August 2014 - council - lists.icann.org

[Accountability] Call for Candidates -- Please share with your communities
by Glen de Saint Géry Aug. 28, 2014

Aug. 28, 2014

https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2014-08-28-en Call for Candidates: Seeking Advisors to the ICANN Accountability & Governance Coordination Group In Short The Accountability & Governance Public Experts Group is asked to select up to seven advisors to the ICANN Accountability & Governance Coordination Group. As part of executing its mandate, the Public Experts Group is issuing a Call for Candidates to encourage nominations from the community. Nominations are to be submitted to acct-advisors(a)icann.org<mailto:acct-advisors@icann.org> by Wednesday, 10 September 2014 - 23:59 UTC. ________________________________ Background Information On 14 March 2014 the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) announced<http://www.ntia.doc.gov/press-release/2014/ntia-announces-intent-transition…>its intent to transition its stewardship of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions to the global multistakeholder community. NTIA asked the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), as the IANA functions contractor and global coordinator for the Domain Name System (DNS), to convene a multistakeholder process to develop a proposal for the transition. This process is currently under way as further described here<https://www.icann.org/stewardship>. During discussions around the transition process, the community raised the broader topic of the impact of the change in the historical contractual relationship with the United States in light of the transition ofNTIA's stewardship role. The community identified the importance of improving ICANN Accountability & Governance as a crucial aspect and, after community consultations at the ICANN 49 and ICANN50 meetings and a comment period on a draft process from 6 May - 27 June 2014, ICANN published afinal Process and Next Steps<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/process-next-steps-2014-08-14-en> on 14 August 2014. Subsequent to this announcement, on 19 August 2014, ICANN announced<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2014-08-19-en> the formation of the Public Experts Group. These four individuals - who are not part of ICANN's staff or Board - are asked to select up to seven advisors to the Coordination Group. The Public Experts are Mr. Brian Cute, Ms. Jeanette Hofmann, Amb. Janis Karklins, and Hon. Lawrence E. Strickling. Role of Advisors The role of the Advisors is defined as follows in the Process<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/process-next-steps-2014-08-14-en>: The advisors, selected by the Public Experts Group, will bring an external, independent voice to this process to assure that best practices are brought in from outside of the ICANN community. While there is a level of research and work that the advisors will do on their own, the integration of the advisors with the rest of the Coordination Group is key to considering how the research they perform can be best implemented to solve for the issues identified. The advisors can also help bring inputs in from their own networks as necessary. Utilized correctly, the advisor inputs will not only assist in developing enhanced accountability practices for ICANN, but provide a model that other multistakeholder organizations will strive to meet. The areas identified for expertise include: · Internet Technical Operations · International Organizational Reviews · Global Accountability Tools and Metrics · Jurisprudence / Accountability Mechanisms · Internet Consumer Protection (including privacy, human rights and property rights concerns) · Economics (Marketplace and Competition) · Global Ethics Frameworks · Operational, Finance and Process · Board Governance · Transparency · Risk Management · Governmental Engagement and Relations · Multistakeholder Governance Selection of Advisors As part of executing its mandate, the Public Experts Group is issuing a Call for Candidates to encourage nominations and self-nomination of suitable candidates. The Public Experts Group may reach out to their networks for additional suggestions. The Public Experts Group will conduct its activities with a "default open" and its process can be followed, through its mailing list<http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/public-experts/> and its Wiki<https://community.icann.org/x/_wPxAg>. In evaluating candidates, the Public Expert Group will respect individual candidates' privacy and will deliberate in closed session where appropriate. How to Submit a Nomination The Public Experts Group is seeking nominations for individuals to serve as Advisors to the Coordination Group. Nominations should include the following: · A brief description of the candidate's background · Identified area(s) of expertise based on the list in the Process<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/process-next-steps-2014-08-14-en>. Nominations should be emailed to acct-advisors(a)icann.org<mailto:acct-advisors@icann.org>. Upon receipt of a nomination, ICANN staff will confirm with the candidate if he/she is indeed willing to be considered. Deadline Nominations will be accepted until Wednesday, 10 September - 23:59 UTC. The Public Experts Group will select Advisors to the Coordination Group in time for the first Coordination Group meeting, which will take place from during the ICANN 51 meeting in Los Angeles from 12-16 October 2014. Timeline Advisors are anticipated to serve on the Coordination Group from October 2014 until April 2015. During this time, Advisors can estimate 5-10h of work per week, with a heightened workload during the ICANN51 (12 - 16 October 2014) and ICANN 52 (8 - 12 February 2015) meetings where travel for in person meetings is expected. NB: The timeline described above is the Public Experts Group's assessment based on the Process<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/process-next-steps-2014-08-14-en> and is subject to change after the Coordination Group determines its working methods. Compensation Advisors will not receive remuneration for their time. However, travel, meal and lodging costs to participate in Coordination Group meetings will be reimbursed upon request in accordance withICANN's community travel support guidelines<https://www.icann.org/en/news/in-focus/travel-support>. Contact Please contact acct-advisors(a)icann.org<mailto:acct-advisors@icann.org> for any questions you may have. 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

FW: Interaction between the ICANN Board's IDN Variant Working Group and the GNSO
by Jonathan Robinson Aug. 28, 2014

Aug. 28, 2014

From: Ram Mohan [mailto:ram.mohan@icann.org] Sent: 28 August 2014 13:04 To: 'Jonathan Robinson' Cc: 'Ram Mohan'; 'Board Variant Working Group' Subject: RE: Interaction between the ICANN Board's IDN Variant Working Group and the GNSO Importance: High Dear Jonathan, The Board's IDN Variant Working Group (BV-WG) members thank the GNSO Council and its community for maintaining an active interest in the IDN program. We are pleased to learn that we were able clarify the status of the IDN Program during the discussion on topics of mutual interest with the GNSO Council and community members in London. The GNSO Council is correct in its assessment that the current work on the development of the Label Generation Ruleset (LGR) for the Root Zone (P2.2) is technical in nature and policy advise is not required at this stage. If the Integration Panel or the Generation Panels communicate any such need in the future, the ICANN staff will issue the call for the advisor position as per the <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/lgr-procedure-20mar13-en.pdf> procedure for developing the LGR for the Root Zone. ICANN staff will ensure that the GNSO Council is informed in this case. BV-WG continues to oversee and guide the progress of the IDN Variant TLD program. The Program is currently being advised by the BV-WG to focus on organizing the community efforts for developing the LGR for the Root Zone, which is the necessary pre-requisite for further implementation. The BV-WG encourages active involvement of the GNSO community in this current phase of the work by volunteering for the Generation Panels for the various scripts, especially for Latin and Cyrillic. The BV-WG welcomes the GNSO community's intention to self-organize to review the original New gTLD IDN WG recommendations, with a view toward assisting Program staff with preparation for P7 following maturation of the work on LGR. Based on our prior agreement, IDN Program staff will continue to provide regular updates to GNSO Council and GNSO members. The BV-WG also looks forward to the continued discussion on the status and the future of the IDN Variant TLD program. Regards, Ram Mohan Chair, Board Variant Working Group From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 4:39 AM To: Ram Mohan Subject: Interaction between the ICANN Board's IDN Variant Working Group and the GNSO Importance: High Dear Ram, I write to follow up on the meeting in London between the ICANN Board's IDN Variant Working Group and a number of GNSO Council and community members. I'd like to thank you and the other Board members for taking the time to meet with them to discuss the progress of ICANN's IDN Variant Program. We believe the discussion was helpful to all of us, and appreciate the updates that ICANN staff has been providing to the GNSO regarding ongoing work on the Program. I'd like to follow up on a specific observation that had been shared by a few GNSO community members in Singapore and London, regarding a perceived need for policy input into the Program by individuals with experience and expertise in ICANN policy development. Our discussions in Singapore and now in London have served to clarify that the current work being done in the Program (and specifically in P2.2) is largely technical in nature. In addition, I understand that ICANN's call last summer for advisors and experts to assist the Label Generation Rule-set (LGR) panels provided that the LGR panels might call on advisors (including ICANN staff) as the need arises. I note further that an advisor has already been appointed to the Integration Panel and that ICANN has announced that any additional advisors to be appointed will be at the request of the panels, in accordance with the LGR Procedure. As the Program progresses, and particularly in the near future as the panels conclude their work, some GNSO community members have noted that should the need for policy expertise arise at any point there are individuals within the GNSO who will be willing to volunteer to assist. In this regard the GNSO Council will be happy to serve as a contact point for any such requests. Separately, I note that a suggestion was made at the London meeting for interested GNSO community members to "self-organize" to review the original New gTLD IDN WG recommendations, with a view toward assisting Program staff with preparation for P7. It is my hope as GNSO Chair that these suggestions, along with ICANN staff continuing to provide their regular update to the GNSO on the Program, will allow the GNSO community to be of assistance to the important work of the Program and, in particular, if and when any policy questions are encountered. Thank you again for your time. I look forward to continuing our discussion and to facilitating any appropriate involvement of interested members of the GNSO community in the current and future work of the IDN Variant Program. Best regards, Jonathan Robinson GNSO Council Chair

2 1

FW: SO-AC-SG HIGH INTEREST TOPIC SESSION @ ICANN 51 in Los Angeles - A Reminder
by Jonathan Robinson Aug. 28, 2014

Aug. 28, 2014

All, Please be aware that ICANN is seeking (urgent) input on selection of content for a high interest topic session in LA. Thanks, Jonathan From: David Olive [mailto:david.olive@icann.org] Sent: 26 August 2014 03:04 To: Byron Holland; heather.dryden(a)ic.gc.ca; Jonathan Robinson; Louie Lee; Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond; Patrik Fältström; Jun Murai; Lars-Johan Liman; Elisa Cooper; tony holmes; krosette(a)cov.com; rafik dammak; William Drake; Michele Neylon :: Blacknight; Drazek, Keith; Rudi Vansnick; Fadi Chehade; Cassia Oliveira; Tina Shelebian; Lynn Lipinski; Lynn Gravel; Gisella Gruber; Global Leadership; William Drake; Robert Hoggarth; Duncan Burns Subject: Re: SO-AC-SG HIGH INTEREST TOPIC SESSION @ ICANN 51 in Los Angeles - A Reminder Dear Community Leaders: Its been an unusually busy August so far and, understandably, I have not received much feedback from you all on prospective topics for your SO-AC High-Interest topic at the ICANN51 Public Meeting in Los Angeles. Certain topics, such as ICANN Accountability, the IANA Stewardship Transition, and new gTLD Directory Services (WHOIS), appear to be covered by other session programming on Monday or elsewhere during the week, so, additional topics are now needed for the potential session discussion. The staff meeting and programming team is giving me some more time to collaborate with you on this session, and we should start identifying some specific topics so that you have time to lead some conversations within your communities over the next month in preparation for the LA session discussion. Ive been able to extend the topic-brainstorming deadline to COB this Thursday. Please share any thoughts or ideas with me at your earliest convenience. Best, 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: Thursday, August 14, 2014 7:49 PM To: Byron Holland <byron.holland(a)cira.ca>, Heather Dryden <Heather.Dryden(a)ic.gc.ca>, Jonathan Robinson <jonathan.robinson(a)ipracon.com>, Louie Lee <louie(a)louie.net>, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl(a)gih.com>, Patrik Fältström <paf(a)netnod.se>, Jun Murai <junsec(a)wide.ad.jp>, Lars-Johan Liman <liman(a)netnod.se>, Elisa Cooper <Elisa.Cooper(a)markmonitor.com>, tony holmes <tonyarholmes(a)btinternet.com>, "krosette(a)cov.com" <krosette(a)cov.com>, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak(a)gmail.com>, William Drake <william.drake(a)uzh.ch>, "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" <michele(a)blacknight.com>, "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek(a)verisign.com>, Rudi Vansnick <rudi.vansnick(a)isoc.be>, Fadi Chehade <fadi.chehade(a)icann.org>, Cassia Oliveira <cassia.oliveira(a)icann.org>, Tina Shelebian <tina.shelebian(a)icann.org>, Lynn Lipinski <lynn.lipinski(a)icann.org>, Lynn Gravel <lynn.gravel(a)cira.ca>, Gisella Gruber <Gisella.Gruber(a)icann.org>, Global Leadership <global_leadership(a)icann.org>, William Drake <wjdrake(a)gmail.com>, Rob Hoggarth <robert.hoggarth(a)icann.org>, Duncan Burns <duncan.burns(a)icann.org> Subject: SO-AC-SG HIGH INTEREST TOPIC SESSION @ ICANN 51 in Los Angeles Dear SO/AC/SG Leaders: Thank you all for confirming your interest in proceeding with the planning for an SO-AC High Interest Session in Los Angeles. Working with our staff Meeting Team colleagues, it appears that Monday in LA will again offer the best window for the session. I have informed the ICANN 51 Steering Committee of the need for the session and we have discussed the following scenario. Monday programming will offer opportunities for community discussion on a range of topics of high interest to the community. We can count on their being at least one session addressing the IANA Stewardship Transition and another session addressing the ICANN Accountability matter. Heather has also noted the likelihood of a GAC request for a session on Registration Data (WHOIS) issues. As a result of this overall concept, we suggest planning to conduct a session that highlights one or two topics of high community interest that are different from these three main topic areas. It would be helpful to have you share topic suggestion on this list over the next week or so. Staff will compile the list of all suggestion received by 25 August and then Ill circulate the list of possibilities to all of you for winnowing down. My hope is that, via email, we can quickly reach consensus on a couple of topics so that all of you will have the opportunity to glean your community views to share during the session. Logistically, we will plan to run the session largely like the previous hot-topic session in Buenos Aires recall the Brad White-led format. I am happy to get feedback from you on any improvements we can introduce to that format previous format. Looking forward to hearing your suggestion of topics. 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

9 10

FW: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#154]
by Glen de Saint Géry Aug. 28, 2014

Aug. 28, 2014

FYI 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: ICANN [mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com] Sent: jeudi 28 août 2014 11:05 To: gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org; council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#154] Name of Officer: * rafik dammak Officer Email Address: * rafik.dammak(a)gmail.com<mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com> Date Prepared: * Thursday, August 28, 2014 GNSO Organization: * Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group Officer Position or Title: * NCSG chair Voting Remedy: * Proxy Reason(s) for or condition(s) leading to the remedy: * Magaly Pazello won't be able to attend to the GNSO council call since she cannot be available at the time of the council call due to urgent commitments. Specific subject(s)/measure(s)/motion(s)/action(s) of the Council for which the remedy is being exercised: * Amr elsadr will submit Magaly's vote by proxy for the motions to be approved, and any other matters needing a vote. 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] * Saturday, September 6, 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: * amr elsadr

1 0

Update on GNSO Policy and Implementation Working Group
by Amr Elsadr Aug. 27, 2014

Aug. 27, 2014

Hi, The Policy and Implementation Working Group has sent out emails to the different Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies asking for feedback on some proposed new GNSO processes, which are part of this WG’s attempt to answer one of its charter questions on alternatives to a formal PDP. I’ve pasted the body of that email below as well as attached the document that was sent out with that email illustrating those processes in flowcharts. I’m sending this email only as an update, as I believe that some of the solutions that will come out of this WG’s recommendations will hopefully help the Council in the future with some of the difficult situations it has faced in the recent past. As the Council liaison to this WG, I would be happy to carry feedback back to the WG members, however, it would be very much appreciated if you all encourage your respective SGs/Cs to provide responses to the WG by the requested deadline on September 12th. Please do note that this is still work in progress and far from being finished, but input from SGs/Cs of the GNSO at this stage would be extremely valuable to the WG moving forward. Thanks. Amr ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ DRAFT EMAIL SOLICITING SG/C FEEDBACK ON GNSO PROCESSES FLOWCHARTS Dear _________, One of the questions that the Policy & Implementation Working Group (PIWG) was tasked to consider is: “Under what circumstances, if any, may the GNSO Council make recommendations or state positions to the Board on matters of policy and implementation as a representative of the GNSO as a whole?” In consideration of this question, the PIWG is currently developing possible recommendations for new processes in addition to the existing Policy Development Process (PDP) by which the GNSO Council can provide input on behalf of the GNSO community on policy and related questions brought to its attention by the ICANN Board, other ICANN Supporting Organizations and/or Advisory Committees (SO/ACs) and by GNSO participants. As these proposed mechanisms are likely to be of great interest to the GNSO community, the PIWG would very much like to seek your group’s feedback on the attached flow charts outlining these potential processes. We have not yet developed detailed descriptions of these processes so we are not looking for feedback at that level (although that would be accepted) but rather, we would like to know whether or not you think we are headed in a constructive direction in considering new processes like these. Attached are flow charts that show the two additional processes: a proposed GNSO Guidance Process (GGP) and a proposed GNSO Input Process (GIP). They are intended to supplement the existing mechanisms by which the GNSO Council performs its work and manages that of the GNSO community. The processes are intended to add to the flexibility and responsiveness of the GNSO and the Council. They represent our attempt to balance the need for such nimbleness with the need for codified processes that will allow the GNSO and the Council to deal with requests other than on an ad-hoc basis. The possibility of a “fast track” PDP is also included in some of the flow charts to try to address situations where policies already adopted by the ICANN Board may need clarification or updating. The flow charts are organized as follows: 1. An overview of the GNSO Process Options including the new processes 2. An outline of the GNSO Guidance Process (GGP) without a Fast Track PDP option and with voting thresholds as follows: i) to initiate a GGP, the same as required to initiate a PDP; ii) to approve GGP recommendations, supermajority as currently defined for the GNSO Council 3. An outline of the GNSO Guidance Process (GGP) with a Fast Track PDP option and with voting thresholds as follows: i) to initiate a GGP, supermajority as currently defined for the GNSO Council; ii) to approve GGP recommendations, supermajority as currently defined for the GNSO Council 4. An outline of the GNSO Input Process (GIP). Note that flowcharts 2, 3 & 4 contain boxes that are colored in orange. These indicate that those are specific areas that the WG will further review and discuss once a more detailed description of these processes is available. If you already have any specific input you would like to provide on these areas (or any other), you are more than welcome to do so, but please note that there will of course be further opportunities to provide input as further details are developed by the WG. The PIWG will be grateful if your group could provide its feedback to us by Friday 12 September 2014. At a minimum we would like to know whether you think the PIWG is heading in the right direction with regard to its consideration of recommending two new processes similar to the GGP and GIP shown in the flowcharts. In addition, feedback would also be welcome at your option regarding the orange colored boxes in the flow charts. We will be happy to address any questions that your members may have in the meantime. Your questions and your feedback may be provided via your WG representative(s) or via email in response to this message. Best regards, Attachments

1 0

GNSO Project List - please review
by Glen de Saint Géry Aug. 27, 2014

Aug. 27, 2014

Dear Councillors, Attached please find the clean and red-lined version of the Project list for your review and comment in preparation for the Council meeting on 4 September 2014. If you would like any changes made please let us know otherwise the clean version will be posted on the website at <http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/projects-list.pdf> http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/projects-list.pdf. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat <mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org <http://gnso.icann.org/> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Expert Working Group questions on behalf of the BC
by john＠crediblecontext.com Aug. 26, 2014

Aug. 26, 2014

Jonathan, et. al., I know we were asked in London by Chris Disspain to raise questions about the report of the Expert Working Group before the Board makes an official PDP request of the GNSO Council. At the time, it was clear that a financial analysis of implementing the recommendations had not been done/completed. Neither do we have as detailed a sense of the legal implications of those recommendations. These are two questions that ought to be answered. Since London, there has been discussion among the members of the BC about the report. Out of that have come these additional questions: As large and well-populated as the group was, now that the broadest community has seen the report, are there use cases that the EWG did not consider? Is the data map complete? While ICANN has assiduously maintained its neutrality when it comes to online content, as the Internet and is uses has evolved, should there not be a domain name record field to distinguish domains used for commercial purposes? Do we have adequate mechanisms for handling compliance issues than may arise among the multiple players (e.g., validators, credentials providers, RDS vendor)? Right now the data will be accessed from multiple repositories; should it be centralized? How can the implementation of the recommendations be best segmented and scheduled? Will the progress ICANN is making in accommodating local laws, particularly with regard to data protection and privacy, serve as a model for handling such conflict that might arise from the EWG recommendations? Cheers, Berard

1 0

Fwd: Motion - A Charter for a CWG to Develop an IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal
by Avri Doria Aug. 26, 2014

Aug. 26, 2014

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi, Please make the following motion on accepting the Charter for a Cross Community Working Group to Develop an IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions (CWG) charter in my name. The charter was developed by the cross community drafting team, one of the better cross community teams I have had the privileged to work on. In addition to the charter, the motion names Jonathan as the Council liaison to the CWG and also names him as the GNSO representative to the CWG. Of the five membership seats each SOAC gets based on the charter, the motion assigns one to each SGs. The CWG Charter allows for an unlimited number of observers. thanks avri -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJT+yUCAAoJEOo+L8tCe36H458H/3MYhkSphTLTXwoRh/7yDkMd GqKQ6/EabxECHXc/ALIBViDN/x0l9YkBmT43IPxsLfuELl7FEIaPP8rJt9/eMmza 9jNM4osJ6I+IqHMK5DsGG45oxviRLxcHhm8eTvDlWVjgzP1iVl76/60hJVBauPAj hoSlf+vMs0/xDiZdK5JYKWZyGuHL6TJ86hcvdrZ/UdurITioB8kwBQrh7Fpt9H3q 85WQD0lxfRa5JeXcbwB4aorVZ/+dk7Q86uhDkmTNaol3kNYt8NvtVad8kxOVIJbG vEuWMxqie1jVAmo/HZPkFh9OppL6KSiKRuscjaVCrvwcd5BCxPTSSd7eZGNNlJY= =W2tx -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 2

IDN Variants - call for volunteers to the Generation Panels
by Mary Wong Aug. 26, 2014

Aug. 26, 2014

Dear all, Further to previous emails and updates about ICANN¹s work on the IDN Variant Program, ICANN staff would once again like to request your help. As you know, there is a pressing and urgent need to develop Label Generation Rulesets (LGRs) for each of the 22 scripts identified from among the IDN-based New gTLD applications since IDN variants cannot be implemented in the root until this is finalized. The attached is a summary, in plain English, of the task that also describes the work of the LGR Panels. We will be very grateful if you can assist by volunteering and by distributing the attached request broadly amongst your community. Please let me or the IDN Variant Program staff (cc¹d on this email) know if you or they have any questions about the Panels or the Program. As usual, an update on the Program will also be provided to the GNSO by Program staff at the Los Angeles meeting. 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 From: Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org> Date: Tuesday, July 29, 2014 at 4:54 PM To: GNSO Council List <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: IDN Variant Project Update: first version of Maximal Starting Repertoire released > Dear Councilors, > > On behalf of my colleagues who are supporting ICANN¹s IDN Variant Project, I¹m > pleased to share with you recent news of the release of the first version of > the Maximal Starting Repertoire (MSR-1), a critical step in the implementation > phase of IDN variant TLDs: > https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2014-06-20-en > > As you know, in order to support IDN labels in the root zone, ICANN developed > a Procedure for the creation of Label Generation Rulesets (LGR) for a number > of specific scripts, to create and manage rules applicable to IDN labels in > the root. The LGR for a particular script is to be created by an LGR Panel for > that script; the Arabic panel has already been seated and a number of other > script communities are working to create other panels. MSR-1 is the first > Deliverable under the LGR Procedure, and constitutes the defined set of code > points from which individual LGR Panels will construct their rules for each > script. > > The next update to the GNSO Council and community on IDN variant > implementation is being scheduled for the ICANN meeting in Los Angeles. In the > meantime, we will continue to provide you with further updates as they become > available, so as to enable you and your groups to prepare for the LA meeting > and further discussions with the IDN Variant Project staff. > > 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 > > > > > > >

1 0

Re: [council] Proposed GNSO Council Agenda for 4 September 2014 at 15:00 UTC
by Mary Wong Aug. 26, 2014

Aug. 26, 2014

Dear all, Just a follow up note on Item 4 (the IGO-INGO motion) - please send questions intended for Chris Disspain and the NGPC to this list for review and confirmation. As Thomas had noted in his previous email, the intention is for both the NGPC and the Council to each understand the scope of the options being proposed. As such, while Chris will be on the call to hear from you, one important objective is also for the Council to hear from Chris so any questions we can send to him prior to the call are likely to be very mutually helpful. 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 From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen(a)icann.org> Date: Tuesday, August 26, 2014 at 11:31 AM To: Council GNSO <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] Proposed GNSO Council Agenda for 4 September 2014 at 15:00 UTC > Dear Councillors, > > Please find the Proposed GNSO Council Agenda for 4 September 2014 at 15:00 > UTC. > This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures > approved 13 September 2012 for the GNSO Council and updated. > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-13jun13-en.pdf > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-13jun13-en.pdf> > > For convenience: > * An excerpt of the ICANN Bylaws defining the voting thresholds is provided in > Appendix 1 at the end of this agenda. > * An excerpt from the Council Operating Procedures defining the absentee > voting procedures is provided in Appendix 2 at the end of this agenda. > Meeting Times 15:00 UTC: > http://tinyurl.com/k5lubtm > Coordinated Universal Time 15:00 UTC > 08:00 Los Angeles; 11:00 Washington; 16:00 London; 17:00 Brussels; 23:00 Perth > Dial-in numbers will be sent individually to Council members. Councillors > should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if a dial out call is needed. > GNSO Council meeting audiocast > http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u <http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u> > Item 1: Administrative matters (5 mins) > 1.1 Roll Call > 1.2 Statement of interest updates > 1.3 Review/amend agenda > 1.4. Note the status of minutes for the previous Council meeting per the GNSO > Operating Procedures: > Minutes of the GNSO Council meeting 25 June 2014 > <http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg16567.html> ,and 24 > July 2014 <http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg16568.html> > will be posted as approved on 3 September 2014 > Item 2: Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action List (10 mins) > Review focus areas and provide updates on specific key themes / topics > Include review of Projects List > <http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/projects-list.pdf> and Action List > <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Items> . > Comments or questions arising. > > > Item 3: Consent agenda (5 mins) > 3.1 - Uniformity of Reporting and the ICANN Contractual Compliance three-year > plan. > A MOTION > <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+04+Septembe… > 2014> to : > 1. Thank ICANN Contractual Compliance for its presentation of their > three-year plan and continued collaboration with the GNSO in future policy > development efforts > > AND > > > 2. Consider the issues identified in the Uniformity of Reporting Final > Issue Report to have been addressed and to consider the issue closed. > 3.2 - The Council confirms the Co-Chairs for the Working Group on Curative > Rights Protections for IGO/INGOs (IGO-INGO-CRP), namely Philip Corwin and > Petter Rindforth. > > Item 4: MOTION A proposed modification of the GNSO's consensus > recommendations relating to IGO acronyms and Red Cross identifiers (20 mins) > On 10 November 2013 the PDP Working Group (IGO-INGO PDP WG) delivered its > Final Report <http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/igo-ingo-final-10nov13-en.pdf> > to the GNSO Council that included twenty-five consensus recommendations of the > WG. On 20 November 2013 the GNSO Council unanimously adopted > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#20131120-2> all twenty-five > consensus recommendations of the IGO-INGO PDP WG and forwarded them to the > ICANN Board in January 2014 with a recommendation for their adoption. > On 30 April 2014 the Board resolved > <https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2014-04-30-en> to > adopt those of the GNSO's recommendations that are not inconsistent with GAC > advice, and to facilitate dialogue between the affected parties in order to > reconcile the remaining differences, as further detailed in Annex A > <https://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-annex-a-30apr14… > n.pdf> and Annex B > <https://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-annex-b-30apr14… > n.pdf> of the Board's resolution. The GNSO's recommendations and GAC advice > are largely consistent except in relation to the duration and mechanism of > protection for IGO acronyms and the full names and acronyms of 189 Red Cross > national societies and the international Red Cross and Red Crescent movement, > for which the GNSO had recommended > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#20131120-2> a 90-day period of > protection by way of a claim notification service utilising the Trademark > Clearinghouse (TMCH). > On 16 June 2014 the NGPC sent > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/chalaby-to-robinson-16jun14-en.pdf> > a letter to the GNSO Council requesting that the GNSO consider modifying its > recommendations relating to the duration and mechanism of protection for IGO > acronyms and national society names of the Red Cross. This modification to be > in accordance with and as envisaged by Section 16 of the GNSO's PDP Manual > <http://gnso.icann.org/council/annex-2-pdp-manual-13jun13-en.pdf> . > On 24 July 2014, the Chair of the NGPC followed up with a note to the Chair of > the GNSO Council and offered to provide a written or oral briefing to provide > greater clarity on the GAC¹s advice and expectations with respect to > protections of IGO-INGO Identifiers. Such briefing will now be provided as > part of this meeting. > 4.1 Receive the briefing (Chris Disspain) > 4.2 Present the motion > <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+04+Septembe… > 2014> (Thomas Rickert / Mary Wong) > 4.3 Discussion > 4.4 Vote (Threshold: simple majority) > Item 5: MOTION To appoint a GNSO liaison to the GAC (10 mins) > The call for applications > <http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg16435.html> for the > GNSO Liaison to GAC was circulated and a deadline for applications was set for > the 31 July 2014. > > The three evaluators (GNSO Council Chair and Vice Chairs) carefully and > thoroughly evaluated each application against the specified criteria. > Following this process, the application submitted by Mason Cole was selected > to be put forward to the GNSO Council for the position of GNSO Liaison to the > GAC. > Here the council will consider motion 5 > <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+04+Septembe… > 2014> to appoint Mason Cole as the GNSO Liaison to the GAC with immediate > effect such that he can be well informed and up to speed in order to > participate effectively as soon as possible and, in particular, at ICANN 51. > Unless terminated earlier according to the processes agreed or extended by a > new motion of the Council, the term of the Liaison will run for the course of > the current financial year, FY 2015 (ending 30 June 2015). > 5.1 Motion > <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+04+Septembe… > 2014> (David Cake) > 5.2 Discussion > 5.3 Vote (simple majority) > Item 6: MOTION Adoption of the charter > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/iana-stewardship-naming-function-charter-14… > g14-en.pdf> for a cross community working group to develop a transition > proposal for IANA stewardship on naming related functions (15 mins) > Following the distribution of an invitation to participate > <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/process-next-steps-2014-06-06-en> , a > drafting team (DT) was formed with participants from the ccNSO, GNSO, SSAC and > ALAC to develop a charter for a Cross Community Working Group to Develop an > IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions. > A drafting team was formed and has worked efficiently to produce a charter. > The charter > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/iana-stewardship-naming-function-charter-14… > g14-en.pdf> is now being sent out to the supporting organisations for > support. > Here the Council will take the opportunity to review, discuss and vote on the > adoption of the Charter. > 6.1 Motion > <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+04+Septembe… > 2014> (Avri Doria) > 6.2 Discussion > 6.3 Vote (simple majority) > 6.4 Next steps > > > Item 7: DISCUSSION The report of the ICANN Board Working Group on the > Nominating Committee(10 mins) > The Board Working Group on Nominating Committee (BWG-NomCom) is charged with > performing the review called for in Recommendation 10 of the Nominating > Committee Review Finalization Working Group, addressing issues of the size and > composition of the Nominating Committee, as well as the related issues of > NomCom¹s recruitment and selection functions. > > The Board Working Group on Nominating Committee has recently published its > report <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/bwg-nomcom-2014-08-21-en> . > Here the Council will take the opportunity to discuss the report and consider > what if any action to take. > 7.1 Discussion > 7.2 Next steps > Item 8: DISCUSSION The draft charter from for a cross community working > group on internet governance (10 mins) > A drafting team was formed and has worked to produce a charter. The charter > <http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg16549.html> has been > previously sent out to organisations for discussion and comment, including the > GNSO Council. > Here the Council will take the opportunity to discuss the charter and consider > the appropriate next steps. > 8.1 Discussion > 8.2 Next steps > Item 9: UPDATE On the work of the GNSO Review Working Party (10 mins) > As part of a periodic review process that is built into the ICANN model, work > on the ICANN Board initiated reviews of the GNSO (and the GNSO Council and > related functions) has commenced. The objective of the Review is to examine > the organizational effectiveness of the GNSO, including its components (GNSO > Council, GNSO Working Groups, GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies). The > review is to be tightly scoped based on objective and quantifiable criteria > provided to an independent examiner. > The GNSO Review Working Party has been assembled to: > * Act as a liaison between the GNSO, the independent examiner and the SIC, > * Provide input on review criteria and the 360 Assessment, > * Coordinate interviews and objectively supply clarification and responses to > the draft findings and recommendations. > The SIC envisages that once a final report is issued and the Board takes > action on it, as appropriate, the GNSO Review Working Party will also > coordinate with the GNSO community to prepare an Implementation Plan and > champion implementation of improvement activities. > 9.1 Update (Jennifer Wolfe) > 9.2 Discussion > 9.3 Next steps > Item 10: Procedure to elect the GNSO Council Chair (10 mins) > > We have previously used an election procedure. Here we will review a current > version > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/gnso-council-chair-election-26aug14-en.pdf> > of the same procedure with a view to approving it for use in the run up to and > during the course of the 2014 ICANN Annual Meeting in Los Angeles. > > 10.1 Presentation of procedure > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/gnso-council-chair-election-26aug14-en.pdf> > (Jonathan Robinson) > 10.2 Discussion > 10.3 Call to approve the procedure > > Item 11: UPDATE & DISCUSSION Planning for LA (10 mins) > Making the most out of the face-to-face meeting time available at the ICANN > Meeting in LA will take planning and preparation work. The Council has output > from the survey <https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/QMQJY7Z> of the ICANN 50 > meeting in London. > Here the Council has the opportunity to feed into plans and provide input > based on past experience. Included in this item will be the opportunity to > shape the approach to and substance of the Council's proposed meetings with > other groups such as the ccNSO, the GAC and the ICANN board. > Please Note: The LA Meeting is an ICANN annual meeting and so will include the > GNSO Council development session on the second Friday i.e. Friday 17 October > 2014. This is a day and evening session focused on the successful and > productive functioning of the Council for the period Annual Meeting 2014 to > Annual Meeting 2015. > 11.1 Update (David Cake & Jonathan Robinson) > 11.2 Discussion > 11.3 Next steps > Item 12: Any Other Business (5 mins) > > Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article X, Section > 3) > 9. Except as otherwise specified in these Bylaws, Annex A hereto, or the GNSO > Operating Procedures, the default threshold to pass a GNSO Council motion or > other voting action requires a simple majority vote of each House. The voting > thresholds described below shall apply to the following GNSO actions: > a. Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more than > one-fourth (1/4) vote of each House or majority of one House. > b. Initiate a Policy Development Process ("PDP") Within Scope (as described in > Annex A <http://www.icann.org/en/about/governance/bylaws#AnnexA> ): requires > an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than > two-thirds (2/3) of one House. > c. Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of GNSO > Supermajority. > d. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Within Scope: requires an affirmative > vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) > of one House. > e. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an > affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority. > f. Changes to an Approved PDP Team Charter: For any PDP Team Charter approved > under d. or e. above, the GNSO Council may approve an amendment to the Charter > through a simple majority vote of each House. > g. Terminate a PDP: Once initiated, and prior to the publication of a Final > Report, the GNSO Council may terminate a PDP only for significant cause, upon > a motion that passes with a GNSO Supermajority Vote in favor of termination. > h. Approve a PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority: requires an > affirmative vote of a majority of each House and further requires that one > GNSO Council member representative of at least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups > supports the Recommendation. > i. Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an > affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority, > j. Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain > Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that "a > two-thirds vote of the council" demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the > GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded. > k. Modification of Approved PDP Recommendation: Prior to Final Approval by the > ICANN Board, an Approved PDP Recommendation may be modified or amended by the > GNSO Council with a GNSO Supermajority vote. > l. A "GNSO Supermajority" shall mean: (a) two-thirds (2/3) of the Council > members of each House, or (b) three-fourths (3/4) of one House and a majority > of the other House." > Appendix 2: Absentee Voting Procedures (GNSO Operating Procedures 4.4 > <http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-operating-procedures-22sep11-en.pdf> ) > 4.4.1 Applicability > Absentee voting is permitted for the following limited number of Council > motions or measures. > a. Initiate a Policy Development Process (PDP); > b. Approve a PDP recommendation; > c. Recommend amendments to the GNSO Operating Procedures (GOP) or ICANN > Bylaws; > d. Fill a Council position open for election. > 4.4.2 Absentee ballots, when permitted, must be submitted within the announced > time limit, which shall be 72 hours from the meeting's adjournment. In > exceptional circumstances, announced at the time of the vote, the Chair may > reduce this time to 24 hours or extend the time to 7 calendar days, provided > such amendment is verbally confirmed by all Vice-Chairs present. > 4.4.3 The GNSO Secretariat will administer, record, and tabulate absentee > votes according to these procedures and will provide reasonable means for > transmitting and authenticating absentee ballots, which could include voting > by telephone, e- mail, web-based interface, or other technologies as may > become available. > 4.4.4 Absentee balloting does not affect quorum requirements. (There must be a > quorum for the meeting in which the vote is initiated.) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Local time between March and October, Summer in the NORTHERN hemisphere > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 15:00 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > California, USA (PDT > <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/na/pst.html> ) > UTC-7+1DST 08:00 > Iowa City, USA (CDT <http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/UTC%E2%88%9206:00> ) > UTC-5+1DST 10:00 > New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-4+1DST 11:00 > Rio de Janiero, Brazil (BRST) UTC-2+1DST 12:00 > Montevideo, Uruguay (UYST > <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/uyst.html> ) > UTC-2+1DST 12:00 > Buenos Aires, Argentina (ART > <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/art.html> ) > UTC-3+0DST 12:00 > London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 16:00 > Bonn, Germany (CET) UTC+1+0DST 17:00 > Stockholm, Sweden (CET) UTC+1+0DST 17:00 > Cairo, Egypt, (EET) UTC+2+0DST 18:00 > Istanbul, Turkey (EEST) UTC+2+0DST 18:00 > Ramat Hasharon, Israel(IDT > <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/ist-israel.… > ml> ) UTC+3+0DST 18:00 > Beijing/Hong Kong, China (HKT ) UTC+8+0DST 23:00 > Perth, Australia (WST > <http://timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/au/wst.html> ) > UTC+8+0DST 23:00 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > DST starts/ends on last Sunday of October 2014, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with > exceptions) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com <http://www.timeanddate.com> > http://tinyurl.com/k5lubtm > > 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 <mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> > http://gnso.icann.org <http://gnso.icann.org/> >

1 0