doria (NCSG), Rudi Vansnick (NCSG), Philip Sheppard (CBUC) * Feedback from Steering Committees (Rob Hoggarth) * Question raised regarding GNSO Operating Procedures: Should the concerns about the newly approved disclosure of interest requirements be dealt with by the OSC & GCOT or by the standing committee? * Next steps? Charter? 8.3 Progress of House/SG Elections * Councilors * Chair & Vice Chair Nominations * NCA Assignments Item 9: Other Business (5 Minutes) 9.1 Final Report on Proposals for Improvements to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement <http://gnso.icann.org/issues/raa/raa-improvements-proposal-final-report-18o…> http://gnso.icann.org/issues/raa/raa-improvements-proposal-final-report-18o… Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article X, Section 3) 9. Except as otherwise specified in these Bylaws, Annex A hereto, or the GNSO Operating Procedures, the default threshold to pass a GNSO Council motion or other voting action requires a simple majority vote of each House. The voting thresholds described below shall apply to the following GNSO actions: 1. Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more than 25% vote of each House or majority of one House; 2. Initiate a Policy Development Process ("PDP") Within Scope (as described in Annex A): requires an affirmative vote of more than 33% of each House or more than 66% of one House; 3. Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of more than 75% of one House and a majority of the other House ("GNSO Supermajority"); 4. Approve a PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a majority of each House and further requires that one GNSO Council member representative of at least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups supports the Recommendation; 5. Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority; and 6. Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that "a two-thirds vote of the council" demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded with respect to any contracting party affected by such contract provision. Appendix 2: Absentee Voting Procedures (Council Operating Procedures 4.4) Members that are absent from a meeting at the time of a vote on the following items may vote by absentee ballot: 1. Initiate a policy development process; 2. Forward a policy recommendation to the Board; 3. Recommend amendments to the ICANN Bylaws; 4. Fill a position open for election. The GNSO Secretariat will provide reasonable means for transmitting and authenticating absentee ballots, which could include voting by telephone, e- mail, or web-based interface. Absentee ballots must be submitted within 72 hours following the start of the meeting in which a vote is initiated, except that, in exceptional circumstances announced at the time of the vote, the Chair may reduce this time to 24 hours or extend the time to 7 days. There must be a quorum for the meeting in which the vote is initiated. ________________________________________ Local time between March and October, Summer in the NORTHERN hemisphere ________________________________________ Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) 20:00UTC ________________________________________ California, USA (PST) UTC-8+1DST 13:00 Cedar Rapids, USA (CDT) UTC-6+1DST 15:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EDT) UTC-5+1DST 16:00 Buenos Aires, Argentina UTC-3+0DST 17:00 Rio de Janeiro/Sao Paulo Brazil UTC-3+0DST 17:00 Dublin, Ireland (GMT) UTC+0DST 21:00 Darmstadt, Germany (CET) UTC+1+1DST 22:00 Paris, France (CET) UTC+1+1DST 22:00 Moscow, Russian Federation (MSK) UTC+3+0DST 00:00 next day Karachi, Pakistan UTC+5+0DST 01:00 next day Hong Kong, China UTC+8+0DST 04:00 next day Tokyo, Japan UTC+9+0DST 05:00 next day Melbourne/Sydney Australia (EDT) UTC+10+1DST 07:00 next day ________________________________________ The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of October 2010, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

RE: Absence from GNSO Council meeting
by Glen de Saint Géry 26 Oct '10

26 Oct '10

Dear Mary, I hereby acknowledge receipt of your notification. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org Forwarded From: Mary Wong Dear Glen, This is a note to inform you and thus the Council that I will be unable to participate on the Council call this Thursday due to travel. I therefore appoint my co-Councillor, Wendy Seltzer (cc'd here) to be my proxy for any applicable purpose, including voting, that may arise during the call. My Stakeholder Group has been duly notified and our Chair, Avri, is also cc'd on this email for confirmation. Please acknowledge receipt and do let me/us know if there is further follow up required. Thanks much, Mary Mary W S Wong Professor of Law Chair, Graduate IP Programs

1 0

TLG Review – Independent External Reviewers' Draft Report for Public Comment
by Glen de Saint Géry 25 Oct '10

25 Oct '10

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-23oct10-en.htm ________________________________ TLG Review – Independent External Reviewers' Draft Report for Public Comment 23 October 2010 Public Comment Deadline: 21 November 2010 ICANN continues its work to conduct bylaw mandated organizational reviews to provide for continual improvement in its technical coordination and policy development support roles. In August 2010, ICANN appointed JAS Communications LLC to carry out an independent, external review of ICANN's Technical Liaison Group (TLG). JAS Communications LLC has delivered their draft report<http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/tlg/tlg-review-draft-report-16oct10-en.pdf> [PDF, 286 KB] with recommendations and conclusions based on their independent research and interviews conducted. The draft report has been received by the ICANN Board's Structural Improvements Committee (SIC). The draft report is now released for consultation and public comment. Comments received will be taken into account by the independent external reviewers in producing their final report, which will then be considered by the SIC and subsequently by the ICANN Board for potential actions to take. The community is invited to participate in this comment forum by 21 November 2010 and to provide input on the draft report via: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201011-en.htm#tlg-rev… For additional information, please refer to the TLG Review web page<http://icann.org/en/reviews/tlg/>. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

ICANN News Alert -- Updated New gTLD Budget Published
by Glen de Saint Géry 25 Oct '10

25 Oct '10

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-22oct10-en.htm ________________________________ Updated New gTLD Budget Published 22 October 2010 The New gTLD Budget is a critical component of the program and has been recently updated following public comment and additional analysis. Taking that into account, the Board approved the budget at its most recent meeting (http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-25sep10-en.htm#1). The document is an analysis of the New gTLD program costs, including an assessment of the timing required to complete certain remaining activities necessary for operational readiness. To ensure costs are appropriately managed, tracked and disclosed, the gTLD budget has been organized according to three phases: 1) Development; 2) Deployment; and 3) Application Processing. You can see the updated budget here: http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/explanatory-memo-new-gtld-program-… [PDF, 456 KB] The proposed budget was originally posted for public comment on 31 May 2010. Only four comments were received but other comments, received during the general Guidebook comment process were also taken into account. Staff's Summary & Analysis of these comments can be found here: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/summary-comments-new-gtld-program-bu… [PDF, 108 KB]. What changed? The main change from the original proposed budget is the deployment costs which increased from US$2.6 million to US$4 million. Two major additions include funds for non-financial support of applicants as recommended by the Applicant Support working group and funding for root zone stability efforts. The snapshot from the Applicant Support Working Group can be found here: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#wg-snapshot. The Final Milestone recommendation from the group should be available soon. Resources * New gTLD Program: http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtld-program.htm * Applicant Support Working Group snapshot: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#wg-snapshot Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0