November 2014 - council - lists.icann.org

RE: [council] FW: NomCom appointee skill sets
by Winterfeldt, Brian J. May 7, 2015

May 7, 2015

Dear all: Based on recommendations by others, and a shift from the ambiguous to the explicit, I note that intellectual property law is absent from the criteria. Accordingly I would ask for the following amendment.  International law  Competition law  Intellectual property law  Public interest issues  Consumer rights  Human rights  Economics, especially market analysis  Market mechanisms and dynamics  Business principles Thank you, Brian Brian J. Winterfeldt Head of Internet Practice Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP 2900 K Street NW, North Tower - Suite 200 / Washington, DC 20007-5118 p / (202) 625-3562 f / (202) 339-8244 575 Madison Avenue / New York, NY 10022-2585 p / (212) 940.6762 f / (212) 894.5585 brian.winterfeldt(a)kattenlaw.com<mailto:brian.winterfeldt@kattenlaw.com> / www.kattenlaw.com<http://www.kattenlaw.com/> ________________________________________ From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.orgOn<mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.orgOn> Behalf OfVolker Greimann Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2014 8:43:28 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada) To: David Cake; jrobinson(a)afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info> Cc: council(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] FW: NomCom appointee skill sets I agree with David's suggested additions. instead of financial services businesses, general business experience may be more appropriate. Volker Am 30.10.2014 07:15, schrieb David Cake: > I would consider adding to the list of variable criteria: > - data protection and privacy law > - broader internet governance activities > > I'm also not sure why 'the special needs of financial services businesses' is on that list - not that I have a strong objection to anyone having this expertise, but I do not recall any item of council business having looked at this area in the last couple of years (though it is possible something is slipping my mind). > > David > > On 30 Oct 2014, at 10:02 am, Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson(a)afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>> wrote: > >> <NomCom - GNSO Candidate Criteria.docx> -- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann(a)key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net> www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann(a)key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net> www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems> CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone. =========================================================== CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any attached files contain information intended for the exclusive use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is proprietary, privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any viewing, copying, disclosure or distribution of this information may be subject to legal restriction or sanction. Please notify the sender, by electronic mail or telephone, of any unintended recipients and delete the original message without making any copies. =========================================================== NOTIFICATION: Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP is an Illinois limited liability partnership that has elected to be governed by the Illinois Uniform Partnership Act (1997). ===========================================================

14 28

Name Collision - staff expert participation required?
by Marika Konings Dec. 8, 2014

Dec. 8, 2014

Dear All, In relation to agenda item 6 name collision (see below), Fransisco Arias has indicated that he is available to join the Council meeting tomorrow should there be any further questions in relation to the staff paper or other technical questions relating to this issue. If you anticipate that his input may be required to help inform the Council deliberations on what further action, if any, should be taken on this topic, please let me know (off-list) by today 20.00 UTC at the latest so I can inform him accordingly. Of course, should any questions arise during the meeting that were not originally anticipated, we can always pass these on after the meeting for a response. Best regards, Marika 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-07oct 14-en.pdf) 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

2 1

Draft minutes GNSO Council meeting 13 November 2014
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 27, 2014

Nov. 27, 2014

Dear Councillors, Attached, please find the draft minutes of the GNSO Council meeting on 13 November 2014 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-13nov14-en.pdf> section 3.5 "If no objections are received within 10 days, the minutes will be deemed to have been approved for posting" on 7 December 2014. 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<http://gnso.icann.org/>

1 0

Draft minutes GNSO Council Public administrative meeting LA 15 October 2014
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 27, 2014

Nov. 27, 2014

Dear Councillors, Attached, please find the draft minutes of the GNSO Council Public administrative meeting of the new Council in Los Angeles on 15 October 2014 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-13nov14-en.pdf> section 3.5 "If no objections are received within 10 days, the minutes will be deemed to have been approved for posting" on 7 December 2014. 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<http://gnso.icann.org/> From: Glen de Saint Géry Sent: mercredi 26 novembre 2014 23:52 To: Jonathan Robinson; Volker Greimann (vgreimann(a)key-Systems.net) David Cake (dave(a)difference.com.au) (dave(a)difference.com.au) Cc: Glen de Saint Géry; gnso-secs(a)icann.org Subject: Draft minutes GNSO Council Public meeting LA & 13 November 2014 for review Dear Jonathan, Volker and David, Please be so kind as to review these minutes so that they can be published on the Council mailing list for approval after 10 days if there are no comments. Thank you so much. Kind regards, Glen From: Glen de Saint Géry Sent: mercredi 12 novembre 2014 20:52 To: David Cake (dave(a)difference.com.au<mailto:dave@difference.com.au>) (dave(a)difference.com.au<mailto:dave@difference.com.au>); Volker Greimann (vgreimann(a)key-Systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-Systems.net>) Cc: jrobinson(a)afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>; Glen de Saint Géry; gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: FW: Draft minutes GNSO Council Public meeting LA for review Dear David and Volker, In Jonathan's absence, would you please be so kind as to go through these with a fine comb and let me know what changes you would like made. Jonathan always has heaps! Thank you so much. All the best Glen From: Glen de Saint Géry Sent: vendredi 7 novembre 2014 16:43 To: Jonathan Robinson; David Cake (dave(a)difference.com.au<mailto:dave@difference.com.au>) (dave(a)difference.com.au<mailto:dave@difference.com.au>); Volker Greimann (vgreimann(a)key-Systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-Systems.net>) Cc: Glen de Saint Géry; gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: Draft minutes GNSO Council Public meeting LA for review Dear Jonathan, David and Volker, Attached are the draft minutes from the LA Council meeting for your review. Please let me know if you would like any changes made. 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<http://gnso.icann.org/>

1 0

Draft minutes GNSO Council Public meeting LA 15 October 2014
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 27, 2014

Nov. 27, 2014

Dear Councillors, Attached, please find the draft minutes of the GNSO Council Public meeting on 15 October 2014 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-13nov14-en.pdf> section 3.5 "If no objections are received within 10 days, the minutes will be deemed to have been approved for posting" on 7 December 2014. 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<http://gnso.icann.org/>

1 0

Informal notes GNSO Council Development Session
by Marika Konings Nov. 27, 2014

Nov. 27, 2014

Dear All, As discussed during the last GNSO Council meeting, please find attached the informal notes of the GNSO Council Development session that was held in Los Angeles on 17 October 2014. Best regards, Marika

1 0

Document and Motion deadline Monday,1 December 2014 at 23:59 UTC for Council meeting 11 December 2014 at 15:00 UTC
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 26, 2014

Nov. 26, 2014

Dear Councillors, Reports, motions and documents for consideration are due no later than (NLT) 10 days in advance (i.e. MONDAY, 1 December 2014 at 23:59 UTC) of the GNSO Council meeting on 11 December 2014 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+11+December… 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

Volunteers for Charter for a Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 24, 2014

Nov. 24, 2014

Dear All, As per the Council resolution passed on the adoption of a Charter for a Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability, please be reminded that "Each GNSO Stakeholder Group should identify one member for the CWG by 20 November 2014 taking into account the charter requirement. Best efforts should be made to ensure that individual 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 CCWG-Accountability 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. Please provide names by COB today. If you have already and this has been missed, apologies and please resend. Thank you very much. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Annex A to the resolution on Planning for Future gTLD Application Rounds
by Bruce Tonkin Nov. 22, 2014

Nov. 22, 2014

From: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/resolutions-annex-a-17nov14-en.… I have attached Annex A from the resolution on Planning for Future gTLD Application Rounds. Regards, Bruce Tonkin On Nov 21, 2014, at 5:47 AM, Bruce Tonkin wrote: > > From: https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2014-11-17-en > > > > 1. Consent Agenda: > > a. Approval of Board Meeting Minutes > > Resolved (2014.11.17.01), the Board approves the minutes of its 16 and 28 October 2014 meetings. > > > b. Appointment of B-, C-, F-, and K- Root Server Operator Representatives to the RSSAC > > Whereas, the ICANN Bylaws call for the establishment of a Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC) with the role to advise the ICANN community and Board on matters relating to the operation, administration, security, and integrity of the Internet's Root Server System. > > Whereas, the ICANN Bylaws call for Board appointment of RSSAC members based on recommendations from the RSSAC co-chairs. > > Whereas, the RSSAC co-chairs recommended for Board consideration appointments to the RSSAC to represent the B-root, C-root, F-root, and K-root server operators. > > Resolved (2014.11.17.02), the Board appoints the representatives for B-root, C-root, and K-root server operators, Bill Manning, Paul Vixie, Daniel Karrenberg, respectively, through 31 December 2017 and the representative for F-root server operator, Jim Martin, through 31 December 2015 to the Root Server System Advisory Committee. > > > > c. SSAC Advisory on DNS "Search List" Processing and DDos Attacks Leveraging DNS Infrastructure > > Whereas, in February 2014, the ICANN Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) published SAC064 [PDF, 931 KB]: SSAC Advisory on DNS "Search List" Processing and SAC065 [PDF, 423 KB]: SSAC Advisory on DDoS Attacks Leveraging DNS Infrastructure. > > Whereas, in SAC 064, the advice highlights some of the DNS "search list" processing behavior presents security and privacy issues to end systems, lead to performance problems for the Internet, and might cause collision with names provisioned under the newly delegated top-level domains. > > Whereas, in SAC 065, the advice recommends ICANN and operators of Internet infrastructure and manufacturers to take action to address the unresolved critical design and deployment issues that have enabled increasingly large and severe Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks using the DNS. > > Whereas, while in some instances SAC 064 and SAC 065 call for actions not under ICANN's control and actors not necessarily within ICANN's usual community, they are meant to address the overall responsibilities of the multi-stakeholder community and encourage ICANN to take action where it is relevant to do so. > > Whereas, ensuring the stable and secure operation of the Internet's system of unique identifiers is part of ICANN's mission; preserving and enhancing the operational stability, reliability, security, and global interoperability of the Internet part of ICANN's core value; and ensuring the introduction of new gTLDs in a secure and stable manner is a strategic priority for ICANN. > > Resolved (2014.11.17.03), the Board acknowledges the receipt of SAC064: SSAC Advisory on Search List Processing, and SAC065: SSAC Advisory on DDoS Attacks Leveraging DNS Infrastructure. > > Resolved (2014.11.17.04), the Board directs the President and CEO, or his designee(s), to evaluate the advice provided in SAC064 and SAC 065. > > Resolved (2014.11.17.05), in the instances where it is recommended that the advice be accepted, the Board directs the President and CEO, or his designee(s), to evaluate the feasibility and cost of implementing the advice, and provide an implementation plan with timelines and high-level milestones for review by the Board, no later than 120 days from the adoption of this resolution. > > > > d. Completion of the Address Supporting Organization (ASO) Organizational Review > > Whereas, ICANN Bylaws Article IV, Section 4 call for a "periodic review of the performance and operation of each Supporting Organization, each Supporting Organization Council, each Advisory Committee (other than the Governmental Advisory Committee), and the Nominating Committee by an entity or entities independent of the organization under review"; > > Whereas, the Number Resource Organization (NRO) "shall provide its own review mechanisms" in reference to periodic review of the ASO, based on the terms of the ICANN Address Supporting Organization (ASO) Memorandum of Understanding dated 21 October 2004; > > Whereas, the NRO completed the review of the ASO and the implementation work resulting from the recommendations offered by ITEMS International, the independent examiner engaged to conduct the ASO review. > > RESOLVED (2014.11.17.06) that the Board accepts the final report from the Number Resource Organization (NRO) issued in the form of a letter to the Chair of the Structural Improvements Committee in November 2013 regarding the completion of implementation work resulting from the ASO Review. The Board thanks the NRO for its work in conducting the review and acknowledges the completion of the implementation work resulting from the recommendations received by the NRO during the review. > > RESOLVED (2014.11.17.07) that the Board directs staff to provide support requested by the Chair of the NRO Executive Council, consisting of logistical staff support associated with ICANN meetings, allocation of time during ICANN meetings for ASO and NRO reports to the ICANN community, translation services and improved visibility on the ICANN web site. > > > > 2. Main Agenda: > > a. Meeting Strategy Working Group (MSWG) Recommendations Implementation Plan for 2016 > > Whereas, ICANN intends to hold meetings in 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020. > > Whereas, the Meeting Strategy Working Group produced a Final Report of recommendations to improve the overall structure and format of ICANN Meetings and on 26 June 2014 received the Board's gratitude for conducting this review. > > Whereas, in furtherance of the Board's 26 June 2014, ICANN reviewed the MSWG Final Report and developed an implementation plan based on the recommendations within that Final Report, identifying implementation in the calendar year 2016. In addition, ICANN identifies a five (5) year schedule and regional rotation for ICANN Meetings through 2020. > > Whereas, the five year schedule reflects the MSWG recommendations for timing and duration of ICANN Public Meetings. > > Resolved (2014.11.17.08), the Board accepts all MSWG recommendations and directs the President and CEO, through his designee(s), to proceed with implementation. For recommendations on meeting support and engagement activities, focusing on technical support for remote participants and easing of future visa attainment for attendees, the Board directs the President and CEO to provide required support to obtain relevant metrics on recurring attendees. > > Resolved (2014.11.17.09), the Board accepts the dates of Meetings to be held in 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020 as set forth in Annex 1 to this Resolution. > > > b. Planning for Future gTLD Application Rounds > > Whereas, the New gTLD Program was developed and implemented based on consensus policy recommendations from the GNSO; > > Whereas, ICANN undertook thorough consultation with the global stakeholder community in the development of the application and evaluation processes in the New gTLD Applicant Guidebook ("Applicant Guidebook"); > > Whereas, the GNSO policy recommendations provide that applications for new gTLDs should continue to be accepted in rounds; > > Whereas, the Board has reaffirmed its commitment to opening a subsequent application round in a timely manner; > > Whereas, the Board wishes to set the continuing direction for the New gTLD Program; > > Whereas, ICANN is committed to executing a number of reviews as part of moving forward with subsequent rounds of the New gTLD Program; > > Whereas, the Board wishes to ensure that the GNSO's deliberations on policy applicable to future rounds includes consideration of potential policy issues that were not addressed by the GNSO's 2007 policy recommendations, including issues that the NGPC was called on to address as implementation issues; > > Resolved (2014.11.17.10), the Board directs the staff to continue working with the community to refine the work plan for executing all required reviews of the New gTLD Program and to provide regular updates to the community on the status and timeframes of review activities. > > Resolved (2014.11.17.11), the Board notes the effort in progress within the GNSO to identify areas where the GNSO believes that policy advice can be clarified or where it wishes to provide additional policy advice applicable to future application rounds, and looks forward to the results of this work, to ensure that key policy areas are addressed for future rounds. > > Resolved (2014.11.17.xx), the Board notes that the GNSO has invited the NGPC to provide input to the GNSO Council to identify areas that may be appropriate for discussion for an evaluation of the current gTLD application round and for possible adjustments for subsequent application procedures. The Board appreciates the request and has identified, in addition to the GNSO analysis of the Applicant Guidebook and the current application round, a set of topics (included as Annex A) that may be appropriate for discussion by the GNSO. > > > c. ICANN 53 Meeting Location > > No resolution taken. > > > Mason Cole VP Communications & Industry Relations Donuts Inc. ................................................ mason(a)donuts.co Ofc +1 503 908 7623 Cell +1 503 407 2555

1 0

Preliminary Report from ICANN Board meeting 17 Nov 2014
by Bruce Tonkin Nov. 21, 2014

Nov. 21, 2014

From: https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2014-11-17-en 1. Consent Agenda: a. Approval of Board Meeting Minutes Resolved (2014.11.17.01), the Board approves the minutes of its 16 and 28 October 2014 meetings. b. Appointment of B-, C-, F-, and K- Root Server Operator Representatives to the RSSAC Whereas, the ICANN Bylaws call for the establishment of a Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC) with the role to advise the ICANN community and Board on matters relating to the operation, administration, security, and integrity of the Internet's Root Server System. Whereas, the ICANN Bylaws call for Board appointment of RSSAC members based on recommendations from the RSSAC co-chairs. Whereas, the RSSAC co-chairs recommended for Board consideration appointments to the RSSAC to represent the B-root, C-root, F-root, and K-root server operators. Resolved (2014.11.17.02), the Board appoints the representatives for B-root, C-root, and K-root server operators, Bill Manning, Paul Vixie, Daniel Karrenberg, respectively, through 31 December 2017 and the representative for F-root server operator, Jim Martin, through 31 December 2015 to the Root Server System Advisory Committee. c. SSAC Advisory on DNS "Search List" Processing and DDos Attacks Leveraging DNS Infrastructure Whereas, in February 2014, the ICANN Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) published SAC064 [PDF, 931 KB]: SSAC Advisory on DNS "Search List" Processing and SAC065 [PDF, 423 KB]: SSAC Advisory on DDoS Attacks Leveraging DNS Infrastructure. Whereas, in SAC 064, the advice highlights some of the DNS "search list" processing behavior presents security and privacy issues to end systems, lead to performance problems for the Internet, and might cause collision with names provisioned under the newly delegated top-level domains. Whereas, in SAC 065, the advice recommends ICANN and operators of Internet infrastructure and manufacturers to take action to address the unresolved critical design and deployment issues that have enabled increasingly large and severe Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks using the DNS. Whereas, while in some instances SAC 064 and SAC 065 call for actions not under ICANN's control and actors not necessarily within ICANN's usual community, they are meant to address the overall responsibilities of the multi-stakeholder community and encourage ICANN to take action where it is relevant to do so. Whereas, ensuring the stable and secure operation of the Internet's system of unique identifiers is part of ICANN's mission; preserving and enhancing the operational stability, reliability, security, and global interoperability of the Internet part of ICANN's core value; and ensuring the introduction of new gTLDs in a secure and stable manner is a strategic priority for ICANN. Resolved (2014.11.17.03), the Board acknowledges the receipt of SAC064: SSAC Advisory on Search List Processing, and SAC065: SSAC Advisory on DDoS Attacks Leveraging DNS Infrastructure. Resolved (2014.11.17.04), the Board directs the President and CEO, or his designee(s), to evaluate the advice provided in SAC064 and SAC 065. Resolved (2014.11.17.05), in the instances where it is recommended that the advice be accepted, the Board directs the President and CEO, or his designee(s), to evaluate the feasibility and cost of implementing the advice, and provide an implementation plan with timelines and high-level milestones for review by the Board, no later than 120 days from the adoption of this resolution. d. Completion of the Address Supporting Organization (ASO) Organizational Review Whereas, ICANN Bylaws Article IV, Section 4 call for a "periodic review of the performance and operation of each Supporting Organization, each Supporting Organization Council, each Advisory Committee (other than the Governmental Advisory Committee), and the Nominating Committee by an entity or entities independent of the organization under review"; Whereas, the Number Resource Organization (NRO) "shall provide its own review mechanisms" in reference to periodic review of the ASO, based on the terms of the ICANN Address Supporting Organization (ASO) Memorandum of Understanding dated 21 October 2004; Whereas, the NRO completed the review of the ASO and the implementation work resulting from the recommendations offered by ITEMS International, the independent examiner engaged to conduct the ASO review. RESOLVED (2014.11.17.06) that the Board accepts the final report from the Number Resource Organization (NRO) issued in the form of a letter to the Chair of the Structural Improvements Committee in November 2013 regarding the completion of implementation work resulting from the ASO Review. The Board thanks the NRO for its work in conducting the review and acknowledges the completion of the implementation work resulting from the recommendations received by the NRO during the review. RESOLVED (2014.11.17.07) that the Board directs staff to provide support requested by the Chair of the NRO Executive Council, consisting of logistical staff support associated with ICANN meetings, allocation of time during ICANN meetings for ASO and NRO reports to the ICANN community, translation services and improved visibility on the ICANN web site. 2. Main Agenda: a. Meeting Strategy Working Group (MSWG) Recommendations Implementation Plan for 2016 Whereas, ICANN intends to hold meetings in 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020. Whereas, the Meeting Strategy Working Group produced a Final Report of recommendations to improve the overall structure and format of ICANN Meetings and on 26 June 2014 received the Board's gratitude for conducting this review. Whereas, in furtherance of the Board's 26 June 2014, ICANN reviewed the MSWG Final Report and developed an implementation plan based on the recommendations within that Final Report, identifying implementation in the calendar year 2016. In addition, ICANN identifies a five (5) year schedule and regional rotation for ICANN Meetings through 2020. Whereas, the five year schedule reflects the MSWG recommendations for timing and duration of ICANN Public Meetings. Resolved (2014.11.17.08), the Board accepts all MSWG recommendations and directs the President and CEO, through his designee(s), to proceed with implementation. For recommendations on meeting support and engagement activities, focusing on technical support for remote participants and easing of future visa attainment for attendees, the Board directs the President and CEO to provide required support to obtain relevant metrics on recurring attendees. Resolved (2014.11.17.09), the Board accepts the dates of Meetings to be held in 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020 as set forth in Annex 1 to this Resolution. b. Planning for Future gTLD Application Rounds Whereas, the New gTLD Program was developed and implemented based on consensus policy recommendations from the GNSO; Whereas, ICANN undertook thorough consultation with the global stakeholder community in the development of the application and evaluation processes in the New gTLD Applicant Guidebook ("Applicant Guidebook"); Whereas, the GNSO policy recommendations provide that applications for new gTLDs should continue to be accepted in rounds; Whereas, the Board has reaffirmed its commitment to opening a subsequent application round in a timely manner; Whereas, the Board wishes to set the continuing direction for the New gTLD Program; Whereas, ICANN is committed to executing a number of reviews as part of moving forward with subsequent rounds of the New gTLD Program; Whereas, the Board wishes to ensure that the GNSO's deliberations on policy applicable to future rounds includes consideration of potential policy issues that were not addressed by the GNSO's 2007 policy recommendations, including issues that the NGPC was called on to address as implementation issues; Resolved (2014.11.17.10), the Board directs the staff to continue working with the community to refine the work plan for executing all required reviews of the New gTLD Program and to provide regular updates to the community on the status and timeframes of review activities. Resolved (2014.11.17.11), the Board notes the effort in progress within the GNSO to identify areas where the GNSO believes that policy advice can be clarified or where it wishes to provide additional policy advice applicable to future application rounds, and looks forward to the results of this work, to ensure that key policy areas are addressed for future rounds. Resolved (2014.11.17.xx), the Board notes that the GNSO has invited the NGPC to provide input to the GNSO Council to identify areas that may be appropriate for discussion for an evaluation of the current gTLD application round and for possible adjustments for subsequent application procedures. The Board appreciates the request and has identified, in addition to the GNSO analysis of the Applicant Guidebook and the current application round, a set of topics (included as Annex A) that may be appropriate for discussion by the GNSO. c. ICANN 53 Meeting Location No resolution taken.

3 3

News on the charter for the Enhancing Accountability Cross Community Working Group
by Thomas Rickert Nov. 20, 2014

Nov. 20, 2014

All, as newly appointed liaison to the ccNSO Council, it is my pleasure to report to you that the ccNSO has just adopted the charter of the Enhancing Accountability Cross Community Working Group unanimously. Best, Thomas

1 0

Re: [council] Re: Request from IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection WG
by James M. Bladel Nov. 18, 2014

Nov. 18, 2014

Mary & Mason & Councilors: I agree with the premise of this letter: That the GAC advice in the Los Angeles Communique is incompatible with certain elements of the WG charter. And I support the chairs’ request to engage Mason on this issue. Question: Should there be any other folks supporting Mason in this effort (WG chairs, Council members, etc.)? Or is it enough to note that Mason represents all interests in this regard? Thanks— J. From: Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> Date: Monday, November 17, 2014 at 21:22 To: Mason Cole <mason(a)donuts.co<mailto:mason@donuts.co>> Cc: GNSO Council List <council(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: [council] Re: Request from IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection WG Hello again everyone, As requested, please find attached a copy of the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection WG letter to the GNSO Council. Phil Corwin, one of the WG co-chairs, has also asked me to convey his hope that Mason will be able to engage with the GAC on this issue sooner rather than later. Thanks and cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 Email: mary.wong(a)icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org> From: Mason Cole <mason(a)donuts.co<mailto:mason@donuts.co>> Date: Monday, November 17, 2014 at 7:55 PM To: Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> Cc: "council(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>>, Phil Corwin <psc(a)vlaw-dc.com<mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com>>, Petter Rindforth <petter.rindforth(a)fenixlegal.eu<mailto:petter.rindforth@fenixlegal.eu>> Subject: Re: Request from IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection WG Mary -- Would you kindly recirculate the current version? Thanks -- Mason On Nov 17, 2014, at 12:12 PM, Mary Wong wrote: Hello again everyone, As noted on the Council call last Thursday, the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection WG believes that its request to have Mason engage early with the GAC, regarding certain questions arising from the GAC’s Los Angeles Communique, is a matter of some urgency. As Mason has indicated his willingness to convey the WG’s questions (as described in the letter circulated to the Council on 6 November) to the GAC and assist with any response or consequent discussion, please indicate if you have any objections to him doing so as soon as you can, and preferably before the end of this week if at all possible. Please also let me know if you need me to recirculate the letter. Thanks and cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 Email: mary.wong(a)icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org> From: Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> Date: Thursday, November 6, 2014 at 11:46 PM To: "council(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Cc: Mason Cole <mason(a)donuts.co<mailto:mason@donuts.co>>, Phil Corwin <psc(a)vlaw-dc.com<mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com>>, Petter Rindforth <petter.rindforth(a)fenixlegal.eu<mailto:petter.rindforth@fenixlegal.eu>> Subject: Request from IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection WG Dear Councilors, Please find attached a letter request from the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection WG, which I am transmitting to you on behalf of the WG Co-Chairs, Phil Corwin and Petter Rindforth, in the absence of a new Council liaison. In the letter, the WG requests that the Council agree to ask Mason Cole (GAC-GNSO liaison) to engage with the GAC in order to resolve certain questions arising from the GAC’s Los Angeles Communique. The specific questions that the WG is suggesting for such engagement are contained in the attached letter. As the WG was able only to discuss and finalize the request at their meeting this week, this is the earliest opportunity that it has had to send the letter to you. I note with gratitude that Jonathan, Marika and Glen have kindly allotted a slot under “AOB” on the agenda of the forthcoming GNSO Council meeting for discussion of this matter; however, as the WG would very much like to pursue early engagement with the GAC as soon as possible, it is their hope that the Council will be able to begin discussing their request upon receipt of this letter. Should the Council require any further information or background, staff supporting the WG (Steve Chan and me), Mason (who is also a member of the WG and participated in the WG’s discussion of this request) and, of course, Phil and Petter, will be very glad to oblige. Thanks and cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 Email: mary.wong(a)icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org> Mason Cole VP Communications & Industry Relations Donuts Inc. ……………………………… …… …… mason(a)donuts.co<mailto:mason@donuts.co> Ofc +1 503 908 7623 Cell +1 503 407 2555

3 2

Re: [council] GNSO Council action items 13 November 2014
by Marika Konings Nov. 18, 2014

Nov. 18, 2014

In relation to the Enhancing ICANN Accountability CCWG and the action item that 'Each GNSO Stakeholder Group should identify one member for the CWG by 20 November 2014 taking into account the charter requirement’, I thought it might be helpful to refer to the charter requirements which state that: Best efforts should be made to ensure that individual 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 CCWG-Accountability 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. Best regards, Marika From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen(a)icann.org<mailto:Glen@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday 18 November 2014 15:31 To: Council GNSO <council(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: [council] GNSO Council action items 13 November 2014 Dear Councillors, Please find the action items arising from the GNSO Council meeting on 13 November 2014. Item 4: MOTION - Adoption of a Charter for a Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability Action Item: Thomas Rickert was nominated as the GNSO Council liaison and GNSO co-chair to the CWGCross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability Each GNSO Stakeholder Group should identify one member for the CWG by 20 November 2014 taking into account the charter requirement. 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 Action Item The GNSO Council instructs ICANN staff to post the new version of the GNSO Operating Procedures and GNSO Working Group Guidelines, effective immediately upon adoption. Item 6: – UPDATE - Name Collision Action Item All constituencies/stakeholder groups should discuss the topic within their respective groups to ascertain what, if any policy development is deemed necessary and be prepared for a discussion at the next Council meeting in December 2014. Item 7: UPDATE – GNSO / GAC Consultation Group and related work Action item Inform the GAC that Volker Greimann is no longer a member of the GAC GNSO Consultation group and has been replaced by Carlos Raúl Gutierrez. Item 9.1 – Any Other Business Action Item Inform the different groups that the Council Liaisons have been confirmed. Curative Rights Protections for IGO/INGOs PDP – Council Liaison - Susan Kawaguchi Data & Metrics for Policy Making – Council Liaison - Volker Greimann Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP – Council Liaison - James Bladel Translation & Transliteration PDP – Council Liaison - Amr Elsadr Geographic Regions WG – Council Liaison - Cheryl Langdon-Orr CWG on a Framework for CWG Principles (co-chair John Berard) - Council Liaison - Avri Doria CWG to develop a framework for the use of country and territory names as TLDs - co-chair position – Carlos Raúl Gutierrez GNSO Council liaison to the ccNSO – Thomas Rickert 9.2 Correspondence with New gTLD Program Committee NGPC on IGO & RCRC. Action item Staff to pursue the issue internally with the appropriate staff when a response can be expected. 9.3Skill sets for Nominating Committee. Action Item Finalise the skill set for the Nominating Committee on the Council mailing list 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. Action item Council is encouraged to take a decision as soon as possible because of the urgency from the perspective of the working group. Mason Cole is ready to step forward but needs the go-ahead from the Council . Confirm on mailing list. 9.5Council in attendance to review informal notes of the Council Development Session held on Friday, 17 October 2014. Action item Circulate notes to the Council mailing list and start discussion on the mailing list. Please let me know if all the action items have been captured or if you have any questions. 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

GNSO Council action items 13 November 2014
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 18, 2014

Nov. 18, 2014

Dear Councillors, Please find the action items arising from the GNSO Council meeting on 13 November 2014. Item 4: MOTION - Adoption of a Charter for a Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability Action Item: Thomas Rickert was nominated as the GNSO Council liaison and GNSO co-chair to the CWG Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability Each GNSO Stakeholder Group should identify one member for the CWG by 20 November 2014 taking into account the charter requirement. 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 Action Item The GNSO Council instructs ICANN staff to post the new version of the GNSO Operating Procedures and GNSO Working Group Guidelines, effective immediately upon adoption. Item 6: - UPDATE - Name Collision Action Item All constituencies/stakeholder groups should discuss the topic within their respective groups to ascertain what, if any policy development is deemed necessary and be prepared for a discussion at the next Council meeting in December 2014. Item 7: UPDATE - GNSO / GAC Consultation Group and related work Action item Inform the GAC that Volker Greimann is no longer a member of the GAC GNSO Consultation group and has been replaced by Carlos Raúl Gutierrez. Item 9.1 - Any Other Business Action Item Inform the different groups that the Council Liaisons have been confirmed. Curative Rights Protections for IGO/INGOs PDP - Council Liaison - Susan Kawaguchi Data & Metrics for Policy Making - Council Liaison - Volker Greimann Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP - Council Liaison - James Bladel Translation & Transliteration PDP - Council Liaison - Amr Elsadr Geographic Regions WG - Council Liaison - Cheryl Langdon-Orr CWG on a Framework for CWG Principles (co-chair John Berard) - Council Liaison - Avri Doria CWG to develop a framework for the use of country and territory names as TLDs - co-chair position - Carlos Raúl Gutierrez GNSO Council liaison to the ccNSO - Thomas Rickert 9.2 Correspondence with New gTLD Program Committee NGPC on IGO & RCRC. Action item Staff to pursue the issue internally with the appropriate staff when a response can be expected. 9.3 Skill sets for Nominating Committee. Action Item Finalise the skill set for the Nominating Committee on the Council mailing list 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. Action item Council is encouraged to take a decision as soon as possible because of the urgency from the perspective of the working group. Mason Cole is ready to step forward but needs the go-ahead from the Council . Confirm on mailing list. 9.5 Council in attendance to review informal notes of the Council Development Session held on Friday, 17 October 2014. Action item Circulate notes to the Council mailing list and start discussion on the mailing list. Please let me know if all the action items have been captured or if you have any questions. 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

FYI - Blog Post 'Working Together to Tame the Coming Tsunami'
by Marika Konings Nov. 18, 2014

Nov. 18, 2014

Dear All, For your information, please find below a blog post from Ashwin Rangan, ICANN’s CIIO requesting community input on his suggestions concerning streamlining and cooperation in relation to exploring tools & technologies that may aid the ICANN community in its activities. Best regards, Marika https://www.icann.org/news/blog/working-together-to-tame-the-coming-tsunami Working Together to Tame the Coming Tsunami <https://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=300&winname=addthis&pub=ra-52fcc7eb2…><https://www.icann.org/news/blog/working-together-to-tame-the-coming-tsunami#><https://www.icann.org/news/blog/working-together-to-tame-the-coming-tsunami#><https://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=300&winname=addthis&pub=ra-52fcc7eb2…><https://www.icann.org/news/blog/working-together-to-tame-the-coming-tsunami#><https://www.icann.org/news/blog/working-together-to-tame-the-coming-tsunami#> It is just over eight months since I joined ICANN and several noteworthy events have occurred since. Within a few days of coming on board, the IANA Stewardship Transition was announced. Fadi's efforts to appropriately position Internet Governance and the follow-on work with NETMundial have progressed, leading to some critical hand-overs. And in attending my third (yes, already my third!) ICANN meeting in Los Angeles, I was able to detect an increasing tone of collaboration within the Stakeholder community, something that will require our increased support. For instance, various Stakeholder community groups have been meeting to review ICANN accountability, transparency and processes with an eye on improving all of them; sometimes in an interlinked fashion. The fact is more and more cross-community teams are forming all of the time. And they're beginning to work on a set of principles as well as a common framework for such cross-community activities. Fadi has recognized this as well. And during his Opening Keynote at ICANN51, he made clear that his focus and energies already are directed more inward than outward. He also is committed to remain focused on ICANN Operations. And so is his Global Leadership team. With six SO-AC-SG-C Leader roundtables during ICANN51, we, sitting alongside Fadi, heard many new ideas for operations improvements. Independently, to help me gain an accelerated education about the ICANN ecosystem, I have been visiting with the different Stakeholder groups - at ICANN meetings, over the phone, in person - whenever there is an opportunity. And I'm recognizing opportunities for improved services, leveraging tools and technologies. All of these activities have the same goal - a time-efficient and cost-effective ICANN (Stakeholder communities + Board + Staff), working collaboratively. However, left to their current pathways, this is becoming like a wild Tsunami, gaining strength from many directions - a potentially uncoordinated Tsunami of requests and requirements. Speaking from an IT point of view, I think we can bring these various vectors together in a constructive way, for the collective benefit of all of us. Together, we can tame this Tsunami. Here is what I am feeling… I'm energized by the prospects. Many of these ideas are compelling. We can get passionate about them. Their need is clear. Here is what I am thinking… What's required to make this all happen is becoming clearer to me. And many Stakeholder communities are saying the same thing – but from their specific point of view. For example - The ALAC wants a set of Issues Management Tools that, in its request, is almost identical to what the SSAC wants. The GAC and the ALAC are both requesting revised websites. The GNSO and the ALAC are both seeking a Knowledge/ Information Management tool. And so on.... To address this, we have a choice. The Stakeholder communities could EITHER have different parts of ICANN be pressed to define, develop and deliver specific, point solutions to satisfy each of these requests, satisfying one Stakeholder community at a time. OR, we can choose a path where a single Stakeholder community (or a small cross-community group) takes "ownership" of an idea, fleshes it out completely and, when almost fully-cooked, invites other Stakeholder groups to weigh-in. The result could be a robust set of requirements that represents the collective needs of our vast, global community. We - the ICANN staff - can then take these requirements and source a tool or a set of technological capabilities in the most cost-effective and time-efficient manner. Of course, not everything will fit into this mind-map. However, there are many requests coming at us concurrently which do fit this model. If we choose the "one-off" path, we would be robbing ourselves of an invaluable opportunity and adding to the confusing plethora of tools already in the ICANN toolbox, not to mention adding to ICANN's operating costs. So here's what I am proposing. We will create a page on the ICANN Community Wiki, where all the requests coming our way are catalogued with the specific Stakeholder community making the request. That can be the base from which we could journey together towards a common Stakeholder, community-wide, set of tools and technologies. Our remit could then be to ensure delivery and support of a harmonized set of robust tools which interoperate where possible and sensible. Here are my questions of you: 1. Do you agree with this concept – of build once and re-use many times? The IT artifacts and services I have reviewed do not currently show much of re-use. 2. If you agree, would you be willing to work as a member of a cross-community working group, focused on Community collaboration Tools? For the sake of brevity, let us call it a Community Tools Focus Group, or CTFG. 3. If that too is agreeable, would it make sense to have just ONE such CTFG across all SOs? Like an SO-CTFG? And ANOTHER such, for all ACs? Like an AC-CTFG? 4. As a working charter for such CTFGs, could you commit time to work with other CTFG members to help frame a Problem Statement (along with clear and specific examples)? 5. The ICANN staff can take this as input and seek appropriate solutions to address the problem. And get back with the concerned CTFG with a small (2 or 3) set of considered options. From which the CTFG can pick the solution that best meets the needs. I welcome your thoughts....You can send them my way by using the subject handle "Tsunami" and addressing your email to: Ashwin.rangan(a)icann.org<mailto:Ashwin.rangan@icann.org> Thank you for your time!

1 0

Request from IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection WG
by Mary Wong Nov. 18, 2014

Nov. 18, 2014

Dear Councilors, Please find attached a letter request from the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection WG, which I am transmitting to you on behalf of the WG Co-Chairs, Phil Corwin and Petter Rindforth, in the absence of a new Council liaison. In the letter, the WG requests that the Council agree to ask Mason Cole (GAC-GNSO liaison) to engage with the GAC in order to resolve certain questions arising from the GAC¹s Los Angeles Communique. The specific questions that the WG is suggesting for such engagement are contained in the attached letter. As the WG was able only to discuss and finalize the request at their meeting this week, this is the earliest opportunity that it has had to send the letter to you. I note with gratitude that Jonathan, Marika and Glen have kindly allotted a slot under ³AOB² on the agenda of the forthcoming GNSO Council meeting for discussion of this matter; however, as the WG would very much like to pursue early engagement with the GAC as soon as possible, it is their hope that the Council will be able to begin discussing their request upon receipt of this letter. Should the Council require any further information or background, staff supporting the WG (Steve Chan and me), Mason (who is also a member of the WG and participated in the WG¹s discussion of this request) and, of course, Phil and Petter, will be very glad to oblige. Thanks and cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 Email: mary.wong(a)icann.org

2 3

GNSO Council Resolution 13 November 2014
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 14, 2014

Nov. 14, 2014

Dear Councillors, The GNSO Operating Procedure<http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-26mar14-en.pdf> foresees absentee voting (per Section 4.4.1 of the GNSO Operating Procedures) for the resolution below that was before the GNSO Council at its meeting on 13 November 2014. Edward Morris was absent from the meeting and submitted an absentee ballot<http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg16880.html>. The Voting results<http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/voting-op-procedures-wg-guidelines-13nov14…> are: Contracted Party House: 7 votes in favour (100%) Non-Contracted Party House: 11 votes in favour and 2 votes against (84.6%) 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 WHEREAS: 1. The GNSO Council has determined that: a. 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; b. the current GNSO Operating Procedures also do not contain a specific provision that permits the Council to vote outside a meeting; and c. 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. 2. The GNSO Council requested that the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) consider: a. whether there should be modifications 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 b. whether the language relating to Consensus Levels in the GNSO Working Group Guidelines requires clarification. 3. The SCI developed language to be inserted in Section 3.3 (Notice of Meetings) of the GNSO Operating Procedures that provide for a waiver of the prescribed deadline for the submission of a new motion for voting by the GNSO Council in certain circumstances provided certain specified criteria are met. This recommendation will not affect the rules regarding the resubmission of a motion approved and added to section 4.3 of the GNSO Operating Procedures in March 2014. 4. In addition, the SCI developed procedures to be added as a new Section 4.10 (Voting Outside A Meeting) to the GNSO Operating Procedures that provide for the GNSO Council to be able to vote outside a meeting in certain circumstances provided certain specified criteria are met. 5. The SCI also developed clarifying language in the form of a footnote to be added to the Consensus Levels definitions in the GNSO Working Group Guidelines, pending a fuller review of all the GNSO Working Group Guidelines, which the SCI also recommends. 6. The revised GNSO Operating Procedures, including the proposed additions to the Working Group Guidelines, were put out for public comment for a period of a minimum of 21 days beginning on 17 September 2014 and ending on 08 October 2014 (see https://www.icann.org/public-comments/gnso-op-procedures-2014-09-17-en) as required by the ICANN Bylaws. 7. As there were no comments received in the public forum the SCI deemed that no further changes were necessary nor was a public comment reply period needed. RESOLVED 1. The GNSO Council adopts the revised Operating Procedures including the new provisions concerning the waiver of deadline for motions submitted for voting by the Council and the ability of the Council to vote outside a meeting - see https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/motion-waiver-proposal-16sep14-… and https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/outside-voting-proposal-16sep14… respectively; 2. The GNSO Council adopts the additional footnote language clarifying the Consensus Levels in the GNSO Working Group Guidelines - see https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/consensus-levels-proposal-16sep… 3. The GNSO Council thanks the SCI for its work on these matters and agrees to consider the SCI's request that the current language concerning Consensus Levels in the GNSO Working Group Guidelines be more fully reviewed and revised as part of a broader exercise in reviewing all the GNSO Operating Procedures, including the Working Group Guidelines; and 4. The GNSO Council instructs ICANN staff to post the new version of the GNSO Operating Procedures and GNSO Working Group Guidelines, effective immediately upon adoption. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

GNSO Council transcript posted
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 14, 2014

Nov. 14, 2014

Dear Councillors, The GNSO Council transcript of the meeting held on 13 November 2014 has been published on page. http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#nov and can be directly viewed at: http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/transcript-council-13nov14-en.pdf Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

vote
by Edward Morris Nov. 14, 2014

Nov. 14, 2014

* On 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 I vote: * [ x] Yes * [ ] No * [ ] Abstain * Password: white-0

1 0

MP3 recording GNSO Council 13 November 2014
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 13, 2014

Nov. 13, 2014

[To: liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org; council[at]gnso.icann.org] Please find the MP3 recording of the GNSO Council teleconference held on Thursday, 13 November 2014 at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-council-20141113-en.mp3 And the Adobe chat transcript at: http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/transcript-chat-council-13nov14-en.pdf all on page http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#nov Thank you. Happy listening and reading! Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

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