May 2014 - council - lists.icann.org

Re: [council] FW: Enhancing ICANN Accountability | ICANN - Proposed Next Steps for the Process
by John Berard 23 May '14

23 May '14

3 2

Reminder: Document and Motion deadline Monday, 26 May 2014 at 23:59 UTC for Council meeting on 5 June 2014 at 18:00 UTC
by Glen de Saint Géry 23 May '14

23 May '14

Dear Councillors, Reports, motions and documents for consideration are due no later than (NLT) 10 days in advance (i.e. MONDAY, 26 May 2014 at 23:59 UTC) of the GNSO Council meeting on 5 June 2014 at 18:00 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+5+June+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

1 0

FW: Enhancing ICANN Accountability | ICANN - Proposed Next Steps for the Process
by Jonathan Robinson 23 May '14

23 May '14

All, It is my view that the GNSO should reasonably expect to have four representatives (one per SG) on this Working Group. Please let me know if you think similarly or differently. Jonathan From: David Olive [mailto:david.olive@icann.org] Sent: 16 May 2014 08:46 To: Jonathan Robinson; Byron Holland; Louie Lee; heather.dryden(a)ic.gc.ca; Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond; Patrik Fältström; Lars-Johan Liman; Jun Murai Cc: Theresa Swinehart; Samantha Eisner Subject: FW: Enhancing ICANN Accountability | ICANN - Proposed Next Steps for the Process Dear SO-AC Chairs: In follow up to ICANNs recent announcement on the Enhancing ICANN Accountability review, part of the success of this group will be through the SO and ACs identification of members to serve on the Working Group. In contrast to the ATRT reviews and others, ICANN will not be making community appointments to the group from a slate of identified candidates; the community representation on this Working Group is to be determined by the SO/AC leadership. We are hoping that you can start consideration of membership from SO or AC that you are leading. As ICANN is trying to align the timeline of the Enhancing ICANN Accountability work to the IANA Stewardship Transition work, we are hoping that we can have community representation identified in advance of ICANN50 in London. To help structure the work of the Working Group, ICANN has identified a range of subject matter areas within which competency would be helpful, including: · Internet Technical Operations · International Organizational Reviews · Global Accountability Tools and Metrics · Jurisprudence / Accountability Mechanism · Internet Consumer Protection · Economics (Marketplace and Competition) · Global Ethics Frameworks · Operational, Finance and Process · Board Governance · Transparency · Risk Management While we did not specify the full number of community members that will be appointed to the Working Group, we are hopeful that each SO and AC will consider identifying two representatives (and no more than three) so that the Working Group is of a size that can perform its work in an efficient manner. We also encourage the consideration of the subject matters when identifying representatives. If you have more questions about this process, please let Theresa Swinehart or myself know. Best regards, David David A. Olive Vice President, Policy Development Support General Manager, ICANN Regional Headquarters Istanbul Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct Line: +90.212.381.8727 Mobile: + 1. 202.341.3611 Email: david.olive(a)icann.org www.icann.org From: David Olive <david.olive(a)icann.org> Date: Wednesday, May 7, 2014 12:47 AM To: "soac-infoalert(a)icann.org" <soac-infoalert(a)icann.org> Cc: Theresa Swinehart <theresa.swinehart(a)icann.org> Subject: Enhancing ICANN Accountability | ICANN - Proposed Next Steps for the Process http://www.icann.org/en/news/in-focus/accountability/enhancing-accountabilit y Proposed Next Steps for the Process Establishing the ICANN Accountability Working Group: At the ICANN meeting in Singapore, members of the community suggested establishing a working group to address topics raised around ICANN Accountability. To respond to both the community dialogues and suggestions, an ICANN Accountability Working Group is proposed. The leaders of ICANN's Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees will be responsible for appointment of community members to the Working Group. Community members with skills in the subject matter areas listed below are encouraged to have their names put forward by the leadership of ICANN's Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees for participation in the Working Group before the end of the comment and reply period. The Board may appoint liaisons to the Working Group. ICANN staff will identify external experts in these subject matter areas to join the Working Group and bring in new ideas. The subject matter areas are: * Internet Technical Operations * International Organizational Reviews * Global Accountability Tools and Metrics * Jurisprudence / Accountability Mechanism * Internet Consumer Protection * Economics (Marketplace and Competition) * Global Ethics Frameworks * Operational, Finance and Process * Board Governance * Transparency * Risk Management After the public comment and reply period, the Working Group will commence in time for the ICANN 50 Meeting. It's expected that sub-working groups on specialized subject areas will be useful and open to all including experts. The ICANN Accountability Working Group would coordinate community dialogue, including discussion on draft materials on the discussions and proposed themes outlined above with regards to strengthening ICANN's accountability to address the absence of its historical contractual relationship to the U.S. Government and other identified issues. One of the first tasks of the Working Group will be to identify the issues that need to be solved. The ICANN Accountability Working Group would prepare a draft report on issues identified including whether measures are needed to strengthen ICANN's accountability, and if so, the recommended time frames for development of new or improved mechanisms, if any. The draft report would be provided for public comment. The ICANN Accountability Working Group would submit its final report to the ICANN Board. The Board would immediately and publicly post the final report, consider whether to adopt all or parts of it, and direct the CEO to implement those parts it has accepted once that decision is made. It is expected that the ICANN Accountability Working Group would operate in an open, transparent and inclusive process, primarily through remote participation opportunities, that would include: * A website that would include a timeline of activities and events, as well as all materials and communications from the working group, and a full archive of all content provided and evaluated throughout the process; * A mailing list to ensure anyone can remain involved in the activities and progress of the group; and, * All meetings and phone conference would be open for stakeholders to observe and transcripts and recordings would be posted. Questions for Community Discussion: As the next steps are being outlined and process finalized, ICANN is collecting community input to help provide feedback to further the work of the ICANN Accountability Working Group once it is comprised. ICANN is now seeking community discussion on both the questions first posed in March 2014 as well as some additional questions: * What issues does the community identify as being core to strengthening ICANN's overall accountability in the absence of its historical contractual relationship to the U.S. Government? * What should be the guiding principles to ensure that the notion of accountability is understood and accepted globally? What are the consequences if the ICANN Board is not being accountable to the community? Is there anything that should be added to the Working Group's mandate? * Do the Affirmation of Commitments and the values expressed therein need to evolve to support global acceptance of ICANN's accountability and so, how? * What are the means by which the Community is assured that ICANN is meeting its accountability commitments? * Are there other mechanisms that would better ensure that ICANN lives up to its commitments? * What additional comments would you like to share that could be of use to the ICANN Accountability Working Group? Please provide your input on the questions above at comments-enhancing-accountability-06may14(a)icann.org Download a PDF of this document here <http://www.icann.org/en/news/in-focus/accountability/enhancing-accountabili ty-06may14-en.pdf> [PDF, 375 KB]. David A. Olive Vice President, Policy Development Support General Manager, ICANN Regional Headquarters Istanbul Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct Line: +90.212.381.8727 Mobile: + 1. 202.341.3611 Email: david.olive(a)icann.org www.icann.org

2 1

FW: [Soac-infoalert] Transition from U.S. Government has Four Work Tracks -Blog By Fadi Chehadé
by Jonathan Robinson 23 May '14

23 May '14

From: David Olive [mailto:david.olive@icann.org] Sent: 20 May 2014 22:19 To: soac-infoalert(a)icann.org Subject: [Soac-infoalert] Transition from U.S. Government has Four Work Tracks -Blog By Fadi Chehadé http://blog.icann.org/ http://blog.icann.org/2014/05/transition-from-u-s-government-has-four-work-… Transition from U.S. Government has Four Work Tracks By Fadi Chehadé Nine weeks have passed since the U.S. government announced its intention to transition stewardship of the IANA functions to the global community. This landmark announcement requires a measured, thoughtful approach for how we – the Internet community – will map a route to a successful transition. Together, we must pool our efforts with a goal of producing an acceptable and timely proposal for a smooth transition. What is most important is that our transition process is open and inclusive, while maintaining a discipline and focus that will ensure our success within a reasonable timeline. I see our work ahead as divided into four concurrent tracks, and wanted to update you on where we are on each track. 1. Transition of U.S. government stewardship of IANA functions at ICANN By the end of Thursday, 8 May, the community submitted <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ianatransition/2014/date.html#start> more than 1,000 emails and comments with feedback on the proposed process framework for the U.S. government stewardship transition process, which ICANN is facilitating. Comments were received online, via social media, emails as well as through two public dialogues at ICANN 49 in Singapore and the NETmundial meeting in Brazil. These <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ianatransition/2014/date.html#start> comments will lead to a revised transition process framework. The goal of the process is for the global community to produce a transition proposal to the U.S. government. According to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, this proposal must have broad community support and must not replace NTIA with a government-led or inter-governmental solution. The next few weeks will be spent reading all of the input, analyzing it and ultimately producing a revised transition process framework before ICANN 50 in June 2014. 2. Strengthen ICANN accountability Two weeks ago we began a <http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/enhancing-accountability-06may1…> community discussion on enhancement of ICANN’s accountability through the posting of a background document and questions for input. This dialogue is open to all. Please provide your <http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/enhancing-accountability-06may1…> comments until 27 May on how ICANN (the organization) should be accountable to you after the transition of the IANA stewardship. Your thoughts are welcome on how we can strengthen existing accountability mechanisms like the <http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/aoc/affirmation-of-commitments-30s…> Affirmation of Commitments. Additionally, your insights will help us assess ICANN’s redress mechanisms, and explore new accountability mechanisms where necessary. We expect ICANN’s Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees to finalize the participants in a new community Working Group that will guide this process, so that work can begin during ICANN’s 50th Public Meeting in London in June. 3. Maintain security and stability of implementation of the root zone updates Currently, the process flow for root zone management involves three roles that are performed by three different entities: NTIA as the Administrator, ICANN as the <http://www.ntia.doc.gov/page/iana-functions-purchase-order> Operator, and Verisign as the Maintainer. After the transition, the role of NTIA as the Administrator will be replaced by mechanisms to be determined by you, the global community, to ensure ICANN’s accountability to the community on each request to update the root zone. ICANN will remain in its role as the Operator, and will establish a relationship directly with the third-party Maintainer. As a means to help ensure stability, ICANN’s recommended implementation option is to have Verisign continue its role as the Maintainer. However, we will be working closely with all relevant parties including the Root Zone Operators to ensure there are contingency options in place to meet our absolute commitment to the stability, security and resiliency of the Domain Name System. 4. Strengthen bilateral relationships with policy bodies ICANN staff has begun initial work to review and strengthen existing informal and formal commitments between ICANN and the bodies that produce the policies implemented by the IANA department. Let me be crystal clear – the policies implemented by IANA are produced by the Internet Engineering Task Force (for protocol parameters), the Address Supporting Organization (for IP addresses), the Generic Names Supporting Organization (for generic domain names) and the ccTLDs and Country-Code Names Supporting Organization (for country-code domain names). We welcome your help in order to strengthen these relationships and the assurances of a clear division between the processes that produce the policies and their implementation. You can review <http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements> existing commitments with policy bodies on the following page: <http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements> ICANN’s Major Agreements and Related Reports. In addition, here are other links to major agreements and related documents: · <http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/cctlds> ccTLDs. · IAOC / IAB: o <http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/ietf/ietf-icann-mou-01mar00-en.htm> Original Memorandum of Understanding, dated 1 March 2000, RFC 2860. o <http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/ietf/ietf-iana-agreement-2014-07ma…> Most recent MOU Supplemental Agreement, effective 7 March 2014. · Number Resources Organization: o <http://archive.icann.org/en/aso/aso-mou-29oct04.htm> Memorandum of Understanding, dated 21 October 2004. o Exchange of Letters ( <http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/akplogan-to-twomey-23mar09-en.p…> NRO to ICANN-March 2009; <http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/twomey-to-akplogan-17apr09-en.p…> ICANN to NRO-April 2009; <http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/plzak-to-twomey-17dec07-en.pdf> NRO to ICANN-December 2007; <http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/twomey-to-plzak-19dec07-en.pdf> ICANN to NRO-December 2007). We have a full plate for the next 15 months. Together, we must carefully manage these four concurrent and inter-related tracks. And while September 2015 is not a deadline, we must organize ourselves on a clear timeline to succeed. This is critical work – and I am confident that, united, we will get it done. ##

1 0

FW: [Soac-infoalert] ICANN POLICY UPDATE | Volume 14, Issue 5 – May 2014 Issue
by Jonathan Robinson 23 May '14

23 May '14

FYI From: soac-infoalert-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:soac-infoalert-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of David Olive Sent: 22 May 2014 05:55 To: soac-infoalert(a)icann.org Subject: [Soac-infoalert] ICANN POLICY UPDATE | Volume 14, Issue 5 – May 2014 Issue https://www.icann.org/resources/newsletter/policy-update-2014-05-21-en ICANN POLICY UPDATE | Volume 14, Issue 5 – May 2014 Issue 21 May 2014 <https://www.icann.org/en/resources/policy/update> http://www.icann.org/en/resources/policy/update CONTENTS: Across ICANN 1. <https://www.icann.org/resources/newsletter/policy-update-2014-05-21-en#1> The NEW Policy Update 2. <https://www.icann.org/resources/newsletter/policy-update-2014-05-21-en#2> First Multistakeholder Ethos Award Planned for ICANN 50 3. <https://www.icann.org/resources/newsletter/policy-update-2014-05-21-en#3> Issues Currently Open for Public Comment ASO 4. <https://www.icann.org/resources/newsletter/policy-update-2014-05-21-en#4> NRO AND RIR Updates ccNSO 5. <https://www.icann.org/resources/newsletter/policy-update-2014-05-21-en#5> Council Submits Comments on the IANA Stewardship Transition Process GNSO 6. <https://www.icann.org/resources/newsletter/policy-update-2014-05-21-en#6> Preparations Begin for GNSO Review 7. <https://www.icann.org/resources/newsletter/policy-update-2014-05-21-en#7> Effort Launched to Develop Improved Cross-Community Working Group Operating Principles 8. <https://www.icann.org/resources/newsletter/policy-update-2014-05-21-en#8> GNSO Council Has No Objection to Specification 13 At-Large 9. <https://www.icann.org/resources/newsletter/policy-update-2014-05-21-en#9> ALAC Submits 10 Policy Advice Statements 10. <https://www.icann.org/resources/newsletter/policy-update-2014-05-21-en#10> ATLAS II Planning Enters Final Month 11. <https://www.icann.org/resources/newsletter/policy-update-2014-05-21-en#11> ATLAS II Capacity Building Webinar Series Continues 12. <https://www.icann.org/resources/newsletter/policy-update-2014-05-21-en#12> At-Large Expands to 173 At-Large Structures GAC 13. <https://www.icann.org/resources/newsletter/policy-update-2014-05-21-en#13> High-Level Governmental Meeting to be Held at ICANN 50 RSSAC 14. <https://www.icann.org/resources/newsletter/policy-update-2014-05-21-en#14> RSSAC Seeks Caucus Members David A. Olive Sent from my iPad

1 0

Draft minutes GNSO Council meeting 8 May 2014 for review
by Glen de Saint Géry 22 May '14

22 May '14

Dear Councillors, Attached, please find the draft minutes of the GNSO Council meeting on 8 May 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-13jun13-en.pdf <http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-13jun13-en.pdf%20> > section 3.5 "If no objections are received within 10 days, the minutes will be deemed to have been approved for posting" on 31 May 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

1 0

Document and Motion deadline Monday, 26 May 2014 at 23:59 UTC for Council meeting on 5 June 2014 at 18:00 UTC
by Glen de Saint Géry 21 May '14

21 May '14

Dear Councillors, Reports, motions and documents for consideration are due no later than (NLT) 10 days in advance (i.e. MONDAY, 26 May 2014 at 23:59 UTC) of the GNSO Council meeting on 5 June 2014 at 18:00 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+5+June+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

1 0

GNSO Council meeting 8 May 2014: Action Items
by Glen de Saint Géry 21 May '14

21 May '14

Dear Councillors, Please find the action items arising from the GNSO Council meeting on 8 May 2014. Item 2: Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action List Arising from the Action List<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Items>: Meeting Strategy Working Group (MSWG) Support the existing draft<http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg16102.html> or make any modification so that it can be submitted to Sébastien Bachollet, the MSWG chair, by 23:59 UTC on Friday, 9 May 2014. Item 5: DISCUSSION - Internet Governance Issues Action Item Jonathan Robinson, on behalf of the Council is to provide comments regarding a plan for a Cross-Community Working Group (CWG) intended to make a substantive contribution to the Principles and Mechanisms and the Process to Develop a Proposal to Transition NTIA's Stewardship of the IANA Functions. Item 6: Update - Forthcoming review of the GNSO Action Item Staff to issue 'Call for participation' and ensure there is active participation through all of the GNSO Stakeholder Groups/Constituencies. Item 8: Update - WHOIS Studies Action Item: Prepare a motion for the next Council meeting. Item 9: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Planning for London Action Item All input and topics for discussion are welcome and should be sent to the Council mailing list and /or Volker Greimann. Item 10: Any Other Business Action Item Councillors are encouraged to provide comments to the Strategic Plan.<https://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/stratplan-draft-09apr14-en.htm> Please let me know if you have any questions. 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

FW: ICANN News Alert -- Proposed Implementation of GNSO PDP Recommendations on Locking of a Domain Name Subject to UDRP Proceedings - Revised UDRP Rules
by Marika Konings 21 May '14

21 May '14

For your information please note that the proposed implementation was developed by ICANN Staff in close collaboration with the GNSO Implementation Review Team that was formed following the adoption of the PDP recommendations by the ICANN Board. Best regards, Marika From: ICANN News Alert <communications(a)icann.org> Reply-To: "communications(a)icann.org" <communications(a)icann.org> Date: Wednesday 21 May 2014 01:52 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org> Subject: ICANN News Alert -- Proposed Implementation of GNSO PDP Recommendations on Locking of a Domain Name Subject to UDRP Proceedings - Revised UDRP Rules ICANN News Alert <http://www.icann.org/> News Alert https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2014-05-20-en Proposed Implementation of GNSO PDP Recommendations on Locking of a Domain Name Subject to UDRP Proceedings - Revised UDRP Rules 19 May 2014 Forum Announcement: Comment Period Opens on Date: 19 May 2014 Categories/Tags: * Contracted Party Agreements * Policy Processes Purpose (Brief): Obtain community input on the proposed implementation of the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) Policy Development Process (PDP) recommendations on the Locking of a Domain Name subject to Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy (UDRP) Proceedings Implementation. Public Comment Box Link: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/udrp-rules-proposed-2014-05-19-en This message was sent to marika.konings(a)icann.org from: ICANN | 12025 Waterfront Drive Suite 300 | Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Email Marketing by <http://www.icontact.com/a.pl/144186> Manage Your Subscription <http://app.icontact.com/icp/mmail-mprofile.pl?r=11415898&l=6333&s=KUM2&m=93 7856&c=165637>

1 0

FYI - Update on Registry Agreement Specification 13
by Marika Konings 20 May '14

20 May '14

Update on Registry Agreement Specification 13 <https://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=300&winname=addthis&pub=ra-52fcc7eb2 43d6d89&source=tbx32-300&lng=en-US&s=linkedin&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.or g%2Fnews%2Fblog%2Fupdate-on-registry-agreement-specification-13&title=Update %20on%20Registry%20Agreement%20Specification%2013%20-%20ICANN&ate=AT-ra-52fc c7eb243d6d89/-/-/537afb27ea7f72a7/2&frommenu=1&uid=537afb272c23986c&ct=1&pre =http%3A%2F%2Ft.co%2FAxhQhtbZhW&tt=0&captcha_provider=nucaptcha> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/update-on-registry-agreement-specification- 13#> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/update-on-registry-agreement-specification- 13#> <https://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=300&winname=addthis&pub=ra-52fcc7eb2 43d6d89&source=tbx32-300&lng=en-US&s=sinaweibo&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.o rg%2Fnews%2Fblog%2Fupdate-on-registry-agreement-specification-13&title=Updat e%20on%20Registry%20Agreement%20Specification%2013%20-%20ICANN&ate=AT-ra-52f cc7eb243d6d89/-/-/537afb27ea7f72a7/3&frommenu=1&uid=537afb2780f4beba&ct=1&pr e=http%3A%2F%2Ft.co%2FAxhQhtbZhW&tt=0&captcha_provider=nucaptcha> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/update-on-registry-agreement-specification- 13#> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/update-on-registry-agreement-specification- 13#> By Cyrus Namazi Vice President, Domain Name Services ICANN Global Domains Division As reported earlier, Specification 13 to the Registry Agreement was approved by the NGPC on 26 March 2014. Specification 13 provides limited accommodations to registry operators of TLDs that qualify as ³.Brand TLDs² and reflects months of discussions on many key issues raised by the community during the public comment forum and other community outreach. One provision of this specification was the ability of a .Brand registry operator to designate up to three ICANN accredited registrars to serve as the exclusive registrars for their TLD. Implementation of this provision was delayed for 45 days in respect of the GNSO policy Recommendation 19 on the Introduction of New Generic Top-Level Domains. After considering the matter, the GNSO Council found that the proposed provision was inconsistent with Recommendation 19. However, given the unique and specific circumstances the GNSO Council accepted the variation from the original policy recommendation and did not object to the adoption of Specification 13 in its entirety. As a result, all new gTLD applicants who have applied, or will apply, for Specification 13 and are qualified by ICANN as a .Brand TLD will be entitled to all the provisions of Specification 13. Additionally, in the event that a .Brand applicant who qualifies for Specification 13 may require additional time for contracting, and satisfies the Applicant Guidebook requirements for an extension of their contracting window, ICANN will consider a request to approve an extension until 12 February 2015 (9 months from when Specification 13 was finalized in its entirety). I thank the participating members of the community for their involvements and inputs and in particular the GNSO Council for its timely and constructive response in reaching this major milestone.

1 0