August 2013 - council - lists.icann.org

Item for Discussion on Implementation and Policy Working Group
by Neuman, Jeff Sept. 5, 2013

Sept. 5, 2013

The provisional leadership of the Policy and Implementation WG would like to invite ICANN Board members to participate in and/or observe the WG activities at any time. Although they would like to do this, they believe that such an invitation would be more appropriate coming from the GNSO Council rather than the Working Group (if we agreed that this was a good idea). This may be a quick discussion as it seems like a good and productive request, but I thought I would introduce this subject on e-mail and answer any questions on the Council call if any questions come up. Thanks. Jeffrey J. Neuman Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs 46000 Center Oak Plaza, Sterling, VA 20166 Office: +1.571.434.5772 Mobile: +1.202.549.5079 Fax: +1.703.738.7965 / jeff.neuman(a)neustar.biz<mailto:jeff.neuman@neustar.biz> / www.neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz/>

3 3

Policy & Implementation WG Update
by Neuman, Jeff Sept. 4, 2013

Sept. 4, 2013

Dear Councilors, Yesterday we had our first teleconference of the Policy & Implementation Working Group. On behalf of the Working Group, as the GNSO Council Liaison for the Working Group, I would like to inform you that the Working Group has elected to go with two co-chairs, and potentially two vice chairs. The proposed co-chairs are J. Scott Evans (BC) and Chuck Gomes (RySG). Two candidates have been proposed as Vice Chairs, Michael Graham (IPC) and Olevie Kouami (NPOC), however, the Working Group did not yet have time to consider whether to support one candidate or whether to have Co-Vice Chairs as well. The working group is one of the largest groups I have seen to date (30+ members), so having a strong diverse leadership team has some appeal. The Working Group will consider this at its next meeting scheduled for September 4, 2013.. In the meantime, as is required by the GNSO WG Operating Guidelines, the GNSO Council must confirm the appointment of the co-chairs and I ask the Council to do so at its next regularly scheduled meeting on September 5th. In the past, this has not required a motion, but I am happy to craft one for inclusion on the Consent Agenda if deemed appropriate. Until such confirmation occurs, J. Scott and Chuck are serving as provision Co-Chairs. The Working Group is expected to finalize its work plan over the next couple of weeks and set out the milestones, deliverables, etc. and I will update the Council when those are completed. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Best regards, Jeffrey J. Neuman Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs 46000 Center Oak Plaza, Sterling, VA 20166 Office: +1.571.434.5772 Mobile: +1.202.549.5079 Fax: +1.703.738.7965 / jeff.neuman(a)neustar.biz<mailto:jeff.neuman@neustar.biz> / www.neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz/>

2 3

Draft Agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting 5 September 2013 at 15:00 UTC
by Glen de Saint Géry Sept. 4, 2013

Sept. 4, 2013

Dear Councillors, Please find the proposed draft agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting 5 September 2013 at 15:00 UTC. This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures approved 13 September 2012 for the GNSO Council and updated. <http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-13jun13-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 Times 15:00 UTC<http://tinyurl.com/bojlrbx> http://tinyurl.com/mdmrnk9 Coordinated Universal Time 15:00 UTC 08:00 Los Angeles; 11:00 Washington; 16:00 London; 17:00 Paris; 03:00 Wellington next day 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 audio cast http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u Item 1: Administrative matters (10 mins) 1.1 Roll Call 1.2 Statement of interest updates 1.3 Review/amend agenda Item 2: Opening Remarks from Chair (10 mins) Review focus areas and provide updates on specific key themes / topics Include review of Projects List<http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/projects-list.pdf> and Action List<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Items>. Comments or questions arising. Item 3: Consent agenda 3.1 - Locking of a Domain Name subject to UDRP Proceedings GNSO Council approval of Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board 3.2 - Policy & Implementation Working Group GNSO Council approval of co-chairs J.Scott Evans (BC) and Chuck Gomes (RySG). Item 4: DRAFT MOTION - To approve Whois Survey Working Group (WSWG) final report and recommendations<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/whois/wswg-final-21aug13-en.pdf> (10 mins) This report<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/whois/wswg-final-21aug13-en.pdf> is published in response to a request by the GNSO Council for a report and analysis on a survey about possible technical requirements of a future WHOIS Service. The objective for the Working Group is to develop a set of proposed recommendations around the measurement of support of proposed technical requirements. After consideration of community input on a draft survey and the implementation of the Lime Survey software within the ICANN IT infrastructure, the survey was made available to the community in September 2012. ICANN staff compiled and consolidated the survey results and the WSWG completed the WSWG Final Report<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/whois/wswg-final-21aug13-en.pdf> for delivery to the GNSO Council. Here the Council will review a draft motion in preparation for voting to approve the report it at the next meeting. 4.1 - Review the draft motion Motion to approve Whois Survey Working Group (WSWG) Final Report and Recommendations: WHEREAS, 1. on 07 May 2009, the GNSO Council resolved that Policy Staff, with the assistance of technical staff and GNSO Council members as required, should collect and organize a comprehensive set of requirements for the Whois service policy tools; 2. on 29 July 2010, Staff published the Inventory of Whois Service Requirements - Final Report; 3. in July 2011, volunteers drafted a proposed charter for a Whois Survey "Working Group", preferring the term "Working Group" to "Drafting Team" in this case; http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/charter-wswg-06oct11-en.pdf; 4. on 30 May 2012, the WSWG published a draft of the Whois Service Requirements Survey for public comment, http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/draft-whois-requirements-survey…; 5. on 13 September 2012, the WSWG released the final Whois Service Requirements Survey to solicit input from community members on the possible technical requirements of a future Whois system, http://gnso.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-13sep12-en.htm; 6. on 13 September 2012, ICANN staff compiled and consolidated the survey results and the WSWG completed the WSWG Final Report, (http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/whois/wswg-final-21aug13-en.pdf) NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, 1. that the GNSO Council thanks the Whois Survey Working Group (WSWG) and ICANN staff for their efforts in conducting the survey and compiling survey results of possible technical requirements of a future Whois system; 2. the GNSO Council further approves the recommendations, as defined in the Final Report (http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/whois/wswg-final-21aug13-en.pdf) to send the survey results to other applicable efforts regarding Whois and Domain Name Registration Data for their consideration. 4.2 - Discussion Item 5: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - A PDP to develop relevant policies for issues not dealt with during the course of the development of the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA) ICANN staff has prepared a paper which summarises the outcomes of the 2013 RAA negotiations and so sets the scene for the subsequent, relevant policy development work to be managed by the Council. Here the Council will receive an update from staff and confirm the intended course of action. 5.1 Staff update (Margie Milam /Mary Wong) 5.2 Discussion 5.3 Next steps Item 6: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Metrics and Reporting Working Group (WG) Despite the unanimous support for this resolution, only six volunteers (3 GNSO, 3 ALAC) have signed up for this effort to date, which is not considered sufficiently representative to kick off the Drafting Team (DT). At the ICANN meeting in Durban, ICANN staff was tasked with looking into and proposing alternative ways forward. Apart from renewing the call for volunteers or delaying this effort, the GNSO Council could consider, as this is a non-PDP WG, to explore an alternative approach not necessarily requiring the formation of a DT or WG. Here the Council will review and discuss the alternatives and consider the next steps. 6.1 Staff update (Berry Cobb) 6.2 Discussion 6.3 Next steps Item 7: DISCUSSION - GAC Engagement / Working with the BGRC WG Here the Council will discuss activity to date and confirm the intended course of action going forward. 7.1 - Status update 7.2 - Discussion 7.3 - Next steps Item 8: INPUT & DISCUSSION - Prospective improvements to the Policy Development Process (PDP) The Council is committed to ongoing enhancements to the methods of working of the Council and the work initiated and managed by the Council. The PDP process is a cornerstone of policy making within the GNSO and, as such, the work of the Council. The PDP outcomes and associated processes are the subject of focus and attention both within the GNSO and the broader ICANN Community. In this agenda item we will discuss a paper prepared by ICANN staff on potential improvements to the PDP process and consider the appropriate next steps. 8.1 - Input on GNSO PDP Improvements (Marika Konings) 8.2 - Discussion 8.3 - Next steps Item 9: DISCUSSION - Role and scope of the Standing Committee on GNSO Improvements Implementation (SCI) Here the Council will review input received at the ICANN meeting in Durban as well as any subsequent information and confirm the intended course of action. 9.1 - Status update 9.2 - Discussion 9.3 - Next steps Item 10: DISCUSSION - Forthcoming reviews of the GNSO and GNSO Council As part of a periodic review process that is built into the ICANN model, board initiated reviews of the GNSO and the GNSO Council as an integral part of the GNSO are expected. In order to be effectively prepared for these reviews, it was proposed in Beijing that a group be formed to understand the issues and begin to take appropriate next steps. One key suggestion from Beijing was that any group (such as the Council) being reviewed undertakes a form of self-review. The intended course of action may have been impacted by the recently announced proposal to delay any board initiated review activity. Here the Council will discuss and potentially confirm the intended course of action of initiating a non-PDP WG. 10.1 - Current status 10.2 - Discussion 10.3 - Next steps Item 11: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Planning for Buenos Aeries Making the most out of the face-to-face meeting time available at the ICANN Meeting in Buenos Aires will take planning. GNSO Council Vice Chair, Wolf-Ulrich Knoben has again volunteered to lead this and will be working with the Council and staff on this effort. Here the Council has the opportunity to feed into plans and provide input based on past experience. Included in this item will be the opportunity to shape the approach to and substance of the Council's proposed meetings with other groups in such as the CCNSO, the GAC and the ICANN board. 11.1 - Update (Wolf-Ulrich Knoben) 11.2 - Discussion 11.3 - Next steps Item 12: Any Other Business 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: a. Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more than one-fourth (1/4) vote of each House or majority of one House. b. Initiate a Policy Development Process ("PDP") Within Scope (as described in Annex A<http://www.icann.org/en/about/governance/bylaws#AnnexA>): requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House. c. Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of GNSO Supermajority. d. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House. e. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority. f. Changes to an Approved PDP Team Charter: For any PDP Team Charter approved under d. or e. above, the GNSO Council may approve an amendment to the Charter through a simple majority vote of each House. g. Terminate a PDP: Once initiated, and prior to the publication of a Final Report, the GNSO Council may terminate a PDP only for significant cause, upon a motion that passes with a GNSO Supermajority Vote in favor of termination. h. 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. i. Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority, j. 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. k. Modification of Approved PDP Recommendation: Prior to Final Approval by the ICANN Board, an Approved PDP Recommendation may be modified or amended by the GNSO Council with a GNSO Supermajority vote. l. A "GNSO Supermajority" shall mean: (a) two-thirds (2/3) of the Council members of each House, or (b) three-fourths (3/4) of one House and a majority of the other House." Appendix 2: Absentee Voting Procedures (GNSO Operating Procedures 4.4<http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-operating-procedures-22sep11-en.pdf>) 4.4.1 Applicability Absentee voting is permitted for the following limited number of Council motions or measures. a. Initiate a Policy Development Process (PDP); b. Approve a PDP recommendation; c. Recommend amendments to the GNSO Operating Procedures (GOP) or ICANN Bylaws; d. Fill a Council position open for election. 4.4.2 Absentee ballots, when permitted, must be submitted within the announced time limit, which shall be 72 hours from the meeting's adjournment. 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 calendar days, provided such amendment is verbally confirmed by all Vice-Chairs present. 4.4.3 The GNSO Secretariat will administer, record, and tabulate absentee votes according to these procedures and will provide reasonable means for transmitting and authenticating absentee ballots, which could include voting by telephone, e- mail, web-based interface, or other technologies as may become available. 4.4.4 Absentee balloting does not affect quorum requirements. (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) UTC 15:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/na/pst.html>) UTC-8+1DST 08:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5+1DST 11:00 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (BRST) UTC-3+1DST 12:00 Montevideo, Uruguay (UYST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/uyst.html>) UTC-3+1DST 12:00 London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 16:00 Abuja, Nigeria (WAT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/africa/wat.html>) UTC+1+0DST 16:00 Bonn, Germany (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 17:00 Stockholm, Sweden (CET) UTC+1+0DST 17:00 Istanbul, Turkey (EEST) UTC+2+0DST 18:00 Ramat Hasharon, Israel(IST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/ist-israel.…>) UTC+2+0DST 18:00 Karachi, Pakistan (PKT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/pkt.html> ) UTC+5+0DST 20:00 Beijing/Hong Kong, China (HKT ) UTC+8+0DST 23:00 Perth, Australia (WST<http://timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/au/wst.html>) UTC+8+0DST 23:00 Wellington, New Zealand (NZDT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/pacific/nzdt.html> ) UTC+12+1DST 03:00 (next day) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of October 2013, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com http://tinyurl.com/mdmrnk9 Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

5 8

Draft minutes of the GNSO Council Public meeting held on 1 August 2013
by Glen de Saint Géry Aug. 28, 2013

Aug. 28, 2013

Dear Councillors, Attached please find the draft minutes of the GNSO Council Public meeting held on 1 August 2013 for your review. If there are no comments, these minutes will be published on the website as approved, according to the GNSO Rules of Procedure http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-13jun13-en.pdf <http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-13jun13-en.pdf%20> > section 3.5 "If no objections are received within 10 days, the minutes will be deemed to have been approved for posting" on 6 September 2013. Thank you very much. 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

1 0

Adopted FY14 Operating Plan and Budget
by Glen de Saint Géry Aug. 28, 2013

Aug. 28, 2013

http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-27aug13-en.htm Adopted FY14 Operating Plan and Budget 27 August 2013 On 22 August 2013, the ICANN Board approved the FY14 Operating Plan and Budget<http://www.icann.org/en/about/financials/adopted-opplan-budget-fy14-22aug13…> [PDF, 1.05 MB]. This document describes the planned core operations and project activities, aligned with the required funding, for the 2014 fiscal year. These funded project activities are based on ICANN's strategic priorities as documented in the adopted three year 2013-2015 Strategic Plan, and include input taken from comments and feedback received from the community on the draft Operating Plan and Budget posted on 10 May 2013. Within the adopted Budget are the FY14 Special Budget Requests [PDF<http://www.icann.org/en/about/financials/budget-requests-fy14-22aug13-en.pdf>, 238 KB] [XLSX<http://www.icann.org/en/about/financials/budget-requests-spreadsheet-fy14-2…>, 38 KB] from the Supporting Organizations, Advisory Committees, and Stakeholder Groups. Those additional requests will be implemented in conjunction with the appropriate ICANN staff work. Throughout the year, up to date financial information can be found on the ICANN Financial Information webpage<https://community.icann.org/display/projfinadhocws/Community+Group+Workspace>. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

RE: WSWG Final Report - Survey Results of Possilbe WHOIS Technical Requirements
by Berry Cobb Aug. 27, 2013

Aug. 27, 2013

Jonathan and All, I was advised that the draft motion could not be accessed. I have attached an older word version and PDF. Thank you. B Berry Cobb Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) 720.839.5735 <mailto:mail@berrycobb.com> mail(a)berrycobb.com @berrycobb From: Berry Cobb [mailto:mail@berrycobb.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 06:03 To: council(a)gnso.icann.org Cc: gnso-secs(a)icann.org Subject: WSWG Final Report - Survey Results of Possilbe WHOIS Technical Requirements Dear All, On behalf of the WHOIS Survey Working Group non-PDP, please find attached for your review and consideration its Final Report. Also attached is a proposed draft motion. This motion is submitted in draft form to allow for review and possible modification prior to formal submission and consideration. You will recall the initial results and proposed recommendations within the draft Final Report were presented to the GNSO Council during its Saturday session at the Durban meeting. If any Council members wish to sponsor and second this motion, please announce so on this list. With best regards, Berry Berry Cobb Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) 720.839.5735 mail(a)berrycobb.com @berrycobb

1 0

GNSO Metrics & Reporting (MetRep) for 5 Sept GNSO Council Meeting
by Berry Cobb Aug. 26, 2013

Aug. 26, 2013

Jonathan and All, Please find attached a document regarding the GNSO Metrics & Reporting WG. As you may recall, we have an issue with limited volunteers within the GNSO for this effort, which is not considered sufficiently representative. At the GNSO Council meeting in Durban, the staff was tasked (Action Item #7 <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Items> ) with developing a possible alternative approach to the Uniformity of Reporting Final Issue Report recommendations approved in Beijing. This MetRep document is intended to provide a possible way forward for the GNSO Council to consider. Item 6: DISCUSSION - Metrics and Reporting WG (10 mins) Despite the unanimous support for this resolution, only six volunteers (3 GNSO, 3 ALAC) have signed up for this effort to date, which is not considered sufficiently representative to kick off the DT. Apart from renewing the call for volunteers or delaying this effort, the GNSO Council could consider, as this is a non-PDP WG, to explore an alternative approach to addressing this issue while still respecting the multi-stakeholder approach, but not necessarily requiring the formation of a DT or WG. Please let me know if you require additional information or if you have any questions. Thank you. B Berry Cobb Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) 720.839.5735 mail(a)berrycobb.com @berrycobb

1 0

REMINDER: Document and Motion deadline Monday 26 August 2013 at 23:59 UTC for Council meeting on 5 September 2013 at 15:00 UTC
by Glen de Saint Géry Aug. 26, 2013

Aug. 26, 2013

Dear Councillors, Reports, motions and documents for consideration are due no later than (NLT) 10 days in advance (i.e MONDAY, 26 August 2013 at 23:59 UTC) of the GNSO Council meeting on 5 September 2013 at 15:00 UTC. Motions should be sent to the Council mailing list and will then be posted on the Wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+05-Septembe… Thank you very much. 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

1 1

Projects List for review
by Glen de Saint Géry Aug. 25, 2013

Aug. 25, 2013

Dear Councillors, In preparation for the Council meeting on 5 September 2013, attached please find the red line and the clean version of the Projects List for your review. The Projects List is also posted at: http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/projects-list.pdf Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Action Items / Possible revision of the SCI Charter
by Jonathan Robinson Aug. 24, 2013

Aug. 24, 2013

All, You will recall from Durban that there is discussion going on within the Standing Committee on Improvements (SCI) regarding possible changes to the charter of the SCI. In order for the Council to be well-informed in any deliberations it may undertake with respect to changes to the charter of the SCI, Jeff kindly offered to provide some background information. As I understand it, the key questions being considered are: 1. Scope: Whether the scope of the SCI's work should be limited to a review of the procedures developed in the GNSO Implementations process, or whether the SCI should also address other procedural issues not related to the improvements process. 2. Duration: Should the SCI be considered the last in the series of committees that arose from the Board review and thus cease to exist when it has completed its review of that work? Or should the SCI continue indefinitely, as an ongoing body that considers procedural questions as raised by the GNSO Council or a group Chartered by the Council? 3. Decision making / Consensus: What the threshold for recommendations of the SCI? Full consensus (as is currently the case) or a change to Standard WG Methodology for Making Decisions. Jeff, if possible, please could you provide that background information next week i.e. ahead of the Council meeting the following week. Thanks for your giving attention to this. Jonathan

1 0