October 2016 - council - lists.icann.org

Reports from the GNSO Bylaws Implementation Drafting Team
by Julie Hedlund Oct. 12, 2016

Oct. 12, 2016

Dear GNSO Councilors, Please see the attached Bylaws Implementation Drafting Team Report and implementation plan, plus the cover note below from Steve DelBianco, Drafting Team Chair. Kind regards, Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Note from Steve DelBianco: Dear GNSO Councilors, As you may recall, the Bylaws Drafting Team (DT) was created to provide the GNSO Council with a draft implementation plan for any necessary updates to the GNSO Operating Procedures, or possibly the Bylaws as they relate to the GNSO, arising as a result of the revised ICANN Bylaws. The Council requested that this DT submit the proposed implementation plan by 30 September (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#20160630-2[gnso.icann.org] for the full Council resolution). At the GNSO Council meeting on 29 September, I requested an additional two weeks to complete the report due to the complexity of the task as well as the short time frame. Thank you for allowing the DT the additional two weeks to complete this very important task. Please see the attached final report and implementation plan from the DT for GNSO Council consideration on at its meeting on 13 October. As noted previously, this implementation plan for the Council is not intended to include specific language for new or amended rules and procedures. Drafting of these new or amended processes will therefore likely begin only after approval of the implementation plan. The understanding is that the initial task of the DT was to identify and agree on how GNSO should handle new obligations and rights arising from the revised ICANN Bylaws. I will be available during the GNSO Council call on the 13th to address any questions you may have concerning this implementation plan. Best regards, Steve DelBianco

1 0

REVIEW Updated Project List
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 12, 2016

Oct. 12, 2016

Dear Councillors, Attached please find the updated Project list, clean and red-line version, for review before the Council meeting on Thursday 13 October 2016. Please let us know if you have any comments or would like any changes made. Thank you so 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/> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-…>.

1 0

Adobe connect room issues
by Nathalie Peregrine Oct. 11, 2016

Oct. 11, 2016

Dear all, As many of you are aware, ICANN is now rolling out new Adobe Connect (AC) rooms. Whilst this has been mostly smooth, we have been noticing glitches affecting accessibility, audio quality and some delays in the AC chat pod. Our tech-team is working very closely with Adobe Connect to iron out these issues as soon as possible. In order for the tech team to identify rapidly what constitues an individual issue rather than a widespread one, we encourage you to report any issues which affected the quality of your conference call be it delays in joining, difficulty hearing what was being said, or abnormal delays in the room. Prior to reporting however please follow the below troubleshooting steps: 1. Run the ICANN AC test to ensure you have all the latest add ins, it takes 10 - 15 seconds: http://tinyurl.com/icannactest[tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__tinyurl.com_icannactest…> 2. Try accessing the AC room via a different browser. Tech support recommends trying this order, from first to last: 1) Firefox 2) Chrome 3) Safari 4) IE 3. Check that you have no Ad Blockers, or other Blockers enabled (this can vary from browser to browser) Once this is done, and you are still having issues, please send an email to tech-support(a)icann.org cc-ing gnso-secs(a)icann.org reporting on the above three steps and describing the issue. This will be taken care of, or escalated to Adobe immediately . Please rest assured that the Tech team is working round the clock to solve these issues, and we will provide updates as we go along. Our apologies for the inconvenience caused, Kind regards, Nathalie -- Nathalie Peregrine Specialist, SOAC Support (GNSO) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: nathalie.peregrine(a)icann.org <nathalie.peregrine(a)icann.org> Skype: nathalie.peregrine.icann Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages[gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gn…>

1 0

Final Status Report - GAC-GNSO Consultation Group
by Marika Konings Oct. 11, 2016

Oct. 11, 2016

Dear All, On behalf of the GAC-GNSO Consultation Group on GAC Early Engagement in GNSO Policy Development Processes, please find attached their Final Status Report and Recommendations for your review and consideration. Best regards, Marika Marika Konings Senior Policy Director & Team Leader for the GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings(a)icann.org Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages.

1 0

Draft Motion - GNSO Council Response to the ICANN Board
by Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez G. Oct. 11, 2016

Oct. 11, 2016

Dear Glen, Dear Councillors I submit this motion to approve during our next call on 13 Oct a response to Chairman Crocker´s letter from August 5th 2016, and ask for secondment: <Text> Motion on the GNSO Council Response to the ICANN Board Letter on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Made by: Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez Seconded by: WHEREAS, On 5 August 2016, the GNSO Council received a letter from Dr. Stephen Crocker seeking an understanding of the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process (PDP) Working Group’s (WG) requirements and timing related to advancing a new application process. On 16 August 2016, the GNSO Council acknowledged receipt of the letter and informed the ICANN Board that initial discussions within the GNSO Council and more broadly, within the GNSO community and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG, were anticipated. On 12 September 2016, the GNSO Council sent a letter to all of the GNSO’s Stakeholder Groups, Constituencies, and the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG seeking input to help formulate the Council’s response to the ICANN Board. The GNSO Council received an important number of responses and divergent positions from many different individuals as well a constituencies within the GNSO community, as well as from the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG. RESOLVED, The GNSO Council has synthesized the positions received and prepared a response to the ICANN Board. The GNSO Council looks forward to ongoing discussions with the broader community, particularly at ICANN57 in Hyderabad, India. The GNSO Council expects to continue to consult with the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG to determine if there are any significant changes to its schedule or scope of work as defined in its charter. <text end> Respectfully Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez +506 8837 7176 Skype: carlos.raulg Current UTC offset: -6.00 (Costa Rica) Forwarded message: > From: Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org> > To: Carlos Raul Gutierrez <crg(a)isoc-cr.org> > Cc: Phil Corwin <psc(a)vlaw-dc.com>, Drazek, Keith > <kdrazek(a)Verisign.com>, James M. Bladel <jbladel(a)godaddy.com>, > Stefania.Milan(a)EUI.eu <Stefania.Milan(a)EUI.eu>, Emily Barabas > <emily.barabas(a)icann.org>, Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org>, > Paul McGrady <policy(a)paulmcgrady.com> > Subject: Re: New gTLD Subsequent Procedures - GNSO Council Response to > the ICANN Board > Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2016 22:34:18 +0000 > > All, > > Carlos, thank you for your comments. Seeing no volunteers to hold the > pen, staff is happy to prepare an initial draft for your > consideration, especially given the contracted timelines until the > next Council meeting. > > With a vote expected to consider and approve this letter at the 13 > October 2016 GNSO Council meeting, staff has prepared a draft motion, > also for your consideration. Unfortunately, the document and motion > deadline is today – any volunteers to put forth this motion (with > any necessary edits of course)? > > We will try to provide the draft letter as soon as possible, as > ideally, it should be available with the motion, > > Best, > > Steve > > From: Carlos Raul Gutierrez <crg(a)isoc-cr.org> > Date: Sunday, October 2, 2016 at 3:00 PM > To: Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org> > Cc: Phil Corwin <psc(a)vlaw-dc.com>, "Drazek, Keith" > <kdrazek(a)Verisign.com>, "James M. Bladel" <jbladel(a)godaddy.com>, > "Stefania.Milan(a)EUI.eu" <Stefania.Milan(a)EUI.eu>, Emily Barabas > <emily.barabas(a)icann.org>, Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org>, > Paul McGrady <policy(a)paulmcgrady.com> > Subject: Re: New gTLD Subsequent Procedures - GNSO Council Response to > the ICANN Board > > Thank you vey much Steve for the excellent overview of the comments to > Chairman´s Crocker letter to date. From my personal point of view, I > belong to the group of the subsequent procedures PDP, that wonders > what the (short term vs. long term) context of the question is. And > just because of that, I´m a strong supporter of a very conservative > stance. > > My initial suggestion for a clear formulation of a response at the > Council level, is to structure around the main (contentious) > issues/areas, including its pro and con arguments, instead of listing > the source of all the different positions. From that perspective I see > 4 main areas/chapters for a structure of the response: > > 1. All the pending studies and PDPs that are analyzing the impact or > the 2012 round and will produce related recommendations: RPM, > Subsequent procedures and CCT-RT. (In general it worked well, but it > needs more refinement) > > 2. The question if the 2007 ¨policy¨ is strong enough for subsequent > procedures without any mayor changes. > > 2.a including the policy equal treatment of all applications (without > any categorization), as compared to restrictions over certain groups > of possible new TLDs (Geographic names, Communities, etc.) > > 3. if the AGB is strong enough as a ¨predictable application > process¨ for subsequent procedures, and if not, which type of > revisions it needs > > 3.a including the question of global fairness (or underserved areas) > > 4. if the ¨implementation/delegation¨ of new gTLDs of the last round > was good enough, or there are few lessons that should be carefully > analyzed and improvements introduced before new delegations > > After reading the summary document I see how a general consensus gets > more and more difficult, as we go down the list here proposed. Then it > should be pretty obvious that the Boards main question should be > answered with a pretty clear ¨NO shortcuts¨. > > But I also want to hear what the other members of the team think. > > Carlos Raúl > > El 30 sept 2016, a las 16:20, Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org> > escribió: > > <Input - ICANN Board Letter on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures - 27 > Sept 2016.docx>

2 1

FW: [council] International Registration Data (IRD) - Expert WG Report and Proposed Council Actions
by Marika Konings Oct. 10, 2016

Oct. 10, 2016

Dear All, In follow up to item #2 below, please find attached the input received from Jim Galvin, who served as Chair of the IRD Expert Working Group and who was a member of the Translation and Transliteration PDP Working Group as one of the representatives of the Registry Stakeholder Group. We did initially reach out to the chairs of the T & T Working Group, but unfortunately neither of them was available to provide a response so I am very grateful to Jim that he was able to step in. Note that further discussion on this item is foreseen during the upcoming GNSO Council meeting on 13 October. For your convenience, you will also find attached the original request from the ICANN Board as well as a table prepared by ICANN staff comparing both sets of recommendations. Best regards, Marika Marika Konings Senior Policy Director & Team Leader for the GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings(a)icann.org Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages. From: <owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org> on behalf of "James M. Bladel" <jbladel(a)godaddy.com> Date: Sunday 19 June 2016 at 10:19 To: GNSO Council List <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] International Registration Data (IRD) - Expert WG Report and Proposed Council Actions Council Colleagues - Last month we received a letter (attached) from the ICANN Board, requesting that the GNSO Council analyze the Final Report from the 2012 WHOIS Expert Working Group for policy implications (IRD Final Report), and forward this report and our concerns to the appropriate PDP working groups, including the Next Generation RDS PDP working group at a minimum. To move this task forward, here are the steps I propose: That the Council, forward the IRD Final Report to the RDS PDP chairs, with the request that this PDP WG consider these recommendations within the context of that policy development work. And that they report to us (via their Council Liaison) any elements of the IRD Recommendations that they believe to be incompatible with their Charter, or beyond the scope of a GNSO PDP, and That the Council also forward the IRD Final Report to the former chairs of the recently-completed Translation & Transliteration Working Group, with the request that they (along with support from Policy Staff) analyze the IRD Recommendations against the adopted Recommendations of their PDP (see Staff-prepared table, attached). And that they report back to the Council with their assessment of whether or not these recommendations were adequately covered by the PDP, or if there are any omissions or incompatibilities, and That we reply to the letter from Steve & the Board, acknowledge receipt of this request, and inform them of actions taken. I’d welcome any additional thoughts on this topic, or the proposed path forward. This is an extraordinarily complex topic, with numerous dependencies and moving parts, so please don’t hesitate to raise any questions or concerns. Thank you, J. James Bladel

1 0

Webinar on new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG Charter - Thursday 13 October at 16.00 UTC
by Marika Konings Oct. 10, 2016

Oct. 10, 2016

Dear All, Following the DT’s request for input concerning pertinent issues that would prevent adoption of the proposed charter for the new gTLD Auction Proceeds Cross-Community Working Group from all ICANN SO/ACs (see https://community.icann.org/x/7Bq4Aw[community.icann.org]) we’ve understood that there is a request to have a webinar to allow for a walk through of the charter followed by Q & A to address any questions there might be. As such, a webinar will be organized on Thursday 13 October at 16.00 UTC for 60 minutes. This webinar will also be open to other SO/ACs as others may have been similarly challenged to give the proposed charter due consideration (note, to date only formal input has been received from the ccNSO (see https://community.icann.org/x/7Bq4Aw[community.icann.org]) If you are interested in participating, please confirm your attendance at gnso-secs(a)icann.org. Note that the webinar will be recorded and transcribed. Best regards, Marika Marika Konings Senior Policy Director & Team Leader for the GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings(a)icann.org Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages.

1 0

FW: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#217]
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 10, 2016

Oct. 10, 2016

FYI From: ICANN [mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2016 5:48 PM To: gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org; council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#217] Name of Officer: * Paul Diaz Officer Email Address: * pdiaz(a)pir.org<mailto:pdiaz@pir.org> Date Prepared: * Monday, October 10, 2016 GNSO Organization: * Registries Stakeholder Group Officer Position or Title: * Chair, RySG Voting Remedy: * Proxy Reason(s) for or condition(s) leading to the remedy: * Rubens Kuhl requests that Keith Drazek be his proxy for the 13 October GNSO Council call since Rubens may have connectivity issues. Specific subject(s)/measure(s)/motion(s)/action(s) of the Council for which the remedy is being exercised: * TBD Date upon which the remedy will expire or terminate: [Note: may not exceed 3 months initially; may be renewed by sending an email with explanation to GNSO Secretariat] * Friday, October 14, 2016 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: * Keith Drazek

1 0

Fwd: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#216]
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 8, 2016

Oct. 8, 2016

Début du message transféré : Expéditeur: "ICANN" <no-reply(a)wufoo.com<mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com>> Date: 8 octobre 2016 10:52:21 UTC+2 Destinataire: gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@icann.org>, council(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> Objet: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#216] Répondre à: <no-reply(a)wufoo.com<mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com>> Name of Officer: * Tony Holmes Officer Email Address: * tonyarholmes(a)btinternet.com<mailto:tonyarholmes@btinternet.com> Date Prepared: * Wednesday, August 10, 2016 GNSO Organization: * Internet Services Provider Constituency Officer Position or Title: * Chairman Voting Remedy: * Proxy Reason(s) for or condition(s) leading to the remedy: * Tony Harris is unable to attend on October 13 due to travel schedule Specific subject(s)/measure(s)/motion(s)/action(s) of the Council for which the remedy is being exercised: * Proxy given to Wolf-Ulrich Knoben Date upon which the remedy will expire or terminate: [Note: may not exceed 3 months initially; may be renewed by sending an email with explanation to GNSO Secretariat] * Friday, October 14, 2016 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: * Wolf-Ulrich Knoben

1 0

Re: [council] Board reply letter on IGO/RC issues and proposal on IGO acronyms protection from the IGO "small group"
by James M. Bladel Oct. 7, 2016

Oct. 7, 2016

Thanks, Mary – Notwithstanding the existing discussions on this thread, could we ask Staff to send the Board formal acknowledgement of receipt of this letter, and a note that we plan to discuss at our next opportunity? Thanks— j. From: <owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 6, 2016 at 16:02 To: GNSO Council List <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Cc: Steve Crocker <steve.crocker(a)board.icann.org>, Chris Disspain <chris(a)disspain.uk>, "bruce.tonkin(a)melbourneit.com.au" <bruce.tonkin(a)melbourneit.com.au>, Markus Kummer <markus.kummer(a)board.icann.org>, "Burr, Becky" <Becky.Burr(a)neustar.biz>, "board-ops-team(a)icann.org" <board-ops-team(a)icann.org> Subject: [council] Board reply letter on IGO/RC issues and proposal on IGO acronyms protection from the IGO "small group" Dear Councilors, Please find attached the ICANN Board’s reply to the GNSO Council’s letter of 31 May 2016 on the topic of protections for IGOs and the Red Cross. The letter also includes the final proposal on IGO acronyms protection that was worked on by the IGO “small group” of IGO, Board and GAC representatives, facilitated by ICANN staff as appropriate. We will also transmit a copy of this to the co-chairs of the GNSO IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protections PDP Working Group and the GAC. Best regards, Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: mary.wong(a)icann.org Telephone: +1-603-5744889

1 0