September 2014 - council - lists.icann.org

FW: Formation of a GNSO-Board Working Group re the EWG Final Report
by Jonathan Robinson Oct. 9, 2014

Oct. 9, 2014

All, Please see below for a reminder of the proposal / request from Steve Crocker. Following our discussion in yesterday's council meeting, the suggested response is that we offer 4 volunteers (one per SG) in response to this request and who will be in a position to meet in LA. Assuming we go down this route, I believe we agreed that these volunteers should primarily certainly be knowledgeable about and experienced in the GNSO PDP. Ideally some or all should additionally be knowledgeable about the work and background to the EWG. Please can you review the letter below and the proposed response / approach above and provide any additional comment or input you see fit. Bear in mind that a timely and constructive response to Steve's letter is obviously highly desirable. Therefore if you are not in agreement with the above, an alternative such response will be appreciated. Thanks, Jonathan -----Original Message----- From: Steve Crocker [mailto:steve@shinkuro.com] Sent: 21 September 2014 03:10 To: Jonathan Robinson Cc: Stephen D. Crocker; Denise Michel; Icann-board ICANN Subject: Formation of a GNSO-Board Working Group re the EWG Final Report Jonathan, I'm a bit late getting this out to you, for which I apologize. During the Board's retreat last week in Istanbul, we had a session devoted to next steps related to the Expert Working Group. We've reached that exquisite moment in this process where we have the EWG's report in hand but we're not yet ready to formally ask the GNSO to initiate a policy development process. Instead, this is the time for us all to put our heads together to identify the issues that have to be sorted out before we take that step. We suggest we form a joint GNSO-Board working group with a handful of members from both groups to identify the main issues - technical, organizational, etc., etc. - that have to be addressed before attempting to initiate another policy development process. I don't have any preconception as to how many people or how you might choose them. I'll leave that entirely up to your judgment. Fewer is always better in terms of logistics, but we all know full well there will be many who will want to participate. I hope you and your folks were able to participate in the webinars this past week. If not, it might be worthwhile listening to them. The Expert Working Report is a solid piece of work, and it was intended to provide a much stronger basis for moving forward with a PDP than we've ever had before. That said, I think it would be wise for all of us to understand what failed in earlier PDPs and thus to make sure that we really do have a stronger chance this time. My mantra for this effort is that we're going to take the time to get this right. The problem has been lingering for a very long time. We have given this matter high priority and will continue to do so, so it has the resources and the urgency that comes with high priority issues, but we do not have a specific deadline or timetable. Perhaps that's something that can come from the working group. Please let me know your thinking and we'll move forward. With the LA meeting coming up, if we're organized by then, perhaps we can schedule time for the working group to meet. Thanks! Steve

4 7

Flow chart - gTLD Registration Services PDP
by Marika Konings Oct. 2, 2014

Oct. 2, 2014

Dear All, Following our discussion last week, please find attached a flow chart in which we've tried to describe in further detail where from a staff perspective the gTLD Registration Services PDP stands and how it relates to the EWG Final Report as well as the informal group proposed by Steve Crocker to discuss next steps. As we also tried to make clear on the call and which the flow chart will hopefully show, is that the PDP has been following the required steps as outlined in the ICANN Bylaws as well as Annex A and that the EWG is in no way circumventing this process but merely providing additional insights and information that will hopefully help inform subsequent deliberations, something that from our perspective is fully in line with the objective of fact-based policy development. We hope this may be helpful as the Council considers next steps and engages with the Board in the proposed informal discussion. Best regards, Marika

3 14

Draft GNSO Council Minutes 4 September 2014
by Glen de Saint Géry Sept. 30, 2014

Sept. 30, 2014

Dear Councillors, Attached, please find the draft minutes of the GNSO Council meeting on 4 September 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 4 October 2014. Thank you very much. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org<http://gnso.icann.org/>

1 0

Draft GNSO Weekend Schedule
by Marika Konings Sept. 29, 2014

Sept. 29, 2014

Dear All, Please find attached the draft GNSO weekend schedule. Note that as we are still in the process of confirming some of the external speakers, some changes may still occur. For your convenience, we have also included some of the other GNSO WG/community organised sessions (in yellow) as well as some of the other main sessions throughout the week that may be of interest. For full details on these other sessions, please see http://la51.icann.org/en/schedule-full. Best regards, Marika

1 0

GNSO Council - ICANN 51 Working Weekend Session Schedule
by Winterfeldt, Brian J. Sept. 29, 2014

Sept. 29, 2014

Dear Jonathan and David: I know in the past draft versions of the weekend working schedule have been shared on list or linked on confluence. I apologize if I am mistaken, but I have not yet seen any initial drafts circulated. Would you please be so kind as to send around a draft file or share the hyperlink? Best regards, Brian Brian J. Winterfeldt Head of Internet Practice Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP 2900 K Street NW, North Tower - Suite 200 / Washington, DC 20007-5118 p / (202) 625-3562 f / (202) 339-8244 575 Madison Avenue / New York, NY 10022-2585 p / (212) 940.6762 f / (212) 894.5585 brian.winterfeldt(a)kattenlaw.com<mailto:brian.winterfeldt@kattenlaw.com> / www.kattenlaw.com<http://www.kattenlaw.com/> =========================================================== CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any attached files contain information intended for the exclusive use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is proprietary, privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any viewing, copying, disclosure or distribution of this information may be subject to legal restriction or sanction. Please notify the sender, by electronic mail or telephone, of any unintended recipients and delete the original message without making any copies. =========================================================== NOTIFICATION: Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP is an Illinois limited liability partnership that has elected to be governed by the Illinois Uniform Partnership Act (1997). ===========================================================

1 0

IRTP Part D PDP Final Report
by Lars Hoffmann Sept. 29, 2014

Sept. 29, 2014

Dear all, Following James¹ presentation during last week¹s Council call, please find attached the Final Report of the IRTP Part D PDP Working Group <http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/transfers/irtp-d-final-25sep14-en.pdf> - containing 18 recommendations. Please note that a motion to approve the Report during the next GNSO Council meeting, to take place during ICANN 51, is also forthcoming. As always, please share and discuss the report with your respective Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies to allow for an informed debate in Los Angeles, both on the recommendations and the motion to adopt the Final Report. Many thanks and safe travels to Los Angeles! Best wishes, Lars

1 0

Cybersecurity Awareness Messaging - Session Invitation (ICANN 51)
by Glen de Saint Géry Sept. 29, 2014

Sept. 29, 2014

The Anti-Phishing Working Group will hold a session during ICANN 51 in Los Angeles regarding the STOP. THINK. CONNECT. cybersecurity awareness campaign. The SSR Team would like to invite all members of the community, including gTLD and ccTLD registries, registrars, the private sector, government representatives, academic researchers, NGOs and all others to attend and consider joining the initiative as well. Session title: (APWG) Hemispheric Unification of Cyber Security Awareness Messaging http://la51.icann.org/en/schedule/wed-apwg-cyber-security Date: Wed, 15 October 2014 - 16:30 to 17:45 PDT Room: Pacific Palisades "The STOP. THINK. CONNECT. Messaging Convention has embarked upon a campaign to establish the STOP. THINK. CONNECT. cybersecurity awareness messaging suite as a hemisphere-wide campaign, leveraging initial adoption by nation-states in North America, Central America and South America. "The Messaging Convention was established in 2010 to unify online safety awareness with a common slogan - STOP.THINK.CONNECT. - and a universally recognized logo. The campaign has been adopted by national government agencies and group in the USA, Canada, Malaysia, Japan, Uruguay, Panama and Paraguay and the Convention joined with the Organization of American States in 2012 to promote the campaign among its member states, of which there are 35 independent nations. Working from these early adoptions in the Western Hemisphere and the membership networks of the APWG and co-founder, NCSA, the Convention proposes the consolidation of national cybersecurity awareness messaging campaigns into a hemispheric effort that would provide transborder resonance and unparalleled efficiency in delivering the campaign's essential messages." Carlos Alvarez Sr. Manager, SSR Technical Engagement Security Stability Resiliency Team ICANN

1 0

Call for Observers to Join Cross Community Working Group to Develop an IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions
by Glen de Saint Géry Sept. 29, 2014

Sept. 29, 2014

https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2014-09-26-en Call for Observers to Join Cross Community Working Group to Develop an IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions In Brief The organizations that have adopted the charter for the Cross Community Working Group (CWG) to develop an Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Stewardship Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions call for observers to join this effort. The primary goal of the CWG is to produce a consolidated transition proposal for the elements of the IANA Functions relating to the Domain Name System. Participating as observer Participation in the CWG is open to members and observers. In addition to members, who are appointed by the chartering organizations, anyone interested in the work of the CWG, can join as an observer. Observers are expected to actively participate and attend all meetings. The only difference between a member and an observer is that any consensus calls or formal decisions that may need to be made will be limited to CWG members appointed by the chartering organizations. However, this does not take away that it is the expectation that the CWG will operate as much as possible with the views and consensus support of all participants in mind as the importance of considering all input and views on this important topic is recognized. Observers may be from a chartering organization, from a stakeholder group or organization not represented in the CWG or currently active within ICANN, or self-appointed. How to join If you are interested in joining, please contact Grace Abuhamad (grace.abuhamad(a)icann.org<mailto:grace.abuhamad@icann.org>), or the secretariats of your Supporting Organization or Advisory Committee. All participants (members and observers) will be listed on the CWG's webpage. All observers are also required to submit a Statement of Interest (SOI) following the procedures of their chartering organization, or where that is not applicable for observers, the GNSO Procedures should be followed (see https://community.icann.org/x/cYLg) Next steps The CWG is currently in formation. To date, the At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC), the Country Code Supporting Organization (ccNSO), the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) and the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) have adopted the charter, and are in the process of appointing members. The CWG will have its first meeting<https://community.icann.org/x/6grxAg> (via teleconference) on 6 October at 13.00 UTC, followed by a F2F meeting in Los Angeles during the ICANN meeting<http://la51.icann.org/en/schedule/mon-iana-stewardship-naming> (scheduled for Monday 13 October from 12.15 - 13.45 local time (19.15 - 22.45 UTC), with remote participation). Both sessions will be recorded and transcribed. Background The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) has requested that ICANN "convene a multistakeholder process to develop a plan to transition the U.S. government stewardship role" with regard to the IANA Functions and related root zone management. In making its announcement, the NTIA specified that the transition proposal must have broad community support and meet the following principles: * Support and enhance the multistakeholder model * Maintain the security, stability, and resiliency of the Internet DNS * Meet the needs and expectation of the global customers and partners of the IANA services * Maintain the openness of the Internet. NTIA also specified that it would not accept a proposal that replaces the NTIA role with a government-led or an intergovernmental organization solution. On June 6 ICANN proposed the creation of an IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) "responsible for preparing a transition proposal reflecting the differing needs of the various affected parties of the IANA functions." It was determined that Stewardship Transition proposals for each of the IANA functions should be developed by the directly affected communities, the IETF and IAB for IANA functions related to Internet Protocol Parameters; the NRO, the ASO, and the RIRs for functions related the management and distribution of numbering resources; and the GNSO and ccNSO for functions related to the Domain Name System. These efforts will inform the work of the ICG, whose responsibility is to develop an overall integrated transition proposal from these autonomously developed components. Two of IANA's global directly affected communities, the addressing and Internet protocol parameter communities, have responded to the NTIA's announcement and the formation of the ICG, by establishing working groups to provide input on their specific needs and expectations with respect to the IANA Stewardship Transition. This CWG was formed as an integral part of this transition process, and to develop a proposal for the elements of the IANA Stewardship Transition that directly affect the naming community. Further Information * Charter of Cross Community Working Group (CWG) to develop an IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions<http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/iana-stewardship-naming-function-charter-14…> [PDF, 277 KB] * CWG Wiki<https://community.icann.org/x/37fhAg> Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

draft letter to NGPC tbd on the 25th
by Thomas Rickert Sept. 26, 2014

Sept. 26, 2014

All, following-up to the discussion we had with Chris Disspain during out last Council call, please find attached a draft letter to the NGPC. The intention is to discuss and hopefully adopt the letter during the upcoming Council call on the 25th. Sending the letter well in advance of the LA meeting will surely increase the chances that we get substantive feedback either before or during the LA meeting. Please let me know if you have any questions. Best, Thomas

2 2

Action items from Council meeting 25 September 2014
by Glen de Saint Géry Sept. 26, 2014

Sept. 26, 2014

Dear Councillors, Please find the action items arising from the Council meeting on Thursday 25 September 2014. Please let me know if there are any changes or items missed. Item 2: Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action List Arising from the Action List<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Items>. Expert Working Group (EWG) Action Item: Recirculate Steve Crocker's letter to the Council mailing list Add the proposed solution provided at the Council meeting: * Respond to the request from Steve Crocker * Call for four volunteers and one staff member who is well versed in the Policy Development Process, to join a team to work with the Board on moving the issue forward. CWG on Internet Governance Charter Action Item: Bring item to a close. Make a motion for the next Council meeting in Los Angeles. Avri Doria and James Bladel volunteered to help write up a motion. Item 4: DISCUSSION - A letter to the ICANN NGPC regarding the proposed modification of GNSO consensus recommendations relating to IGO acronyms and Red Cross identifiers Action Item Send a variation of the proposed letter<http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg16658.html>, including input that Alan Greenberg will provide on how to deal with Red Cross names, to the mailing list and after review on the list send the revised letter to New gTLD Policy Committee (NGPC) as soon as possible. Item 8: UPDATE - A cross community working group to develop a transition proposal for IANA stewardship on naming related functions Action Item Councillors are reminded to fill the positions with volunteers who are knowledgeable, committed and have the time to dedicate. The Registry and Non Commercial Stakeholder Groups need to provide volunteers to the Cross Community working group to develop a transition proposal for IANA stewardship on naming related functions. Item 9: DISCUSSION - The report of the ICANN Board Working Group on the Nominating Committee Action Item James Bladel volunteered to provide lead input but only during the 'reply period' (i.e. once GNSO Groups / Constituencies have individually had the opportunity to provide input) of the public comments on the report of the ICANN Board Group on the Nominating Committee<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/bwg-nomcom-2014-08-21-en> Item 10: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Planning for LA Action Item Jonathan Robinson will provide information on the mailing list concerning key items proposed for the agenda. 11.1 - Input from Jennifer Wolfe on the GNSO Review including Survey participation. Action Item: Councillors, and members of their specific groups are strongly encouraged to complete the survey<https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/GNSOREVIEW360SURVEY>. 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

1 0