January 2017 - council - lists.icann.org

GNSO Council Mailing list migration & new archives
by Nathalie Peregrine 10 Jan '17

10 Jan '17

Dear councilors, The mailing list software (Majordomo) used for running the GNSO Council mailing list is at the end of its life. For security reasons ICANN IT, will be migrating the list to a new platform (Mailman) on which all of the GNSO mailing lists will now be hosted. The list migration will take place on Saturday, January 14, 2017 at 01:00 am UTC. You should see only cosmetic differences between the old and the new platform. The email address will remain the same. However, the web archive will be at a new URL: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/ For historical purposes the old URL and data will remain intact but it will no longer receive updates: https://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/ Staff will ensure that both old and new archives be visible both on the wiki and on the website. Please let us know if you have any questions, Kind regards, Nathalie

1 0

Motion: Nomination of GNSO Candidates for SSR2-RT
by James M. Bladel 09 Jan '17

09 Jan '17

Councilors – Attached and copied below, please find a motion for Council consideration during our next call on 19 JAN 2017, which presents our slate of candidates for the Security & Stability Review Team (SSR2-RT). As you may recall from our DEC 2016 call, we decided to convene a small group comprised of myself, Heather, Donna, Susan and Ed. This group was tasked to evaluate submitted applications for our 3 Primary (guaranteed to be seated) and 4 Alternate (may be seated based on need & diversity) candidates, and bring these recommendations back to the Council. The attached motion presents our findings. Looking forward to discussing this during our next meeting. Thank you, J. Nomination of GNSO Candidates for Second Security, Stability, and Resiliency of the DNS (SSR2) Review Team Whereas, 1. On 30 June 2016, ICANN launched a call for volunteers seeking individuals interested in serving as a Volunteer Review Team Member on the SSR2-RT (see https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-3-2016-06-30-en). 2. Under the new Bylaws, each SO/AC participating in the Specific Review may nominate up to 7 members to the review team, for consideration by the SO/AC leadership, for a review team of no more than 21 members. Any SO/AC nominating up to 3 individuals are entitled to have those nominees selected as members to the review team, so long as the nominees meet the applicable criteria for service on the team. 3. The GNSO Council formed a small team to review the candidates that requested GNSO endorsement (see https://community.icann.org/x/xRqsAw<https://community.icann.org/x/xRqsAw)>) taking into account the criteria outlined in the call for volunteers as well as the desire to ensure a RT that is balanced for diversity and expertise. The small team submitted its findings to the GNSO Council on [date]. 4. The GNSO Council considered the findings of the small team. Resolved, 1. The GNSO Council nominates (in alphabetical order): Denise Michel, Eric Osterweil, James Gannon as its primary three candidates for the SSR2-RT, noting that these candidates under the new ICANN Bylaws are entitled to be selected. Furthermore, the GNSO nominates (in alphabetical order): Emily Taylor, Howard Eland, Norm Ritchie, Scott McCormick to be considered for inclusion in the SSR2-RT by the SO-AC Chairs should additional places be available. 2. Noting the lack of diversity (gender, geographic) of the applicants, the GNSO Council encourages Staff to explore ways to encourage gender and geographic diversity in applications for future review teams. 3. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to communicate resolved #1 and #2 to the staff supporting the SSR2-RT. 4. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to inform the applicants that have received endorsement that the GNSO Council expects that, if selected for the SSR2-RT, the applicant will represent the views of the entire GNSO community in their work on the SSR2-RT, and provide regular feedback as a group on the discussions taking place in the SSR2-RT, as well as the positions being taken by GNSO Review Team Members. 5. The GNSO Council requests staff supporting the SSR2-RT and application process to send a response to those applicants who did not receive endorsement (if any), thanking them for their interest. The response should also encourage them to follow the SSR2-RT work, and participate in Public Comments and community discussions.

3 3

Proposed Final Agenda GNSO Council Meeting 19 January at 21:00UTC
by Nathalie Peregrine 09 Jan '17

09 Jan '17

Dear councilors, Please find the Proposed Final Agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting on 19 January at 21:00UTC. The links for item 8 will be provided shortly. PROPOSED FINAL AGENDA FOR GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 January 2017 Please note that all documents referenced in the agenda have been gathered on a Wiki page for convenience and easier access: https://community.icann.org/x/YqzDAw This agenda was established according to the GNSO Operating Procedures<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_coun…> v3.2, updated on 01 September 2016. 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: 21:00 UTC http://tinyurl.com/zocj4py 13:00 Los Angeles; 16:00 Washington; 21:00 London; (Friday 20 January 2017) 00:00 Istanbul; 08:00 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 mins) 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: Minutes of the meeting of the GNSO Council part II on 7 November 2016, posted on XXXXXXXX. Minutes of the meeting of the GNSO Council on 1 December 2016, posted on 19 December 2016. Minutes of the meeting of the GNSO Council on 15 December 2016, posted on 4 January 2017. Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action List (10 mins) 2.1 - Review focus areas and provide updates on specific key themes / topics, to include review of Projects List <https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/project> and Action Item List<https://community.icann.org/x/RgZlAg> Item 3. Consent Agenda (0 mins) Item 4. COUNCIL VOTE – Endorsement of GNSO Representatives to the Second Security, Stability & Resiliency Review Team (SSR-2 RT) (20 minutes) The ICANN Bylaws mandate a periodic review of ICANN’s commitment to “enhance the operational stability, reliability, resiliency, security, and global interoperability of the systems and processes, both internal and external, that directly affect and/or are affected by the Internet's system of unique identifiers that ICANN coordinates”, to be conducted by a community-led Review Team. This security, stability and resiliency (SSR) review has to be conducted no less frequently than once every five years, measured from the date the previous SSR Review Team (RT) was convened. The first SSR RT was formed in October 2010, and it delivered its final report in June 2012. A Call for Volunteers to the SSR-2 RT was issued on 30 June 2016, with applications closing on 15 September 2016. A total of 12 applicants indicated that they were seeking endorsement from the GNSO, for a possible maximum of 7 out of 21 slots on the SSR-2 RT. Under the selection process agreed among the ICANN Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees (SO/ACs), the top 3 nominees from each SO/AC will be guaranteed a slot. A small group of volunteer Councilors have reviewed the list and qualifications of the candidates who are seeking the GNSO’s endorsement. The current slate of applicants can be viewed at https://community.icann.org/x/xRqsAw. Here the Council will decide whether to approve the proposed slate of nominees for GNSO endorsement, as circulated to the Council list on 9 January 2017. 4.1 – Presentation of the motion https://community.icann.org/x/YKzDAw (James Bladel) 4.2 – Council discussion 4.3 – Council vote (voting threshold: simple majority) Item 5. COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Proposal for a Facilitated Discussion between the GAC and the GNSO to Resolve Outstanding Differences in GAC Advice and GNSO Policy Recommendations concerning Second Level Protections for International Governmental Organization (IGO) Acronyms and Certain Names and Acronyms of the Red Cross Movement (25 minutes) On 20 December 2016, the GNSO Council Chairs participated in a teleconference with several members of the ICANN Board, the GAC Chair and several GAC member representatives. The purpose of the call was to discuss possible objectives for, and the scope of, a possible facilitated discussion between the GAC and the GNSO in order to resolve the inconsistencies between GAC advice and GNSO policy recommendations on the topic of IGO and Red Cross protections. These inconsistencies mainly concern second level protections for IGO acronyms and the following Red Cross identifiers: the names of 189 Red Cross National Societies, the names International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and International Committee of the Red Cross, and the acronyms associated with the two international names (IFRC/FICR and ICRC/CICR). The idea for a facilitated discussion had been suggested by the ICANN Board during the second Public Forum at ICANN57, in November 2016. Following the call, the GNSO Chair requested feedback from Councilors regarding any concerns or questions about GNSO participation in the proposed discussion. Board members who had participated in the 20 December call are preparing to circulate a proposed process outline describing the objectives and scope of the proposed discussion. Here the Council will continue its deliberations on the topic, including the timing of the discussions in relation to the work of the ongoing Working Group that is conducting the GNSO’s Policy Development Process on IGO curative rights protection issues. 5.1 – Summary and update (Council Chairs) 5.2 – Council discussion 5.3 – Next steps Item 6. COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Letter from Thick WHOIS Implementation Review Team on Privacy Issues relating to Implementation of the Thick WHOIS Consensus Policy Recommendations (10 minutes) On 15 December 2016, the Thick WHOIS Implementation Review Team (IRT) sent a letter to the GNSO Council describing a number of privacy law developments and how the IRT has considered them (see https://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/irt-to-gnso-council-15dec16-en.pdf). The letter noted that the IRT’s implementation plan has been published for public comment (see https://www.icann.org/public-comments/proposed-implementation-gnso-thick-rd…) and that the IRT does not currently expect the developments in question to affect the timeline for transition to thick WHOIS. Here the Council will discuss the letter, and any actions it may wish to take or feedback it may wish to provide to the IRT on this topic. 6.1 – Summary and update (Amr Elsadr) 6.2 – Council discussion 6.3 – Next steps Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Community Budget Requests for Financial Year 2018 (15 minutes) On 15 December 2016, ICANN launched the FY18 SO-AC Community Additional Budget Request process. This process concerns a dedicated part of the overall ICANN annual budget that is set aside to fund specific requests from the community for activities in that specific Financial Year not already included in the recurring ICANN budget. The deadline for submission of community budget requests for FY2018 is 30 January 2017. Following preliminary review by ICANN staff and community consultations at ICANN58 in March 2018, final assessments are expected to be made by mid-April in time for Board approval by the end of May. The proposed timeline, guidelines and request templates can be found at https://community.icann.org/x/aqXDAw. Here the Council will discuss whether, and what, additional specific FY18 budget requests it may wish to make (distinct from any requests individual GNSO Stakeholder Groups or Constituencies may submit). 7.1 – Summary (GNSO Council Chairs/ Rob Hoggarth) 7.2 – Council discussion 7.3 – Next steps Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Planning for ICANN58 (15 minutes) The GNSO Council had agreed previously on the need to start planning early for ICANN58, and to confirm certain important sessions (including joint meetings with other SO/ACs and the ICANN Board) as fixed in the overall meeting schedule. Advance planning will be helpful for scheduling purposes, including for GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies, coordination between and with other SO/ACs, and ensuring that sufficient time is given over to policy development work. To assist in the Council’s deliberations, staff compiled all GNSO Council input received on the ICANN58 Council Planning Survey: https://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/icann58-council-planning-survey-30nov16-en…. Based on the Council’s deliberations at ICANN58 and its two December 2016 meetings, the Council Chairs, with the assistance of staff, have been developing a proposed ICANN58 schedule for the GNSO Council. The draft GNSO schedule was circulated on [INSERT DATE] (see [INSERT LINK]), and attempts to take into account the current overall block schedule (see https://meetings.icann.org/sites/default/files/icann58_blocksched_draft2.pdf). Here the Council will continue its discussion of scheduling priorities for the GNSO at ICANN58. 8.1 – Status summary (GNSO Council leadership) 8.2 – Council discussion 8.3 – Next steps Item 9: ANY OTHER BUSINESS (10 minutes) Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article 11, Section 11.3(i)) See https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#article11. Appendix 2: GNSO Council Absentee Voting Procedures (GNSO Operating Procedures, Section 4.4) See https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-01sep16-en.pdf. References for Coordinated Universal Time of 21:00 UTC Local time between October and March Winter in the NORTHERN hemisphere ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PST) UTC-8 +0DST 13:00 San José, Costa Rica UTC-6 +0DST 15:00 Iowa City, USA (CST) UTC-6 +0DST 15:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5 +0DST 16:00 Buenos Aires, Argentina (ART) UTC-3+0DST 18:00 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (BRST) UTC-2 +0DST 19:00 London, United Kingdom (GMT) UTC+0DST 21:00 Bonn, Germany (CET) UTC+1+0DST 22:00 Cairo, Egypt, (EET) UTC+2 +0DST 23:00 Istanbul, Turkey (TRT) UTC+3+0DST (20 Jan 2017) 00:00 Singapore (SGT) UTC +8 +0DST (20 Jan 2017) 05:00 Tokyo, Japan (JST) UTC+9+0DST (20 Jan 2017) 06:00 Sydney/Hobart, Australia (AEDT) UTC+11+0DST (20 Jan 2017) 08:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- DST starts/ends on last Sunday of March 2017, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com and http://tinyurl.com/zocj4py Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you very much 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

Re: [council] Letter to GNSO Council from "thick" WHOIS Implementation Review Team (IRT)
by James M. Bladel 09 Jan '17

09 Jan '17

Thanks, Paul. I’m chatting with Marika now, and we hope to finalize the 19 JAN agenda today. J. From: "policy(a)paulmcgrady.com" <policy(a)paulmcgrady.com> Date: Monday, January 9, 2017 at 10:32 To: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel(a)godaddy.com>, GNSO Council List <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: RE: FW: [council] Letter to GNSO Council from "thick" WHOIS Implementation Review Team (IRT) Thanks James. The IPC has its regular call tomorrow, so if there is any way possible to have a draft Jan 19 Council call agenda capturing non-motion items like this, that would be supremely helpful. Otherwise, i'm afraid that many of the topics that end up on the agenda for discussion will be slowed down by "I have to get back to you" wince we won't have another IPC call between now and then. Best, Paul -------- Original Message -------- Subject: FW: [council] Letter to GNSO Council from "thick" WHOIS Implementation Review Team (IRT) From: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel(a)godaddy.com<mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com>> Date: Sun, January 08, 2017 10:56 am To: GNSO Council List <council(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Councilors – Please see the note from Amr (below) and the letter from the “thick WHOIS” IRT (attached), outlining some challenges associated with the implementation of this GNSO Policy and changes to national privacy laws. I propose that we add this topic, and potential next steps, as a discussion item for our next call on 19 JAN. Thank you, J. On 12/17/16, 09:13, "owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Amr Elsadr" <owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of aelsadr(a)egyptig.org<mailto:aelsadr@egyptig.org>> wrote: Hi, The “thick” WHOIS IRT has asked me to forward a letter (attached) sent on its behalf to the GNSO Council. If folks recall, the “thick” WHOIS Consensus Policy recommendations included this: > "As part of the implementation process a legal review of law applicable to the transition of data from a thin to thick model that has not already been considered in the EWG memo is undertaken and due consideration is given to potential privacy issues that may arise from the discussions on the transition from thin to thick Whois, including, for example, guidance on how the long-standing contractual requirement that registrars give notice to, and obtain consent, from each registrant for uses of any personally identifiable data submitted by the registrant should apply to registrations involved in the transition. Should any privacy issues emerge from these transition discussions that were not anticipated by the WG and which would require additional policy consideration, the Implementation Review Team is expected to notify the GNSO Council of these so that appropriate action can be taken.” In June, 2015, ICANN’s Legal Dept. submitted a memo in follow up of the above recommendation, which can be found on this page: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/thick-whois-2016-06-27-en. The IRT believes that the privacy/data protection law environment has changed since the production of the legal memo by ICANN Legal. Although the IRT has not reached any consensus on recommending further policy work as a result of its findings, there is agreement that the shifting privacy/data protection environment may complicate the transition from “thin” to “thick” WHOIS for some contracted parties. This letter is meant to brief the Council on the IRT’s work in that regard. Thanks. Amr

1 0

RE: FW: [council] Letter to GNSO Council from "thick" WHOIS Implementation Review Team (IRT)
by policy＠paulmcgrady.com 09 Jan '17

09 Jan '17

1 0

Reminder deadline today 23:59 UTC: Document and Motion deadline Monday, 9 January 2017 at 23:59 UTC for the GNSO Council Meeting 19 January 2017 at 21:00 UTC
by Nathalie Peregrine 09 Jan '17

09 Jan '17

Dear Councillors, Reports, motions and documents for consideration are due no later than (NLT) 10 days in advance (i.e. MONDAY, 9 January 2017 at 23:59 UTC) of the GNSO Council Meeting on 19 January 2017 at 21:00 UTC. Motions should be sent to the Council mailing list and will then be posted on the Wiki at:https://community.icann.org/x/YKzDAw<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_…> Thank you very much. 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<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gn…>

1 0

Letter to GNSO Council from "thick" WHOIS Implementation Review Team (IRT)
by Amr Elsadr 08 Jan '17

08 Jan '17

Hi, The “thick” WHOIS IRT has asked me to forward a letter (attached) sent on its behalf to the GNSO Council. If folks recall, the “thick” WHOIS Consensus Policy recommendations included this: > "As part of the implementation process a legal review of law applicable to the transition of data from a thin to thick model that has not already been considered in the EWG memo is undertaken and due consideration is given to potential privacy issues that may arise from the discussions on the transition from thin to thick Whois, including, for example, guidance on how the long-standing contractual requirement that registrars give notice to, and obtain consent, from each registrant for uses of any personally identifiable data submitted by the registrant should apply to registrations involved in the transition. Should any privacy issues emerge from these transition discussions that were not anticipated by the WG and which would require additional policy consideration, the Implementation Review Team is expected to notify the GNSO Council of these so that appropriate action can be taken.” In June, 2015, ICANN’s Legal Dept. submitted a memo in follow up of the above recommendation, which can be found on this page: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/thick-whois-2016-06-27-en. The IRT believes that the privacy/data protection law environment has changed since the production of the legal memo by ICANN Legal. Although the IRT has not reached any consensus on recommending further policy work as a result of its findings, there is agreement that the shifting privacy/data protection environment may complicate the transition from “thin” to “thick” WHOIS for some contracted parties. This letter is meant to brief the Council on the IRT’s work in that regard. Thanks. Amr

3 2

FW: GNSO Council Chair and vice Chair Election results - Hyderabad 2016
by Glen de Saint Géry 06 Jan '17

06 Jan '17

Dear Council members, Attached please find the letter informing the ICANN Board of the GNSO Council Chair and Vice Chair election results as per the GNSO Operating Procedures https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-01sep16-en.pdf Unfortunately this communication was delayed - apologies. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen From: Glen de Saint Géry Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 11:32 PM To: Board-Ops-Team(a)icann.org Cc: James M. Bladel, Austin, Donna, Heather Forrest, Marika Konings, Mary Wong, David Olive Subject: GNSO Council Chair and vice Chair Election results - Hyderabad 2016 Dear Board Operations Colleagues, Please be so kind as to forward the attached letter from the GNSO Council to Dr. Crocker and members of the ICANN Board The letter concerns the notification to the Board of the results of the GNSO Council Chair and Vice Chair elections that took place at the Annual General Meeting in Hyderabad in November 2016. The letter will be published on page: https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/correspondence<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_coun…> We humbly apologise for the delayed communication. Thank you. Respectfully submitted. Glen Glen de Saint Géry Manager Supporting Organisations Advisory Committees Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers - ICANN glen(a)icann.org<mailto:glen@icann.org> http://www.icann.org<http://www.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

FW: [community-finance] FY18 SO/AC Additional Budget Requests Process - Official Start
by James M. Bladel 06 Jan '17

06 Jan '17

Councilors - You may have already seen this announcement from your SG/C leadership, but does anyone have any FY18 budget requests from a Council perspective? For example, in Hyderabad we discussed discretionary travel funding for PDP WG leaders who weren’t otherwise sponsored, but no firm decision was taken. Council needs to submit its requests, if any, by 30 JAN, so please bring your ideas to discuss during our next call on 19 JAN. Thanks— J. From: <community-finance-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of ICANN-Controller <controller(a)icann.org> Date: Thursday, December 15, 2016 at 6:47 PM To: "community-finance(a)icann.org" <community-finance(a)icann.org> Subject: [community-finance] FY18 SO/AC Additional Budget Requests Process - Official Start Dear Community Members and Leaders, 15 December 2016 marks the launch of the FY18 SO-AC Community Additional Budget Request process. As you know, this process pertains to a dedicated part of the overall ICANN annual budget that is set aside to fund specific requests from the community for activities that are not already included in the recurring ICANN budget. The timeline and deliverables for the process are as follows: FY18 Community Additional Budget Requests Timeline Start End Kick off and Submission period 12/15/2016 1/30/2017 Preliminary review of requests by ICANN staff 1/31/2017 3/10/2017 SO/AC consultations at ICANN 58 (by request, during Constituents’ Day) 3/11/2017 3/16/2017 Final assessments and recommendations by ICANN staff 3/20/2017 4/14/2017 ICANN Board review and approval at May Board meeting 5/15/2017 5/31/2017 Action items In preparation for the submission, please review the following documents attached with this email: * FY18 Community Additional Budget Requests Process description and timeline * Principles that govern ICANN’s request assessment work * FY18 template request form Please e-mail any questions you may have to controller(a)icann.org<mailto:controller@icann.org>. For updates related to the FY18 SO/AC Additional Budget Requests Process, please access the following web page on the Finance Community Wiki: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=63153499 We look forward to working with you all again on this effort for FY18! Regards, ICANN Staff

1 0

RC / IGO / CRP Updates
by James M. Bladel 05 Jan '17

05 Jan '17

Council Colleagues – At the Second Public Forum in Hyderabad, Bruce Tonkin reported on the Board’s discussions regarding the inconsistencies between GAC Advice and GNSO Policy Recommendations on the subject of RC/IGO protections. At this session, Bruce made the following comment: “The board met yesterday and we had a discussion about, you know, how best to move this forward, and we haven't made any resolution at this meeting because we want to talk to the different parties, but the gist of our suggestion is that we like the idea of some sort of facilitated discussion between the GNSO and GAC. We think it's important that in doing such a discussion, that there's a clear set of shared information and briefing documents that are available for all the parties in that discussion. “ http://schd.ws/hosted_files/icann572016/60/I57%20HYD_Tue08Nov2016-Public%20… Since we left Hyderabad, there hasn’t been much progress to report on this front. However, this week the Council chairs (Donna, Heather and myself) had a brief call with Bruce, Becky and a few other folks from the Board, and also with Thomas Schneider and a few other folks from the GAC. During this call, we brainstormed about a potential for a public session on this topic at ICANN58 in Copenhagen, and also discussed what materials & documents we should gather to ensure a constructive dialog (trialog?). However, before we get too far in to this “facilitated discussion”, we first wanted to check in with the Council (and by extension, your SGs and Cs) and start a conversation to establish some boundaries and get consensus on our direction: · Any concerns about participating with the Board & GAC on this effort? I don’t believe this is the case, but worth asking at the outset. o Also, we’d like to keep the GNSO “delegation” small: Chairs, GAC Liaison (Carlos) but situationally include subject matter experts (Phil, Petter, Thomas Rickert, etc.) · It is not our intention to “negotiate” or “compromise” on the substance of community-developed policy. These are not ours to trade away. o Instead, the goal is to familiarize the other participants with GNSO procedures, provide rationale for how the recommendations were reached, and (only if necessary) describe the process for asking the GNSO community to revisit their earlier recommendations. · Naturally, we would report back to Council with any major developments, decisions or agreements. · Any other thoughts, questions or concerns from this Council. Thanks in advance for your feedback. And on behalf of Heather, Donna and myself: Have a great holiday break! All the best wishes to Councilors, Staff and their families & friends, and looking forward to a productive and prosperous 2017. Thank you, J. ----- James Bladel

3 4