March 2016 - council - lists.icann.org

Updated GNSO Working Session Agendas Saturday and Sunday
by Glen de Saint Géry March 4, 2016

March 4, 2016

Dear All, Please consult the GNSO Working Session Agendas on the Wiki pages below /attached documents for the changes in the schedule on Saturday and Sunday. The meeting will take place in DIAMANT, opposite the Registration booth. Saturday Schedule https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/GNSO+Working+Sessio… Sunday schedule https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/GNSO+Working+Sessio… Please see the abridged schedule below. GNSO Schedule / Marrekech 2016 ** All GNSO meetings are open unless otherwise indicated ** Remote participation, live audio streaming, recording and transcript available after meeting. Saturday 5 March Session Leader Presenter 08:00 09:00 Standing Committee on GNSO Improvements Implementation face 2 face Anne-Aikman Scalese F2F meeting 09:30 09:45 IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms PDP update Petter Rindforth, Phil Corwin 09:45 10:00 Standing Committee on GNSO Improvements Implementation update Rudi Vansnick /Avri Doria 10:00 10:15 Next Generation gTLD Registration Directory Services to replace WHOIS PDP Working Group Chuck Gomes 10:15 10:30 New gTLD auction proceeds DT Jonathan Robinson 10:30 11:00 COFFEE BREAK 11:00 11:15 IDN Variants Program Status Update Sarmad Hussein 11:15 11:45 New Meeting Strategy Update Volker Greimann 11:45 12:00 New gTLD Subsequent Rounds PDP Working Group Jeff Neuman 12:15 12:45 Operational update (FY16, FY15, dashboard, business excellence) (Lunch continued) Xavier Calvez 12:45 13:00 LUNCH + CCWG Accountability discussion 13:00 15:00 CCWG Accountability discussion Xavier Calvez 15:00 15:30 Security and Stability Advisory Committee discussion and update Patrik Falström, Jim Galvin 15:30 15:45 COFFEE BREAK 15:45 16:15 Prep for meeting with Board (and GAC / ccNSO 16:15 16:45 Prep for discussion with new CEO 16:45:00+A23:G23 17:15 Open and substantial strategic discussion/ Educational update from CPH and NCPH intersessionals 17:15 18:00 Discussion of motions ( to be voted on at Public Council meeting 9 March 2016 19:00 Offsite Informal Council Dinner Amr Elsadr Sunday 6 March Session Leader Presenter 09:00 10:00 GDD Update Cyrus Namazi, Akram Atalla, Christine Willett 10:00 10:30 IANA Stewardship Update Jonathan Robinson 10:30 11:00 Theresa Swinehart Theresa Swinehart 11:15 11:45 Update on CCWG on Enhancing ICANN Accountability Thomas Rickert 11:45 12:15 CEO Discussion Fadi Chehadé/Göran Marby 12:15 13:00 LUNCH + CCWG Update and discussion 13:00 14:30 GNSO Meeting with the Board 14:30 15:00 GNSO Review Update Jen Wolfe 15:00 15:30 CCT Update 15:30 16:00 BREAK 16:00 17:00 GNSO Meeting with the GAC 17:00 18:30 Separate SG/Constituency meetings (closed)* Thank you. See you tomorrow Glen

1 0

Fwd: [CCWG-ACCT] Fwd: CCWG Final report for your consideration
by James M. Bladel March 4, 2016

March 4, 2016

Councilors- See below. The ASO has approved the CCWG report. I'll try to keep tabs on the progress of other Chartering Orgs and share any announcements from them. Sent via iPhone. Blame Siri. Begin forwarded message: From: León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <leonfelipe(a)sanchez.mx<mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx>> Date: March 4, 2016 at 09:52:06 GMT To: Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>> Cc: Accountability Staff <accountability-staff(a)icann.org<mailto:accountability-staff@icann.org>> Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Fwd: CCWG Final report for your consideration Dear all, I am forwarding this communication sent by Oscar Robles on behalf of the ASO. Best regards, León Inicio del mensaje reenviado: De: "Oscar A. Robles-Garay" <oscar(a)lacnic.net<mailto:oscar@lacnic.net>> Asunto: Re: Fwd: CCWG Final report for your consideration Fecha: 4 de marzo de 2016, 9:42:53 a.m. GMT Para: León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <leonfelipe(a)sanchez.mx<mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx>> Cc: louie(a)equinix.com<mailto:louie@equinix.com>, David Olive <david.olive(a)icann.org<mailto:david.olive@icann.org>>, Carlos Reyes <carlos.reyes(a)icann.org<mailto:carlos.reyes@icann.org>>, 'Steve Crocker' <steve(a)shinkuro.com<mailto:steve@shinkuro.com>> Dear León, As a designated Chartering Organization of the CCWG, the ASO states its support for the Final Report of the CCWG WS1. We therefore ask ICANN to accept this document, along with the ICG proposal for IANA Stewardship Transition, for approval during the ICANN 55 meetings in Marrakech. The two proposals should then be forwarded to the US Government for their review, without further delay. Oscar Robles Chair, NRO Executive Committee for the ASO On 2/23/16 20:36, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote: Dear Oscar, dear Louie, In my rush to send this out as soon as possible, I involuntarily omitted to include you in this email. Please accept my apologies for this oversight. I hope you will find this final report worthy of the approval of your Organization. Thanks for your understanding. Best regards, León Inicio del mensaje reenviado: De: León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <leonfelipe(a)sanchez.mx<mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx>> Asunto: CCWG Final report for your consideration Fecha: 23 de febrero de 2016, 5:20:42 p.m. GMT-6 Para: "James M. Bladel" <<mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com>jbladel(a)godaddy.com<mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com>>, Thomas Schneider <Thomas.Schneider(a)bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Thomas.Schneider@bakom.admin.ch>>, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>>, Tripti Sinha <tsinha(a)umd.edu<mailto:tsinha@umd.edu>>, Brad Verd <bverd(a)verisign.com<mailto:bverd@verisign.com>>, Byron Holland <byron.holland(a)cira.ca<mailto:byron.holland@cira.ca>>, Patrik Fältström <paf(a)frobbit.se<mailto:paf@frobbit.se>>, Lise Fuhr <fuhr(a)etno.eu<mailto:fuhr@etno.eu>>, Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson(a)afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>> Cc: <mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org>, Olof Nordling <olof.nordling(a)icann.org<mailto:olof.nordling@icann.org>>, Julia Charvolen <julia.charvolen(a)icann.org<mailto:julia.charvolen@icann.org>>, Tom Dale <tom(a)acig.com.au<mailto:tom@acig.com.au>>, Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>>, Carlos Reyes <carlos.reyes(a)icann.org<mailto:carlos.reyes@icann.org>>, "Kimberly Carlson (kimberly.carlson(a)icann.org<mailto:kimberly.carlson@icann.org>)" <kimberly.carlson(a)icann.org<mailto:kimberly.carlson@icann.org>>, Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel(a)icann.org<mailto:bart.boswinkel@icann.org>>, Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>>, Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad(a)icann.org<mailto:grace.abuhamad@icann.org>>, David Olive <david.olive(a)icann.org<mailto:david.olive@icann.org>>, Theresa Swinehart <theresa.swinehart(a)icann.org<mailto:theresa.swinehart@icann.org>>, ACCT-Staff <acct-staff(a)icann.org<mailto:acct-staff@icann.org>>, Steve Crocker <steve.crocker(a)icann.org<mailto:steve.crocker@icann.org>>, Fadi Chehadé <fadi.chehade(a)icann.org<mailto:fadi.chehade@icann.org>> Dear Chartering Organizations, The Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) is pleased to provide its Chartering Organizations with its report on Work Stream 1 recommendations. You can download the full report here: <https://community.icann.org/x/8w2AAw> https://community.icann.org/x/8w2AAw. As per the CCWG-Accountability’s Charter, we now seek your approval to submit this final report to the ICANN Board and ask you to consider this approval in accordance with your respective SO or AC rules and procedures by 9 March 2016 to meet the overall timing requirements, which would allow the IANA Stewardship Transition (as a whole) to proceed. The report is the result of extensive work by the CCWG-Accountability’s 28 members, 175 participants and a team of highly qualified legal advisors since December 2014, which included over 221 calls or meetings, 3 public consultations and more than 13,900 email messages. It represents a carefully crafted balance between key requirements, specific legal advice, and significant compromises by all who participated and includes diligent attention to the input received through the Public Comment proceedings. The final proposal has received the consensus support of the CCWG-Accountability with five minority statements from members recorded for Chartering Organization consideration (see Appendix A). Please note that we are publishing our report today with the minority statements delivered by the original 19 February deadline, but we have given our members a final opportunity to revise, retract or add minority statements based on our compromise reached this morning. We will send you a revised Appendix A on 25 February. As noted in the CCWG-Accountability report, the group worked to meet both NTIA requirements for the overall IANA Stewardship Transition (Annex 14), and the CWG-Stewardship dependencies for the naming community on ICANN accountability enhancements (Annex 13). The co-chairs of the CWG-Stewardship and the CCWG-Accountability have coordinated their efforts. The CWG-Stewardship will deliver a letter to you confirming that its dependencies have been met, thus allowing the IANA Stewardship Transition proposal to move forward. We will make ourselves together with or other key contributors available to you before and during the ICANN 55 meeting in Marrakech to answer any questions you may have and explain any details of the report. For your information, further background documents as well as the slides, recordings and transcripts of recent webinars explain the details of the final proposal are available here: https://community.icann.org/x/ogDxAg. Should you have any further questions please do not hesitate to contact us. Thank you very much for your continued support. Thomas Rickert, Mathieu Weill and Leon Sanchez CCWG-Accountability Co-Chairs _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community(a)icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

1 0

Proposed GNSO Council Public Meeting Agenda Marrakech 9 March 2016 UTC;WET.
by Glen de Saint Géry March 2, 2016

March 2, 2016

Dear Councillors, Please find the proposed Agenda for the GNSO Council Public Meeting in Marrakech 9 March 2016 UTC;WET. https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Agenda+9+March+2016 http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/agenda-council-09mar16-en.htm This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures,<http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-24jun15-en.pdf> approved and updated on 24 June 2015. 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. Coordinated Universal Time: 13:30 UTC 05:30 Los Angeles; 08:30 Washington; 13:30 London; 15:30 Istanbul; 00:30 Hobart GNSO Council Meeting Audio Cast To join the event click on the link: http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if they will not be able to attend and/or need a dial out call. ___________________________________________ Item 1: Administrative matters (5 minutes) 1.1 - Roll call 1.2 - Updates to Statements of Interest 1.3 - Review/amend agenda. 1.4 - Note the status of minutes for the previous Council meetings per the GNSO Operating Procedures: Draft minutes<http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg18151.html> of the meeting of the GNSO Council on 18 February 2016 will be posted as approved on 6 March 2016. Item 2: Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action List (5 minutes) 2.1 - Review focus areas and provide updates on specific key themes / topics, to include review of Projects List<http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/projects-list.pdf> and Action List<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Items> Item 3: Consent agenda (5 minutes) 3.1 - Approve appointment of co-chairs for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process Working Group (co-chairs: Stephen Coates, Avri Doria, Jeff Neuman; Council liaison: Paul McGrady) Item 4: VOTE - Approval of Recommendations from the Cross-Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (45 minutes) In the course of discussions over the IANA stewardship transition, the community had raised concerns about ICANN's accountability, given ICANN's historical contractual relationship with the United States government. The community discussions indicated that existing ICANN accountability mechanisms do not yet meet some stakeholders' expectations. As the US government (through the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA)) has stressed that it expects community consensus on the transition, this gap between the current situation and stakeholder expectations needed to be addressed. This resulted in the creation<http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/enhancing-accountability-charter-03nov14-en…> of a Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability<https://community.icann.org/x/ogDxAg>) of which the GNSO is a chartering organization. In May 2015, the CCWG-Accountability published an initial proposal regarding its work on Work Stream 1 for public comment. Following significant changes made as a result of feedback received, the CCWG-Accountability published<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ccwg-accountability-2015-08-03-en> its Second Draft Proposal for public comment in August 2015. With the assistance of further community input, including from the ICANN Board, and discussions at several sessions during ICANN54, the CCWG-Accountability made further adjustments to its draft recommendations, resulting in its Third Draft Proposal that was published<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/draft-ccwg-accountability-proposal-20…> for public comment on 30 November 2015. Concurrently, the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) - the community group formed to consolidate the various proposals relating to the IANA stewardship transition submitted by the Internet communities affected by the issue - announced<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2015-10-29-en> after ICANN54 that it had completed its task. However, before the ICG can send its consolidated proposal to the NTIA via the ICANN Board, it needs confirmation from the Cross Community Working Group to Develop an IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions (CWG-Stewardship<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/CWG+to+Develop+an+IAN…>) that its accountability requirements have been met by the Work Stream 1 recommendations from the CCWG-Accountability. In this regard, the CWG-Stewardship had submitted a public comment to the CCWG-Accountability which, while noting that several of the CCWG-Accountability's latest recommendations adequately satisfied the CWG-Stewardship's requirements, nevertheless highlighted a number of points that in its view merited further attention. Following a Special Meeting on 14 January 2016, the GNSO Council had approved a letter<http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/gnso-council-to-ccwg-accountability…> setting out its response to the recommendations in the Third Draft Proposal. This was sent to the CCWG-Accountability on 22 January. In response to the community input to its Third Draft Proposal, the CCWG-Accountability reworked some of its draft recommendations, resulting in a Final Supplemental Proposal that was sent to all its Chartering Organizations on 23 February (see https://www.icann.org/news/blog/ccwg-accountability-delivers-report-to-char… Supplemental Final Proposal on Work Stream 1 Recommendations<https://community.icann.org/x/8w2AAw> has the consensus support of the CCWG-Accountability, and contains five minority statements (see revised Appendix A, circulated to all Chartering Organizations on 25 February). On 29 February, the GNSO Council held a Special Meeting that included all the GNSO representatives to the CCWG-Accountability. The purpose of the meeting was to receive initial feedback from all the GNSO's Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies, and to identify any remaining issues of concern that may require further discussion amongst the GNSO community. Here the Council will review the final comments from of all its SG/C, and, taking into account further discussions occurring during ICANN55, vote on whether or not to adopt the recommendations from the CCWG-Accountability as set forth in the Supplemental Final Proposal. 4.1 - Update (Thomas Rickert, GNSO co-chair of the CCWG-Accountability) 4.2 - Presentation of the motion<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+9+March+2016> (James Bladel) 4.3 - Discussion 4.4 - Council vote (voting threshold: simple majority) Item 5: COUNCIL VOTE - Approval of Charter for a PDP Working Group to review all RPMs in all gTLDs (20 minutes) On 18 February 2016, the GNSO Council voted unanimously to initiate a new Policy Development Process (PDP) to review all Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) in all gTLDs (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#20160218-3) At that meeting, a small group of Councilors volunteered to review the draft Charter for the PDP Working Group, with a view to submitting an updated Charter for the Council's review and approval at the Marrakech meeting. The draft Charter had been based substantially on the approach recommended in the Final Issue Report, published on 11 January 2015 (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/new-gtlds/rpm-final-issue-11jan16-en.pdf) This recommended that the GNSO Council proceed with a two-phased PDP, with the first phase focused on a review of the RPMs developed for the New gTLD Program and the subsequent, second phase on a review of the longstanding Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP). A Working Group Charter typically also sets out the scope of work for the PDP Working Group and includes a list of topics identified previously by the community for the Working Group to consider including as part of its work. Here the Council will consider the updated draft Charter<http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/rpm-charter-26feb16-en.pdf> and vote on whether to adopt it. 5.1 - Presentation of the motion<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+9+March+2016> (Phil Corwin) 5.2 - Discussion 5.3 - Council vote (voting threshold: an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House) Item 6: VOTE - Approval of Proposed Approach for Implementing Recommendations from the GNSO Review (10 minutes) As part of ICANN's Bylaws-mandated periodic review of its structures, the ICANN Board's Structural Improvements Committee (now known as the Organizational Effectiveness Committee) appointed Westlake Governance as the independent examiner to conduct the current review of the performance and operations of the GNSO. A GNSO Working Party, chaired by former Councillor Jennifer Wolfe and comprising representatives of all the GNSO's Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies, was formed to consult with Westlake over the design and conduct of the review. Westlake's Draft Report was published<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/gnso-review-draft-2015-06-01-en> for public comment on 1 June 2015. Following feedback received, including from the GNSO Working Party, Westlake published its Final Report<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/gnso-review-final-15sep15-en.pdf> on 15 September. The Working Party reviewed all the recommendations to develop guidance for the GNSO Council and ICANN Board in relation to the implementability and prioritization of the recommendations. The Council received a written update<http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/presentation-gnso-council-update-21…> from the Working Party chair on 29 January, and the Working Party's proposed Implementation and Feasibility Analysis [INSERT LINK] was sent to the Council on 28 February. Here the Council will review the Working Party's Implementation and Feasbility Analysis, and vote on its adoption as well as agree on next steps in the process. 6.1 - Presentation of the motion<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+9+March+2016> (Wolf-Ulrich Knoben) 6.2 - Discussion 6.3 - Council vote (voting threshold: simple majority) Item 7: DISCUSSION - RDAP Implementation (15 minutes) Building on previous advisories, ICANN's Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) had recommended the replacement of the longstanding WHOIS protocol in SAC051 (see https://www.icann.org/en/groups/ssac/documents/sac-051-en.pdf) In October 2011, the ICANN Board directed<https://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/minutes-28oct11-en.htm#5> staff to produce, in consultation with the community, a roadmap for the coordination of the technical and policy discussions necessary to implement the recommendations outlined in SAC 051. The Roadmap was published in 2012 (see https://www.icann.org/en/groups/ssac/documents/sac-051-roadmap-04jun12-en.p…) Also in 2012, the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) chartered the WEIRDS (Web Extensible Internet Registration Data Services) working group, which concluded its work in early 2015 with the publication of several specifications defining the behavior of the Registry Data Access Protocol (RDAP), a standardized replacement for WHOIS. ICANN-accredited registrars subject to the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA), registry operators from the 2012 New gTLD round and several other gTLD registries are contractually obligated to deploy RDAP. In February 2014 the ICANN Board adopted the GNSO Council's recommendations for a new Consensus Policy that would require the provision of "thick" WHOIS services for all gTLD registries. The GNSO Implementation Review Team that was formed for the Thick Whois Policy Implementation agreed with the proposal of ICANN staff to synchronize implementation of the policy with the adoption of RDAP. On 3 December 2015 ICANN staff published a draft RDAP Operational Profile for public comment (see https://www.icann.org/public-comments/rdap-profile-2015-12-03-en) Public comments will be received through 15 February 2015. Some concern has been expressed as to the policy implications of adopting RDAP in view of a number of other parallel efforts with potential cross-cutting impact, such as the recent initiation by the GNSO Council of a PDP for a Next-Generation Registration Directory Service to Replace WHOIS (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201511) Following an expected discussion with ICANN's Global Domains Division staff overseeing the RDAP implementation during the GNSO Weekend Sessions at ICANN55 on the policy bases for RDAP, the linkage to Thick WHOIS, and the RDAP Operational Profile requirements, the Council will now consider next steps and any further actions that may be advisable at this time. 7.1 - Update (James Bladel?) 7.2 - Discussion 7.3 - Next steps Item 8: Open Microphone (10 minutes) Item 9: Any Other Business (5 Minutes) _________________________________ 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.) Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 13:30 Local time between October and March Winter in the NORTHERN hemisphere ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PDT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/na/pst.html>) UTC-7+1DST 05:30 San José, Costa Rica UTC-6+0DST 07:30 Iowa City, USA (CDT<http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/UTC%E2%88%9206:00>) UTC-6+0DST 07:30 New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5+0DST 08:30 Buenos Aires, Argentina (ART<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/art.html>) UTC-3+0DST 10:30 Rio de Janiero, Brazil (BRST) UTC-2+0DST 10:30 London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 13:30 Bonn, Germany (CET) UTC+1+0DST 14:30 Cairo, Egypt, (EET) UTC+2+0DST 15:30 Istanbul, Turkey (EEST) UTC+3+0DST 15:30 Perth, Australia (WST<http://timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/au/wst.html>) UTC+8+1DST 21:30 Singapore (SGT) UTC +8 21:30 Sydney/Hobart, Australia (AEDT) UTC+11+0DST 00:30 next day ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- DST starts/ends on last Sunday of October 2016, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com<http://www.timeanddate.com/> http://tinyurl.com/jzasfwr Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen de Saint Géry Manager Supporting Organisations Advisory Committees Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers - ICANN glen(a)icann.org http://www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org/>

1 0

Links for Documents in preparation for the joint GAC-GNSO session
by Glen de Saint Géry March 2, 2016

March 2, 2016

Dear All, The documents have been posted on page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/drafts<http://mailer.samanage.com/wf/click?upn=KTB340yHI8DoUtMP4BGJnral-2F6hkupRgT…> and below are the links: http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/gac-early-engagement-opportunities-pdp-15ja…<http://mailer.samanage.com/wf/click?upn=KTB340yHI8DoUtMP4BGJnuFT4taHix-2FWC…> http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/gac-quick-look-mechanism-19feb16-en.pdf<http://mailer.samanage.com/wf/click?upn=KTB340yHI8DoUtMP4BGJnuFT4taHix-2FWC…> http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/review-liaison-gac-pilot-29feb16-en.pdf<http://mailer.samanage.com/wf/click?upn=KTB340yHI8DoUtMP4BGJnuFT4taHix-2FWC…> Thank you. Glen From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Marika Konings Sent: mardi 1 mars 2016 19:08 To: council(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] For your review - Documents in preparation for the joint GAC-GNSO session Dear All, In preparation for the GNSO meeting with the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC), please find attached the following documents on behalf of the GAC-GNSO Consultation Group: * Review of the GNSO Liaison to the GAC Pilot, including recommendations for GAC/GNSO consideration * Review of the GAC Quick Look Mechanism, including recommendations on how to streamline the existing mechanism * GAC Early Engagement Opportunities in the GNSO PDP - overview of early engagement mechanisms implemented to date as well as ideas/suggestions for further consideration Best regards, Marika

1 0

GNSO Policy Briefings
by Glen de Saint Géry March 2, 2016

March 2, 2016

Dear Councillors / GNSO leaders, In prepration for ICANN55, GNSO support staff has prepared the GNSO Policy Briefing<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/background-briefings>, containing a concise overview of all ongoing GNSO projects. Please also note, that all important information for the forthcoming meeting in Marrakech, including agendas, preparatory documents, and tabled motions can be found on our GNSO @ ICANN55<http://gnso.icann.org/en/icannmeeting> page. You are encouraged to share this information and documents with colleagues in your Stakeholder Groups, Constituencies, and beyond. Many thanks and best wishes, GNSO Policy Development Support Team GNSO@ICANN55: http://gnso.icann.org/en/icannmeeting GNSO Policy Briefings: http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/background-briefings Follow the GNSO on Twitter: @ICANN_GNSO

2 1

Re: [council] For your information - latest version of the GNSO Marrakech Public Schedule
by James M. Bladel March 1, 2016

March 1, 2016

Thank you, Marika. Councilors - Please provide any additional topics or issues you'd like to discuss for the following sessions: * Update from GDD Staff (agenda, including additions from Jennifer, attached) Sunday 0900 * Meeting with Fadi (confirmed) Sunday 1030 * Meeting with New CEO (Gören Marby) Sunday 1145 * Meeting with the Board. Sunday 1300 * Meeting with the GAC. Sunday 1600 * Joint meeting with the ccNSO Monday 1200 If possible, let's try to collect these over the next 24-48 hours, with an emphasis on topics for the Board and New CEO. Thank you - J. From: <owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>> Date: Thursday, February 25, 2016 at 14:54 To: GNSO Council List <council(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: [council] For your information - latest version of the GNSO Marrakech Public Schedule Dear All, Please find attached the latest version of the GNSO Schedule for Marrakech. Please note that we are still in the process of confirming some of these meetings, so further changes may occur. We will, of course, up date you as soon as possible should there be any further changes. Best regards, Marika

5 6

For your review - Documents in preparation for the joint GAC-GNSO session
by Marika Konings March 1, 2016

March 1, 2016

Dear All, In preparation for the GNSO meeting with the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC), please find attached the following documents on behalf of the GAC-GNSO Consultation Group: * Review of the GNSO Liaison to the GAC Pilot, including recommendations for GAC/GNSO consideration * Review of the GAC Quick Look Mechanism, including recommendations on how to streamline the existing mechanism * GAC Early Engagement Opportunities in the GNSO PDP - overview of early engagement mechanisms implemented to date as well as ideas/suggestions for further consideration Best regards, Marika

1 0

Updated Motion and Charter for RPM Review WG
by Phil Corwin March 1, 2016

March 1, 2016

Councilors: On behalf of the subgroup which met twice this past week to discuss the best way to conduct a PDP on the review of all RPMs in all gTLDs, I am pleased to forward for your consideration updated versions of the Motion and draft Charter for same. I am hereby proposing them in order to meet the deadline for items to be considered by the Council in Marrakech. The Motion has been altered since the version that we adopted at the last Council meeting to include a reference to our subgroup. The Charter has been altered to include a new clause in the second sentence of the first paragraph under "Background", as follows (new language in Bold): As a result of the New gTLD Program, several new rights protection mechanisms (RPMs) were developed to mitigate potential risks and costs to trademark rights holders that could arise in the expansion of the gTLD namespace, which included certain safeguards to protect registrants who engage in legitimate uses of domain names: the Uniform Rapid Suspension System (URS); the Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) and the associated availability through the TMCH of Sunrise periods and the Trademark Claims notification service; and the Post-Delegation Dispute Resolution Procedures (PDDRPs). That language was offered by Amr and was deemed non-controversial by members of the subgroup. The subgroup was unable to reach consensus to include draft Charter language proposed by Amr to subsection (a) of the Mission and Scope portion of the Charter. That language would have delegated to the WG the decision as to whether the two-phased approach should start first with review of new gTLD RPMs or of the UDRP. However, there was general consensus among subgroup members that, as the rationale for such delegation of decision-making was that some public comments had taken positions not included within the three staff options contained in the Preliminary Issues Report, the WG should, if Council does not decide scope and priorities, be free to consider any public comment suggestions beyond the staff options - which would include the comments of WIPO and INTA that the UDRP should not undergo any review at all. It will be up to Amr and other supporters of altering the Charter to decide whether they wish to offer such a decisional delegation amendment to the draft Charter when we meet in Marrakech. Let me know if any of you have questions. Safe travel to Marrakech, and best regards, Philip Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

2 2

CCWG-Accountability Supplemental Final Proposal on Work Stream 1 Recommendations
by Glen de Saint Géry March 1, 2016

March 1, 2016

Dear Councillors, Please find the CCWG-Accountability Supplemental Final Proposal on Work Stream 1 Recommendations that Thomas Rickert presented at the Special GNSO Council session on Monday 29 February 2016. http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/presentation-ccwg-accountability-su…<http://mailer.samanage.com/wf/click?upn=KTB340yHI8DoUtMP4BGJnral-2F6hkupRgT…> published on page :http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/correspondence<http://mailer.samanage.com/wf/click?upn=KTB340yHI8DoUtMP4BGJnral-2F6hkupRgT…> 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

MP3 recording & AC Chat transcript Special GNSO Council session 29 February 2016
by Glen de Saint Géry March 1, 2016

March 1, 2016

[To: liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org; council[at]gnso.icann.org] Please find the MP3 recording of the GNSO Council session, held on Thursday, 29 February 2016 http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-council-29feb16-en.mp3 on page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#feb the Adobe chat transcript can be viewed here: http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/transcript-chat-council-29feb16-en.pdf Happy listening and reading! 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