November 2014 - council - lists.icann.org

GNSO Council resolution 13 November 2014
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 13, 2014

Nov. 13, 2014

Dear Councillors, Ahead of the official Council minutes, the following resolution was passed at the GNSO Council meeting on 13 November 2014. Adoption of a Charter for a Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability Whereas, 1. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) has requested that ICANN "convene a multistakeholder process to develop a plan to transition the U.S. government stewardship role" with regard to the IANA Functions and related root zone management. 2. During discussions around the transition process, the community raised the broader topic of the impact of the change on ICANN's accountability given its historical contractual relationship with the United States and NTIA. Accountability in this context is defined, according to the Netmundial multistakeholder statement[1], as the existence of mechanisms for independent checks and balances as well as for review and redress. 3. The concerns raised during these discussions around the transition process indicate that the level of trust into the existing ICANN accountability mechanisms does not yet meet some stakeholder's expectations. Considering that the NTIA has stressed that it was expecting community consensus regarding the transition, this gap between the current situation and stakeholder expectations may prevent the transition to proceed. 4. A DT was formed with participants, amongst others, from the ccNSO, GNSO, ASO and ALAC to develop a charter for a Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability. 5. The DT delivered the proposed charter for consideration to all the ICANN Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees for consideration (see: http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/enhancing-accountability-charter-03nov14-en…) Resolved, 1. The GNSO Council approves the Charter (http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/enhancing-accountability-charter-03nov14-en…) and appoints Thomas Rickert as the GNSO Council liaison and GNSO co-chair to the CWG. 2. Each GNSO Stakeholder Group will identify one member for the CWG by 20 November taking into account the charter requirement that best efforts should be made to ensure that members: · Have sufficient expertise to participate in the applicable subject matter (see for example https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/enhancing-accountability-faqs-2014-08… for areas identified for expertise); · Commit to actively participate in the activities of the CWG on an ongoing and long-term basis; and · Where appropriate, solicit and communicate the views and concerns of individuals in the organization that appoints them. 3. The GNSO will collaborate with the other SOs and ACs to issue a call for participants to join the CWG, each in accordance with its own rules. [1] http://netmundial.br/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/NETmundial-Multistakeholder… 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

1 0

FYI - ICANN Clears the Way for Two-character Second-level Domain Names
by Marika Konings Nov. 13, 2014

Nov. 13, 2014

Dear All, For your information, please find below a blog post in relation to the proposed process for releasing two-character second level domain names. Best regards, Marika ICANN Clears the Way for Two-character Second-level Domain Names <https://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=300&winname=addthis&pub=ra-52fcc7eb2…><https://www.icann.org/news/blog/icann-clears-the-way-for-two-character-seco…><https://www.icann.org/news/blog/icann-clears-the-way-for-two-character-seco…><https://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=300&winname=addthis&pub=ra-52fcc7eb2…><https://www.icann.org/news/blog/icann-clears-the-way-for-two-character-seco…><https://www.icann.org/news/blog/icann-clears-the-way-for-two-character-seco…> Currently, Specification 5 of the base new gTLD Registry Agreement (RA) requires registry operators to reserve all two-character ASCII labels at the second-level. The RA also states that registry operators can request permission from ICANN to release these labels. Earlier this year, many new gTLD registry operators requested permission from ICANN to release some, or all, of the reserved two-character labels. ICANN has processed these requests under the Registry Services Evaluation Policy (RSEP). To date, ICANN has processed over 60 RSEP requests<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/rsep-2014-02-19-en> supporting the release of a variety of two-character labels for over 200 new gTLDs. Registry Agreement amendments permitting the requested releases were proposed and posted for Public Comment. ICANN batched these amendments for a combined total of five Public Comment periods<https://www.icann.org/public-comments>. The five Public Comment periods gave governments, trademark owners, registries, country-code operators, the technical community, and others the opportunity to comment on the proposed Registry Agreement amendments that would allow the release of two-character labels. After reviewing the summary and analysis of the first batch of Public Comments, the ICANN Board passed Resolution 2014.10.16.14<https://features.icann.org/introduction-two-character-domain-names-new-gtld…> on 7 November 2014 directing ICANN staff to "develop and implement an efficient procedure for the release of two-character domains currently required to be reserved in the New gTLD Registry Agreement," while taking into consideration advice from the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) as published in the "Los Angeles Communiqué<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/gac-to-board-15oct14-e…>" [PDF, 127 KB]. Looking Forward Following the Board Resolution, ICANN has been working to develop a more efficient procedure enabling the release of two-character labels for new gTLDs, and I'm happy to say we're almost there. We plan to release an authorization process by 1 December that no longer requires Registry operators to reserve number/letter (2a), letter/number (a2), or number/number (22) labels at the second-level. This category of two-character labels has been determined not to raise significant security, stability and competition concerns and has received no objections from governments, country-code managers, members of the technical community, or rights holders. The remaining two-character ASCII labels, or letter/letter labels, will also be eligible for consideration for "authorization" to be released. The GAC's discussion on two-character labels focused on letter/letter (aa) two-character labels. The GAC stated "that the public comment period is an important transparency mechanism" and that relevant governments should be alerted when such requests arise. Accordingly ICANN has developed a Request for Authorization to Release process for registries who want to release letter/letter labels from reservation. The process consists of the following: 1. Registry operator submits a request to ICANN to release one or more letter/letter two-character labels. 2. ICANN reviews the request, and posts it for comment for 30 days. 3. ICANN notifies the GAC of the request and the comment period. 4. If there are no relevant and reasoned objections to the request, ICANN will authorize the requested letter/letter two-character labels to be released. The 30-day posting period provides the transparency valued by the GAC. Once a request is posted, governments will be provided with the opportunity to comment on registry requests. Under the new process, registries with RSEP requests that have completed the RSEP process and whose proposed RA amendment to release the requested two-character SLDs from reservation have undergone Public Comment will receive an authorization from ICANN by 1 December to release the requested SLDs from reservation. These requests have already been posted for an extended period (up to six months) while the community discussed and considered the issues raised by the requests, and they have each been subject to a 42-day public comment period. There were no comments opposing the proposed amendments that would allow registries to release the requested two-character SLDs from reservation. Those registries that have not had a proposed Registry Agreement amendment to release from reservation the requested two-character SLDs undergo Public Comment will be asked to use the new process outlined above. It is important for the community and registries to remember, that all authorizations to release two-character SLDs from reservation will continue to be subject to all terms of the Registry Agreement, including Rights Protection Mechanisms and the Name Collision Framework. We are pleased to launch this new process that allows for more efficient processing of applicable requests to release certain two-character SLDs from reservation, while respecting the requests of the GAC and other community members. We look forward to continuing to solicit feedback from various members of the community while improving efficiencies for contracted parties.

1 0

FW: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#163]
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 12, 2014

Nov. 12, 2014

From: ICANN [mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com] Sent: mercredi 12 novembre 2014 21:41 To: gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org; council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#163] Name of Officer: * Keith Drazek Officer Email Address: * kdrazek(a)verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com> Date Prepared: * Wednesday, November 12, 2014 GNSO Organization: * Registries Stakeholder Group Officer Position or Title: * RySG Chair Voting Remedy: * Proxy Reason(s) for or condition(s) leading to the remedy: * Jonathan Robinson has suffered a family loss and will not be able to participate in the November 13, 2014 GNSO Council teleconference. Specific subject(s)/measure(s)/motion(s)/action(s) of the Council for which the remedy is being exercised: * Donna Austin will act as proxy for Jonathan Robinson's votes on behalf of the RySG. Date upon which the remedy will expire or terminate: [Note: may not exceed 3 months initially; may be renewed by sending an email with explanation to GNSO Secretariat] * Friday, November 14, 2014 I affirm that a voting position has been established on the matter(s) at issue pursuant to provisions contained in our Charter or Bylaws. * Yes Our GNSO Councilor has been instructed on how to vote on the matter(s). * Yes Please identify the GNSO Councilor who will serve as the voting proxy: * Donna Austin

1 0

FW: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#162]
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 12, 2014

Nov. 12, 2014

FYI From: ICANN [mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com] Sent: mercredi 12 novembre 2014 21:27 To: gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org; council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#162] Name of Officer: * Steve Metalitz Officer Email Address: * met(a)msk.com<mailto:met@msk.com> Date Prepared: * Wednesday, November 12, 2014 GNSO Organization: * Intellectual Property Constituency Officer Position or Title: * Vice President Voting Remedy: * Proxy Reason(s) for or condition(s) leading to the remedy: * IPC councilor Brian winterfeldt anticipates he will be unavailable at the time of the Council call 13 Nov 14. If Brian is able ot join the call, this proxy should be deemed rescinded. Specific subject(s)/measure(s)/motion(s)/action(s) of the Council for which the remedy is being exercised: * All matters coming before Council Date upon which the remedy will expire or terminate: [Note: may not exceed 3 months initially; may be renewed by sending an email with explanation to GNSO Secretariat] * Friday, November 14, 2014 I affirm that a voting position has been established on the matter(s) at issue pursuant to provisions contained in our Charter or Bylaws. * Yes Our GNSO Councilor has been instructed on how to vote on the matter(s). * Yes Please identify the GNSO Councilor who will serve as the voting proxy: * Heather Forrest

1 0

FW: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#161]
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 12, 2014

Nov. 12, 2014

FYI From: ICANN [mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com] Sent: mercredi 12 novembre 2014 01:18 To: gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org; council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#161] Name of Officer: * Steve DelBianco Officer Email Address: * sdelbianco(a)netchoice.org<mailto:sdelbianco@netchoice.org> Date Prepared: * Tuesday, November 11, 2014 GNSO Organization: * Business Constituency Officer Position or Title: * Vice chair for policy coordination Voting Remedy: * Proxy Reason(s) for or condition(s) leading to the remedy: * BC Councilor Gabriela Szlak anticipates she may have a personal conflict at time of the 13-Nov Council call. If Gabriela is able to join the call, this proxy should be rescinded. Specific subject(s)/measure(s)/motion(s)/action(s) of the Council for which the remedy is being exercised: * all matters that come before the Council Date upon which the remedy will expire or terminate: [Note: may not exceed 3 months initially; may be renewed by sending an email with explanation to GNSO Secretariat] * Friday, November 14, 2014 I affirm that a voting position has been established on the matter(s) at issue pursuant to provisions contained in our Charter or Bylaws. * Yes Our GNSO Councilor has been instructed on how to vote on the matter(s). * Yes Please identify the GNSO Councilor who will serve as the voting proxy: * Susan Kawaguchi

1 0

Agenda for ICANN Board meeting - teleconference 17 Nov 2014
by Bruce Tonkin Nov. 11, 2014

Nov. 11, 2014

From: https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/agenda-2014-11-17-en Agenda | ICANN Special Board Meeting 17 Nov 2014 Consent Agenda * Approval of Minutes * RSSAC Appointments * SSAC Advisory on DNS "Search List" Processing and DDoS Attacks Leveraging DNS Infrastructure * Review of the Address Supporting Organization (ASO) Completion Main Agenda * Meeting Strategy Working Group (MSWG) Recommendations Implementation Plan for 2016 * Planning for Future gTLD Application Rounds * AOB Published on 11 November 2014

1 0

Revised GNSO Council Meeting Agenda on 13 November 2014 at 11:00 UTC
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 10, 2014

Nov. 10, 2014

Dear Councillors, Please find the revised proposed GNSO Council Meeting Agenda on 13 November 2014 at 11:00 UTC. The revisions consist of a changing the time for certain items and the addition of two topics under Item 9: Any Other Business, namely: It is noted that Carlos Raúl Gutierrez has volunteered for the co-chair position in the CWG to develop a framework for the use of country and territory names as TLDs. 9.4 IGO/INGO Curative Rights Protection WG letter<http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg16859.html> requesting Mason Cole to engage with the GAC on certain questions regarding the GAC Los Angeles Communique. 9.5 Council in attendance to review informal notes of the Council Development Session held on Friday, 17 October 2014. 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 Time 11:00 UTC: http://tinyurl.com/p2wjsa6 Coordinated Universal Time 11:00 UTC 03:00 Los Angeles; 06:00 Washington; 11:00 London; 12:00 Brussels; 19:00 Perth Councillors should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if a dial out call is needed. Item 1: Administrative matters (5 mins) 1.1 Roll Call 1.2 Statement of interest updates 1.3 Review/amend agenda 1.4. Note the status of minutes for the previous Council meeting per the GNSO Operating Procedures: Minutes of the GNSO Council Public meeting 15 October 2014 will be posted as approved on xxxxxx 2014 Item 2: Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action List (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 (5 mins) Item 4: MOTION - Adoption of a Charter for a Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (20 mins) The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) has requested that ICANN "convene a multistakeholder process to develop a plan to transition the U.S. government stewardship role" with regard to the IANA Functions and related root zone management. During discussions around the transition process, the community raised the broader topic of the impact of the change on ICANN's accountability given its historical contractual relationship with the United States and NTIA. The concerns raised during these discussions around the transition process indicate that the level of trust into the existing ICANN accountability mechanisms does not yet meet some stakeholder's expectations. Considering that the NTIA has stressed that it was expecting community consensus regarding the transition, this gap between the current situation and stakeholder expectations may prevent the transition to proceed. As a result, a DT was formed with participants, amongst others, from the ccNSO, GNSO, ASO and ALAC to develop a charter for a Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability. The DT delivered the proposed charter for consideration to all the ICANN Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees on 3 November 2014. Here the Council will vote on whether or not to adopt the charter for a Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability. 4.1 - Review the motion: Motion 1<https://community.icann.org/x/V0PRAg> 4.2 - Discussion 4.3 - Vote Item 5: MOTION - Changes to GNSO Operating Procedures & Working Group Guidelines to Address Issues relating to Waiver of Motion Deadlines, GNSO Council Voting Outside a Council Meeting & Working Group Consensus Levels (20 mins) The GNSO Council determined that 1) the current GNSO Operating Procedures do not contain a specific provision on waiving the deadline to submit a motion for voting by the GNSO Council; 2) the current GNSO Operating Procedures also do not contain a specific provision that permits the Council to vote outside a meeting; and 3) the language relating to Consensus Levels in the current GNSO Working Group Guidelines, which form Annex I of the GNSO Operating Procedures, may require further clarification. As a result, the GNSO Council requested the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) to consider: 1) whether there should be a modification to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures to address the issues of waiving the deadline for submission of a motion and allowing the Council to vote outside a meeting; and 2) whether the language relating to Consensus Levels in the GNSO Working Group Guidelines requires clarification. The GNSO Council will now consider the changes proposed by the SCI to the GNSO Operating Procedures to address these issues. 5.1 - Review the motion: Motion 2<https://community.icann.org/x/V0PRAg> 5.2 - Discussion 5.3 - Vote Item 6: - UPDATE - Name Collision (15 mins) On the 30 July 2014, the New gTLD Program Committee of the ICANN Board directed staff to "provide information to, and work with the GNSO to consider whether policy work on developing a long-term plan to manage gTLD name collision issues should be undertaken." ICANN Staff submitted this paper to the GNSO Council on 7 October 2014 (see https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/name-collision-gnso-policy-07oc…) and it was presented to the Council during the ICANN meeting in Los Angeles. Council members agreed in Los Angeles to discuss with their respective group what further action, if any, should be taken on this topic and report back accordingly during this meeting. Furthermore, a letter<http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/namazi-to-robinson-30oct14-en.pdf> was received from Cyrus Namazi offering any additional information or assistance that ICANN Staff can provide to further assist the Council in its deliberations. This is an opportunity for the Council to discuss which steps, if any, it would like to take in relation to this topic. 6.1 Discussion 6.2 Next steps Item 7: UPDATE - GNSO / GAC Consultation Group and related work (15 mins) Here the Council will have an opportunity to hear about the work of the GNSO / GAC Consultation Group and from the GNSO Liaison to the GAC including any initial input and feedback derived from the ICANN meeting in Los Angeles. In addition, there will be an opportunity to discuss ideas put forward during the GNSO Council Development Session in relation to potential GNSO work in response to the GAC Communiqué from ICANN meetings. 7.1 - Update (Mason Cole) 7.2 - Discussion Item 8: UPDATE - Cross Community Working Group to develop a transition proposal for IANA stewardship on naming related functions (15 mins) Following adoption of the charter<http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/iana-stewardship-naming-function-charter-14…>, this is an opportunity for the Council to receive a brief update on the current status as well as next steps of this CWG. The CWG has been tasked to develop an IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions and has been meeting for 2 hours every week since its creation in view of delivering a final proposal by the end of January 2015. A number of sub-groups have been formed to progress work on the different elements of the ICG Request for Proposals and a face-to-face meeting is being planned for mid-November. For further information, see https://community.icann.org/x/37fhAg. 8.1 - Update (Jonathan Robinson) 8.2 - Next steps Item 9: Any Other Business (15 mins) 9.1 Confirmation of Council Liaisons to the different GNSO projects: o Curative Rights Protections for IGO/INGOs PDP - volunteer: none to date o Data & Metrics for Policy Making - volunteer: none to date o Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP - volunteer: James Bladel o Translation & Transliteration PDP - volunteer: Amr Elsadr o Geographic Regions WG - As the effort is wrapping up, Cheryl Langdon-Orr volunteered to keep the Council up to date as she will take over the leadership for this group. o CWG on a Framework for CWG Principles (co-chair position) - volunteer: Avri Doria (John would stay on as GNSO Co-Chair for this effort) o CWG to develop a framework for the use of country and territory names as TLDs (co-chair position) - volunteer: Carlos Raúl Gutierrez o GNSO Council liaison to the ccNSO - volunteer: Thomas Rickert 9.2 Correspondence with NGPC on IGO & RCRC. Any update? 9.3 Skill sets for Nominating Committee. Complete? 9.4 IGO/INGO Curative Rights Protection WG letter<http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg16859.html> requesting Mason Cole to engage with the GAC on certain questions regarding the GAC Los Angeles Communique. 9.5 Council in attendance to review informal notes of the Council Development Session held on Friday, 17 October 2014. 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.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 11:00 Local time between October and March, Winter in the NORTHERN hemisphere ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PDT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/na/pst.html>) UTC-7+1DST 03:00 San José, Costa Rica UTC-6+0DST 04:00 Iowa City, USA (CDT<http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/UTC%E2%88%9206:00>) UTC-5+1DST 05:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-4+1DST 06:00 Rio de Janiero, Brazil (BRST) UTC-2+1DST 09:00 Montevideo, Uruguay (UYST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/uyst.html>) UTC-2+1DST 09:00 Buenos Aires, Argentina (ART<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/art.html>) UTC-3+0DST 08:00 London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 11:00 Bonn, Germany (CET) UTC+1+0DST 12:00 Cairo, Egypt, (EET) UTC+2+0DST 13:00 Istanbul, Turkey (EEST) UTC+2+0DST 13:00 Ramat Hasharon, Israel(IDT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/ist-israel.…>) UTC+3+0DST 13:00 Perth, Australia (WST<http://timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/au/wst.html>) UTC+8+1DST 19:00 Melbourne, Australia (AEDT) UTC+11+1DST 22:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- DST starts/ends on last Sunday of March 2015, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com http://tinyurl.com/p2wjsa6 Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

motion re charter for the Accountability CWG
by Thomas Rickert Nov. 10, 2014

Nov. 10, 2014

All, please find attached for your consideration a motion considering the adoption of the charter for the Enhancing Accountability CWG as well as the charter. Let me take the opportunity to applaud DT members, ICANN staff and my co-chair Mathieu Weill on having produced the attached charter in a very short time span in a most collaborative fashion. Thanks, Thomas

6 7

Please review Project List
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 9, 2014

Nov. 9, 2014

Dear Councillors, Attached please find the clean and red-lined Project List for your review and to share with your communities. If there are no comments by the COB on Tuesday 11 November 2014, the clean version of the project list will be posted on the website on page : <http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/project> http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/project under the heading Council activities <http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/projects-list.pdf> http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/projects-list.pdf Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat <mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org <http://gnso.icann.org/> http://gnso.icann.org

4 5

FW: RySG statement on ALAC's input to GAC
by Jonathan Robinson Nov. 7, 2014

Nov. 7, 2014

All, Please see attached. Jonathan From: Paul Diaz [mailto:pdiaz@pir.org] Sent: 07 November 2014 19:19 To: Steve Crocker Cc: Alan Greenberg; Thomas.Schneider(a)bakom.admin.ch; Jonathan Robinson Subject: RySG statement on ALAC's input to GAC Dear Steve, Thomas, Alan and Jonathan, Please find attached comments from the Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) concerning ALAC's Los Angeles input to the GAC concerning the new gTLD program. Respectfully, Paul Diaz Alternate Chair, RySG

1 0