February 2014 - council - lists.icann.org

ICANN Board resolutions from meeting of 7 Feb 2014 in Los Angeles
by Bruce Tonkin Feb. 12, 2014

Feb. 12, 2014

Hello All, See below regarding Board resolutions taken on 7 Feb 2014. In summary: - Joe Abley was added to the SSAC advisory committee - Steve Crocker was added to the new gTLD program committee - the Board noted the GNSO Policy recommendations on the Protection of IGO-INGO Identifiers and has requested more time to consider them in the context of GAC advice - the Board is forming a working group on the Nominating Committee Recruitment & Selection Process and Size & Composition - the Board has approved the GNSO Policy recommendations on thick WHOIS Regards, Bruce Tonkin From: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-07feb14-en.htm Approved Board Resolutions | Regular Meeting of the ICANN Board 7 February 2014 1. Consent Agenda a. Approval of Board Meeting Minutes b. Appointment of Joe Abley to the Security & Stability Advisory Committee c. Technical Liaison Group Bylaws Revisions d. New gTLD Program Committee Membership 2. Main Agenda a. Protection of IGO-INGO Identifiers in All gTLDs PDP b. Formation of Board Working Group on Nominating Committee Recruitment & Selection Process and Size & Composition c. GNSO Thick Whois Policy Development Process Recommendations 1. Consent Agenda: a. Approval of Board Meeting Minutes Resolved (2014.02.07.01), the Board approves the minutes of the 8, 16, 17, 20 and 21 November Meetings of the ICANN Board. b. Appointment of Joe Abley to the Security & Stability Advisory Committee Whereas, the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) does review its membership and make adjustments from time-to- time. Whereas, the SSAC Membership Committee, on behalf of the SSAC, requests that the Board should appoint Joe Abley to the SSAC. Resolved (2014.02.07.02), the Board appoints Joe Abley to the SSAC. c. Technical Liaison Group Bylaws Revisions Whereas, the ICANN Bylaws currently call for the Technical Liaison Group (TLG) to appoint a non-voting liaison to the ICANN Board as well as a voting delegate to the Nominating Committee (NomCom). Whereas, the Bylaws set out areas of responsibility for the entities comprising the TLG, including the appointment of experts from whom the ICANN Board can seek advice on relevant matters; these experts have never been appointed. Whereas, in 2011, ICANN commissioned a review of the TLG which identified that focus was needed to establish effective mechanisms to provide the Board with the technical advice that it may need, noting that the current form of operation of the TLG has not achieved this goal. Whereas, the proposed Bylaws revisions are intended to allow the component entities of the TLG to focus their energies on their advisory functions. Whereas, in resolution 2013.09.28.15, the Board directed the Chair of the ICANN Board, in coordination with the President and CEO, to initiate communications with the component entities of the TLG to facilitate their identification of experts in fulfillment of Article XI-A, Section 2, Paragraph 6 of the ICANN Bylaws and the resulting strengthening of the TLG advisory mechanism. Whereas, in resolution 2013.09.28.16 the Board directed the President and CEO to publish for public comment proposed Bylaws revisions relating to the TLG liaison to the Board and the appointment of a voting member of the Nominating Committee. Whereas, the proposed amendments were posted for public comment on 30 October 2013. Whereas, staff provided the Board with a summary and analysis of the public comment received. Whereas, the Board has reviewed and considered the summary and analysis of the public comment and has determined that the Bylaws revisions attached to the Reference Materials at Attachment A, address the issues discussed above. Resolved (2013.02.07.03), the Board approves the Bylaws revisions as they were posted for public comment at http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/bylaws-amend-tlg-30oct13-en.htm, subject to two non-substantive changes made solely for clarification. d. New gTLD Program Committee Membership Whereas, on 10 April 2012 the Board created the New gTLD Program Committee, to which it delegated all legal and decision making authority of the Board relating to the New gTLD Program as set forth in its Charter, which excludes those things that the Board is prohibited from delegating by law, or pursuant to Article XII, Section 2 of the ICANN Bylaws. Whereas, the Board Governance Committee Subcommittee for Conflicts & Ethics on new gTLDs has determined that Steve Crocker no longer has a conflict of interest with respect to the New gTLD Program, and that determination has been accepted by the Board. Resolved (2014.02.07.04), Steve Crocker is hereby approved as a voting member of the New gTLD Program Committee (NGPC). The new membership of the NGPC is as follows: Cherine Chalaby (Chair), Fadi Chehadé, Steve Crocker, Chris Disspain, Heather Dryden (Liaison), Bill Graham, Bruno Lanvin, Olga Madruga-Forti, Erika Mann, Gonzalo Navarro, Ray Plzak, George Sadowsky, Mike Silber, Jonne Soininen (Liaison), Kuo-Wei Wu 2. Main Agenda: a. Protection of IGO-INGO Identifiers in All gTLDs PDP Whereas, on 17 October 2012, the GNSO Council launched a Policy Development Process (PDP) on the Protection of IGO-INGO Identifiers in All gTLDs addressing the questions set forth in the PDP Working Group Charter at http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/igo-ingo-charter-15nov12-en.pdf [PDF, 189 KB]. Whereas, the PDP followed the prescribed PDP steps as stated in the ICANN Bylaws and the GNSO PDP Manual, and resulted in a Final Report delivered to the GNSO Council on 10 November 2013. Whereas, the Protection of IGO-INGO Identifiers in All gTLDs Working Group (IGO-INGO WG) reached consensus on twenty-five recommendations in relation to the issues outlined in its Charter. Whereas, the GNSO Council reviewed, and discussed the recommendations of the IGO-INGO WG, and adopted the WG's consensus recommendations by a unanimous vote at its meeting on 20 November 2013 (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#20131120-2 ). Whereas after the GNSO Council vote, a public comment period was held on the approved recommendations, and the comments received have been summarized and published (http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/igo-ingo-recommendations-27nov1… ). Whereas, the GAC advised the ICANN Board in the Buenos Aires Communiqué that it remained committed to continuing the dialogue with the NGPC on finalizing the modalities for permanent protection of IGO acronyms at the second level, and the NGPC is actively working on the issue. Resolved (2014.02.07.05), the Board acknowledges receipt of the GNSO Council's unanimous recommendations on the Protection of IGO-INGO Identifiers in All gTLDs as set forth in the IGO-INGO WG's Final Report (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/igo-ingo-final-10nov13-en.pdf [PDF, 644 KB]), and requests additional time to consider the recommendations so that it may take into account advice from the GAC addressing the same topic. Resolved (2014.02.07.06), the Board directs the ICANN Board New gTLD Program Committee to: (1) consider the policy recommendations from the GNSO as it continues to actively develop an approach to respond to the GAC advice on protections for IGOs; and (2) develop a comprehensive proposal to address the GAC advice and the GNSO policy recommendations for consideration by the Board at a subsequent meeting. b. Formation of Board Working Group on Nominating Committee Recruitment & Selection Process and Size & Composition Whereas the Board previously received the Final Report of the NomCom Finalization Review Working Group on 12 March 2010 (http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-12mar10-en.htm) , which called for a review in three-years' time of issues of the composition, size and recruitment function of the Nominating Committee. Whereas the Structural Improvements Committee (SIC) recommends that it is time to complete the follow-up work anticipated in the Final Report and that a Board Working Group be established for such purpose. Resolved (2014.02.07.07), the Board approves the establishment of a Board Working Group on Nominating Committee (BWG-NomCom) in accordance with the Charter recommended by the SIC, the membership of which will be addressed by the Board Governance Committee. Related materials: Final report of the NomCom Review Finalization Group issued in January 2010 http://www.icann.org/en/groups/reviews/nomcom/nomcom-review-finalization-wg… Nominating Committee Improvements Implementation Project Plan adopted in March 2012 http://www.icann.org/en/groups/reviews/nomcom/nomcom-improvements-implement… c. GNSO Thick Whois Policy Development Process Recommendations Whereas, on 14 March 2012, the GNSO Council launched a Policy Development Process (PDP) on the use of 'thick' Whois by all gTLD Registries, both existing and future (see PDP WG Charter, set forth at https://community.icann.org/x/vIg3Ag) Whereas the PDP followed the prescribed PDP procedures as stated in the Bylaws and due process resulting in a Final Report delivered on 21 October 2013. Whereas the Thick Whois PDP Working Group (WG) reached full consensus on the recommendations in relation to the issues outlined in the Charter. Whereas the GNSO Council reviewed and discussed the recommendations of the Thick Whois PDP WG, and adopted the Recommendations on 31 October 2013 by a Supermajority and unanimous vote (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#20131031-1) Whereas the GNSO Council vote exceeded the required voting threshold set forth in the ICANN Bylaws to impose new Consensus Policies on ICANN contracted parties. Whereas the GNSO Council resolved to convene a Thick Whois Implementation Review Team to assist ICANN Staff in developing the implementation details for the new policy should it be approved by the ICANN Board. Whereas after the GNSO Council vote, a public comment period was held on the approved recommendations, and the comments received strongly supported the recommendations (http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/thick-whois-recommendations-06n…) Resolved (2014.02.07.08), the Board adopts the GNSO Council Policy Recommendations for a new Consensus Policy on Thick Whois as set forth in section 7.1 of the Final Report (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/whois/thick-final-21oct13-en.pdf [PDF, 1.23 MB]). Resolved (2014.02.07.09), the Board directs the President and CEO to develop and execute on an implementation plan for the Thick Whois Policy consistent with the guidance provided by the GNSO Council. The President and CEO is authorized and directed to work with the Implementation Review Team in developing the implementation details for the policy, and to continue communication with the community on such work. Published on 11 February 2014

1 0

Additional MSI Panel Proposals posted for comment
by Marika Konings Feb. 11, 2014

Feb. 11, 2014

Dear All, Please note that two additional proposals from the MSI Panel have been posted for input: * Get agile and innovative by enabling collaborative drafting (see http://thegovlab.org/proposal-4-for-icann-get-agile-innovative-by-enabling-c ollaborative-drafting/) * Become more inclusive by innovating the public forum (http://thegovlab.org/proposal-5-for-icann-become-more-inclusive-by-innovati ng-the-public-forum/) Best regards, Marika

2 1

Request for Information on Registration Directory Service User Accreditation (Available Until 10 March 2014)
by Glen de Saint Géry Feb. 11, 2014

Feb. 11, 2014

https://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-10feb14-en.htm Request for Information on Registration Directory Service User Accreditation (Available Until 10 March 2014) 10 February 2014 ICANN is publishing Request for Information (RFI)<https://www.icann.org/en/news/rfps/rds-user-accreditation-rfi-10feb14-en.pdf> [PDF, 787 KB] to identify any organizations capable of accrediting users of the new Registration Directory Service (RDS) now under consideration to replace the current WHOIS system. RDS users may include (but are not limited to) Registrants, Proxy Service Providers and Customers, Internet Technical Staff, On-Line Service Providers, Individual and Business Internet Users, Internet Researchers, Intellectual Property Owners, Law Enforcement Agencies, Operations/Security Incident Investigators, and others requesting gTLD domain name registration data for legitimate purposes. Purpose of RFI ICANN is releasing this Request for Information at the request of the Expert Working Group on Next Generation gTLD Directory Services (EWG). The EWG is now developing recommendations to identify a replacement to the current WHOIS system that could better meet global Internet community needs for domain name registration data while offering greater privacy, accuracy, and accountability. With this Request for Information, the EWG seeks to solicit responses from organizations that currently issue system access credentials to authorized members of their own community, using defined acceptance criteria. The EWG hopes to build upon existing membership or credentialing processes to fulfill RDS user accreditation needs, should ICANN pursue RDS implementation in the future. The purpose of this RFI is purely informational - that is, to inform the development of policies and procedures that may follow the EWG's Final Report. As a result, potential Respondents responding to any future RFP for the EWG Project will not be bound by the estimates, prices, or other information provided in response to this RFI. RFI Attributes * RFI Availability Date: 10 February 2014 * The Requirements and Instructions are more fully described in the RFI<https://www.icann.org/en/news/rfps/rds-user-accreditation-rfi-10feb14-en.pdf> [PDF, 787 KB] * RFI Close Date: 10 March 2014, 23:59 UTC * RFI Language: English only * Responses should be submitted via email to rfi-response(a)icann.org<mailto:rfi-response@icann.org> The EWG greatly appreciates any insights on this topic from those organizations interested in sharing information about their services. Background on the EWG Project In December 2012, ICANN announced the creation of an Expert Working Group (EWG) on next-generation gTLD Registration Directory Services, as a first step in fulfilling the ICANN Board's directive to help redefine the purpose and provision of gTLD registration data. The EWG's findings are expected to serve as a foundation to help the GNSO create a new global policy for the provision of gTLD registration data. A significant milestone was reached on 24 June 2013<https://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-3-24jun13-en.htm> with the publication <https://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-3-24jun13-en.htm> of the Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services (EWG)'s<https://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services> Initial Report and FAQs, opening a consultation period with the ICANN community. The Initial Report<https://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services/initial-repor…> [PDF, 1.70 MB] enumerated the users, purposes, data elements, recommended principles and features, and proposed model to guide the development of a next generation Registration Directory Service (RDS) to replace WHOIS. Prior to the ICANN Meeting in Buenos Aires, the EWG published its Status Update Report<https://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services/status-update…> [PDF, 2.26 MB] to highlight the EWG's thinking on these and many other key issues. It also provides a great deal more detail on the analysis that lay behind the Initial Report<https://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services/initial-repor…> [PDF, 1.70 MB]. The EWG is currently in its research and information gathering phase. This RFI is one of several research efforts that the EWG is currently undertaking to ensure that its final recommendations are supported by facts and informed by current practices. The EWG expects to complete its recommendations in 2014, informed by Community feedback and in-depth analysis of selected areas, including the responses to this RFI. The EWG plans to reconvene in March 2014 to derive fact-based recommendations after carefully examining the results of its research, and expects to deliver its final report to the ICANN Board by June 2014. Questions If questions arise about this RFI regarding the EWG Project, please contact Margie Milam. Any such inquiries should be sent to: rfi-response(a)icann.org<mailto:rfi-response@icann.org>. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Proposed Modifications to GNSO Operating Procedures to Address Resubmission of Motions and Working Group Self Assessment
by Glen de Saint Géry Feb. 11, 2014

Feb. 11, 2014

https://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-10feb14-en.htm Proposed Modifications to GNSO Operating Procedures to Address Resubmission of Motions and Working Group Self Assessment Comment / Reply Periods (*) Comment Open Date: 10 February 2014 Comment Close Date: 3 March 2014 - 23:59 UTC Reply Open Date: 4 March 2014 Reply Close Date: 1 April 2014 - 23:59 UTC Important Information Links Public Comment Announcement<https://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-10feb14-en.htm> To Submit Your Comments (Forum)<mailto:comments-gnso-op-procedures-10feb14@icann.org> View Comments Submitted<http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-gnso-op-procedures-10feb14/> Brief Overview Originating Organization: Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) Categories/Tags: * Policy Processes * Reviews/Improvements Purpose (Brief): The Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) is recommending a modification of: (1) the GNSO Operating Procedures to Resubmission of Motions; and (2) the GNSO Working Group (WG) Guidelines to Add a WG Self Assessment Mechanism. Current Status: As required by the ICANN Bylaws, a public comment forum is hereby initiated on the proposed changes prior to GNSO Council consideration. Next Steps: Following the closing of the public comment forum, the SCI will review the comments received; revise its recommendations, if deemed appropriate, and; submit these to the GNSO Council for approval. Staff Contact: Julie Hedlund Email Staff Contact<mailto:Policy-staff@icann.org?subject=More%20information%20on%20the%20Proposed%20Modifications%20to%20GNSO%20Operating%20Procedures%20to%20Address%20Resubmission%20of%20Motions%20and%20Working%20Group%20Self%20Assessment%20public%20comment%20period> Detailed Information Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose: The Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) was established by the GNSO Council on 7 April 2011 as a standing committee of the GNSO, responsible for reviewing and assessing the effective functioning of the GNSO Operating Procedures and Working Group Guidelines. As part of its charter, the SCI is tasked to consider requests concerning issues related to the GNSO Council processes and procedures and to Working Group Guidelines that have been identified either by the GNSO Council or a group chartered by the GNSO Council as needing discussion. This public comment forum is being opened in relation to two proposed changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures being recommended by the SCI. The current GNSO Operating Procedures do not contain a specific provision on the possibility of resubmitting a motion for voting by the GNSO Council. In addition, the current GNSO Working Group Guidelines, which form Annex I of the GNSO Operating Procedures, do not contain a mechanism for WGs to self-assess their work. As a result, the GNSO Council requested that the SCI consider whether there should be a modification to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures to address the issue of the resubmission of a motion. In addition, the GNSO Council asked the SCI to develop a survey that WGs could use to perform a self-assessment once their work is complete. Accordingly, the SCI developed procedures to be inserted in Section 4.3 (Motions and Votes) of the GNSO Operating Procedures that provide for the resubmission of a motion to the GNSO Council for consideration at a subsequent meeting of the Council, if three criteria are followed: 1) providing of an explanation for the resubmission; 2) timely publication of the resubmitted motion, and 3) seconding of the resubmitted motion by a Councilor from each of the two GNSO Houses. The proposed new procedures also include limitations and exceptions for the resubmission of a motion concerning the timing of its submission, disallowing any material changes to the original motion, and clarifying that a previously-submitted motion not voted upon by the GNSO Council is considered a new motion (and not resubmitted) if it is brought before the GNSO Council again. Please see the redlined version of Section 4.3 of the GNSO Operating Procedures<http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-voting-redline-10feb14-en.pdf> [PDF, 148 KB]. In addition, the SCI developed and tested a WG self-assessment questionnaire, as a result of which the SCI is recommending that procedures for administering the self-assessment be added as a new Section 7.0 to the GNSO Working Group Guidelines, which form Annex I of the GNSO Operating Procedures. In the self-assessment questionnaire WG members are asked a series of questions about the WG processes and outputs. ICANN staff is required to monitor responses to the questionnaire, close the questionnaire when all WG members have completed it, and provide a summary of responses to the WG Chair. Please see the redlined version of Annex I to the GNSO Operating Procedures<http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-guidelines-redline-10feb14-e…> [PDF, 242 KB]. As required by the ICANN Bylaws, the SCI is requesting community input on these proposed modifications to the GNSO Operating Procedures. Section II: Background: The Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) was established by the GNSO Council on 7 April 2011 as a standing committee of the GNSO, responsible for reviewing and assessing the effective functioning of the GNSO Operating Procedures and Working Group Guidelines. As part of its charter, the SCI is tasked to consider requests concerning issues related to the GNSO Council processes and procedures and to Working Group Guidelines that have been identified either by the GNSO Council or a group chartered by the GNSO Council as needing discussion. The SCI operates on the basis of the GNSO WG Guidelines, and its recommendations are made based on Full Consensus of the SCI on the proposals under consideration. Each GNSO Stakeholder Group and Constituency appoints a representative to the SCI. Other members of the SCI include a Nominating Committee appointee and an observer from any GNSO constituency-in-formation (if any). The SCI may also appoint observers from other ICANN Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committee. For further information about the SCI and its activities, please see https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/Home. Section III: Document and Resource Links: Current version of the GNSO Council Operating Procedures - see GNSO Operating Procedures v2.7 (13 June 2013)<http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-13jun13-en.pdf> [PDF, 556 KB]. Section IV: Additional Information: Not applicable ________________________________ (*) Comments submitted after the posted Close Date/Time are not guaranteed to be considered in any final summary, analysis, reporting, or decision-making that takes place once this period lapses. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Update to Statement of Interest
by Maria Farrell Feb. 10, 2014

Feb. 10, 2014

Dear Council colleagues, An FYI that I have just updated my Statement of Interest: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=37192832 All the best, Maria

1 0

RE: Resolutions from the Meeting of the New gTLD Program Committee held in Los Angeles on 5 Feb 2014
by Bruce Tonkin Feb. 9, 2014

Feb. 9, 2014

See attached from: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-annex-2… for an additional annex 2 that relates to GAC Category 1 strings.

1 0

Update on Issue Report for IGO-INGO Access to URDP & URS
by Mary Wong Feb. 8, 2014

Feb. 8, 2014

Dear Councilors, This is to inform you that due to preparations for the various Board meetings and workshops that have gone on this week, among other things, it has been more challenging than usual to coordinate things among the various ICANN staffers with whom we will need to work on the Preliminary Issue Report on IGO-INGO Access to the UDRP and URS Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms. We are extremely sorry for the delay; as you know we had hoped to complete the Report by now. We are, however, confident that it will be finalized and published for public comment this month, in good time for community review and discussion before the ICANN meeting in Singapore. In accordance with past practice, we will ensure that the dates and duration of the public comment period will take into account the Singapore meeting and everyone's time leading up to and after it. 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 * One World. One Internet. *

1 0

TR: [NCSG-Discuss] Obituary Alain Berranger
by Glen de Saint Géry Feb. 7, 2014

Feb. 7, 2014

FYI De : Rafik Dammak [ Hi Glen, unfortunately I am sharing bad news about Alain passing away. I think that is important to inform GNSO council , just to remind that we all are volunteers and human beings , and such event dwarf any issue or disagreement. Best, Rafik 2014-02-07 marie-laure Lemineur <mllemineur(a)gmail.com<mailto:mllemineur@gmail.com>>: Alain Berranger sadly passed away shortly before Christmas 2013 after a long illness. Within the GNSO he was better known as being the first elected Chair of ICANN's Not-For-Profit Operational Concerns Constituency (NPOC) from 2011 when the Constituency was first formed, after ICANN 41 in Singapore, until July 2013. He was originally appointed as the Acting Vice-Chair in 2011, and later won the Constituency's first elections. He rose to the challenge successfully. Today, NPOC is what it is because of Alain’s continuous effort to strengthen the Constituency. He truly believed in the key role Not-for-Profits should and could play in the GNSO and the ICANN ecosystem as a whole. He strove to strengthen its Executive Committee by recruiting new members and constantly encouraged them to contribute to the policy issues at hand. His commitment to the NPOC mission was reflected through the numerous Working Groups he joined and actively participated in while he was Chair. His professional achievements outside the GNSO are numerous. After completing his Bachelors degree, he joined Noranda Inc. and then worked for Touche Ross Daihatsu, Tecsult, as well as for Dominion Bridge. Alain served as Vice Chair of the Executive Committee at the Global Knowledge Partnership foundation from 2009 to 2011, moving on to become a member of the Board. He was an Executive-in-residence at Schulich School of Business at York University in Toronto. Alain also filled the position of Vice Chair of the Canadian Foundation for the Americas for two years and from 1996 to 2006 he acted as Director of Partnerships and Business Development for the International Development Research Center of the Canadian Government. Much of his career was focused on international development. To that intent, he worked with aid agencies, management and engineering consulting firms, as well as with the private sector. He travelled extensively, undertaking assignments for Expedia in Mexico, Microsoft, the Omar Dengo Foundation and the CRUSA Foundation both in Costa Rica, UNDP in Egypt and Vietnam, the Chasquinet Foundation in Ecuador. He conducted training in strategic partnering and resource mobilization for civil society, foundations, government and development agencies. Whilst we deeply mourn his passing, we should remember that Alain gave us numerous reasons to be grateful and to celebrate his life. Alain was unique. He was at home on a Golf course, spending a lot of time spinning the balls and spinning the wheels of business, but he was equally at home everywhere in the world where those passed by economic developments needed support to get economic development going. As a pioneer, he bridged worlds, bravely he often performed tight rope acts to unite what seemingly did not belong together. To us he was always a reliable colleague whose friendship has made us better people and the world we inhabit a better place to be. Alain loved life and he loved to enjoy everything on offer but what made him so important was that he was equally prepared to put in the hard work that after completion makes achievements even sweeter. Alain has left his mark with everything he did. It remains for us to honor his life by continuing his legacy by taking what his life has taught us and to move forward with his spirit on our side.

2 1

MSI Panel & the Council (Was RE: [council] framing the discussion on SGs and role of the Council)
by Jonathan Robinson Feb. 7, 2014

Feb. 7, 2014

Thanks Avri, Wise input. Again, I find myself having very similar views to you on this one - MSI Panel / GNSO interaction. It seems to me that we should engage with the work of the panel, absorb proposals where appropriate and similarly push back where proposals are difficult to integrate. I have had a 45 minute call with Beth Novek and she was very interested to engage with and hear from us. As I see it, there are a number of (non-exclusive) options including: 1. Further direct dialogue between Beth & myself. 2. A written submission / response from the GNSO Council 3. An invitation to meet with the Council in Singapore Please note that the remit they have been given means they are working to a very aggressive timetable. Jonathan -----Original Message----- From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri@acm.org] Sent: 06 February 2014 17:33 To: 'Council' Subject: Re: [council] framing the discussion on SGs and role of the Council SNIP ... an opinion on MSI Panel / GNSO interaction while I was probing one of Mikey points. > > I only intended to ensure that we didn't drop the original topic relating to > the work of the MSI panel and our interaction / engagement with that. I think we need to treat it as possible input for our own continuing improvement path. with ICANN spending oodles of bucks on this process, we shouldn't disregard the possibility that they do say something useful. Despite the 'neoclassical style' of their prose. While reading it, and listening to the presentation, it put me in mind of a infomercial for a Branded social improvement product. Nonetheless, I think that many of the the techniques they suggest are things we could consider and possibly even build in pilot projects on some of our processes. But we need to understand them as tools for the purposes of the GNSO and not as solutions in search of a problem. I think it is important that we do not make the mistake they appear to be making, and missing out on the pony because it is hard to find ones way through hay (or something like that). I think a good conversation with them, or those of the MSI panel who are about in Singapore, is a good idea. It also might be good to organize ourselves (a drafting team?) to offer a critical analysis of their output. avri > > Jonathan

1 0

FW: Stage 2 Begins: Designing a 21st Century ICANN
by Jonathan Robinson Feb. 6, 2014

Feb. 6, 2014

From: The ICANN Strategy Panel on Multistakeholder Innovation & The GovLab [mailto:icannmsipanel@thegovlab.org] Sent: 31 January 2014 19:01 To: jrobinson(a)afilias.info Subject: Stage 2 Begins: Designing a 21st Century ICANN <https://gallery.mailchimp.com/1a990feb5c/images/logo_icann_ideascale_3_.png> Hello! By engaging the stakeholders of the Internet (this really includes everyone!), the ICANN Strategy Panel on Multistakeholder Innovation ( <http://openinggovernment.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=1a990feb5c&id=9e…> the MSI Panel) and The Governance Lab @ NYU ( <http://openinggovernment.us6.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=1a990feb5c&id=d…> The GovLab) are working to develop a set of concrete proposals for designing the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) – the public interest organization responsible for coordinating the Internet’s Domain Name System (DNS) – for the 21st Century. We’re writing to request your participation in this important initiative and to help us spread the word! Today launches Stage 2 – Proposal Development – of our online engagement effort aimed at getting your input into the Panel’s work in order to bring our ideas for evolving ICANN from principle to practice. The Panel has been specifically charged by ICANN’s President and CEO with: · Proposing new models for international engagement, consensus-driven policymaking and institutional structures to support such enhanced functions; and · Designing processes, tools and platforms that enable the global ICANN community to engage in these new forms of participatory decision-making. To answer this charter, we launched a three-stage brainstorm initiative on November 19, 2013. We started with Stage 1: Idea Generation. The Panel and GovLab launched an <http://openinggovernment.us6.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=1a990feb5c&id=4…> engagement platform asking the global public to share their ideas for what techniques, strategies, tools and platforms ICANN could look to and learn from to help transform itself into an effective, legitimate and evolving 21st century global organization. We now want to take these ideas closer to implementation during Stage 2. To do so, we’ve shared the <http://openinggovernment.us6.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=1a990feb5c&id=b…> draft proposal blueprint on the GovLab Blog organizing all of our ideas into 16 concrete proposals for ICANN, which we are opening up to you for discussion. We want your feedback, input, comments, questions, and suggestions on what we’ve collected. We’ve also published our first set of proposals, which include recommendations for ICANN to: * <http://openinggovernment.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=1a990feb5c&id=c8…> Leverage expert networking; * <http://openinggovernment.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=1a990feb5c&id=78…> Use crowdsourcing during all phases of decisionmaking; and * <http://openinggovernment.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=1a990feb5c&id=75…> Crowdsource oversight and develop standards to measure success. Feel free to provide feedback or reactions using comments or the line-by-line annotation tools enabled on the blog. You can also see all of these materials aggregated on the GovLab's ICANN project page, online <http://openinggovernment.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=1a990feb5c&id=e6…> HERE. Help us spread the word! Do you know any people or organizations who would be interested in these proposal topics? We’d love to get their feedback, too. Consider doing any of the following: · Forward this “Call To Action” to colleagues and organizations you know working in these areas who may have ideas or feedback to share on the blog. · Share our proposal draft links (all accessible <http://openinggovernment.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=1a990feb5c&id=16…> here), as widely as possible within your networks (e.g., via mailing lists and listservs). Feel free to link to these posts or repost on your website edited to fit your needs! · Use social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter or Google+ to spread the word about this initiative (use the #WeCANN hashtag!). · To inspire participation and learn how to contribute, watch and share a <http://openinggovernment.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=1a990feb5c&id=ad…> video The GovLab made when we launched this brainstorm. · Discuss the MSI Panel’s work and proposals in your own communities and share your comments and feedback with the us in the blog comments or at <http://openinggovernment.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=1a990feb5c&id=c7…> icannmsipanel(a)thegovlab.org. Toward the end of February – we will move into the last stage of this brainstorm – Stage 3: Collaborative Drafting. Using a <http://openinggovernment.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=1a990feb5c&id=e8…> wiki, we will invite collaborative drafting on a first full draft of all proposals that the Panel will then submit to the ICANN CEO, Board and community. So stay tuned! For more information, visit The GovLab at <http://openinggovernment.us6.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=1a990feb5c&id=6…> www.thegovlab.org. Thanks and best, The MSI Panel & The GovLab <http://openinggovernment.us6.list-manage.com/unsubscribe?u=1a990feb5c&id=a8…> unsubscribe from this list <http://openinggovernment.us6.list-manage.com/profile?u=1a990feb5c&id=a862b4…> update subscription preferences <http://openinggovernment.us6.list-manage.com/track/open.php?u=1a990feb5c&id…>

10 27