September 2019 - council - lists.icann.org

IMPORTANT: 2020 Strategic Planning Session
by Drazek, Keith Sept. 18, 2019

Sept. 18, 2019

Hi all, Council Leadership and staff just met to kick off our planning for the January 2020 Strategic Planning Session in Los Angeles. We are planning for a cocktail reception on Tuesday night, and a full working day on Friday, including an afternoon meeting and drinks with the ICANN Board. As such, as you make your travel arrangements, plan your return trip to enable your participation, and full Council participation, with the ICANN Board. Thanks, Keith

1 0

**Updated** Final Proposed Agenda GNSO Council Meeting - 19 September 2019 at 21:00 UTC
by Andrea Glandon Sept. 18, 2019

Sept. 18, 2019

Dear all, Please find agenda modified below with updated URLs for the CCT draft and the IRP draft letter. The updates are highlighted below. Final Proposed Agenda 19 September 2019<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Final+Proposed+Agen…> 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/MY-kBg This agenda was established according to the GNSO Operating Procedures<https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-30jan18-en.pdf> v3.3, updated on 30 January 2018 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. GNSO Council meeting held at 21:00 UTC Coordinated Universal Time: 21:00 UTC: https://tinyurl.com/y29q6mfl 16:00 Los Angeles; 17:00 Washington; 22:00 London; (next day) 02:00 Islamabad; 06:00 Tokyo; 07:00 Melbourne GNSO Council Meeting Audio Cast Listen in browser: http://stream.icann.org:8000/stream0<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__stream.icann.org-3A8000…>1<http://stream.icann.org:8000/stream01> Listen in application such as iTunes: http://stream.icann.org:8000/stream01.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 (10 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<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2019/minutes/draft-minute…> of the GNSO Council meeting on the 18 July 2019 were posted on the 02 August 2019 Minutes<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2019/minutes/minutes-coun…> of the GNSO Council meeting on the 22 August 2019 were posted on the 6 September 2019 Item 2: Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action List (10 minutes) 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 minutes) * None Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs (10 minutes) On 10 June 2019, ICANN org communicated to the GNSO Council that the ICANN Board resolution passed on 1 March 2019 – see https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2019-03-01-en [icann.org]<https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2019-03-01-en%20…> - calls for a set of Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice Review Team (CCT-RT) Final Recommendations to be passed through to community groups. As articulated in the Board resolution, “recognizing that the Board has the obligation and responsibility to balance the work of ICANN in order to preserve the ability for ICANN org to serve its Mission and the public interest, the Board decided on three categories of action”: * Accepting recommendations, subject to costing and implementation considerations; * Placing recommendations (in whole or in part) in "Pending" status, directing ICANN org to perform specific actions to enable the Board to take further actions; * Passing recommendations (in whole or in part) to community groups the CCT-RT identified for their consideration. The Board noted fourteen such recommendations (9, 10, 12, 16, 19, 20, 25, 27, 28, 29, 32, 33, 34, 35). The Council was specifically invited to review to pages 1-4 of the scorecard https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/resolutions-final-cct-recs-scor…<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/resolutions-final-cct-recs-scor…> which compile pass-through recommendations, including the groups they are addressed to. The recommendations the ICANN Board resolved to pass through to the GNSO Council, in whole or in part, for its consideration: * Recommendation 10. * Recommendation 16 (in part) Note: this recommendation was also passed through to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG, Registries Stakeholder Group, Registrar Stakeholder Group, Generic Names Supporting Organization, Second Security, Stability & Resiliency of DNS Review Team as suggested by the CCT-RT. In the scorecard, the Board noted that “it is not accepting the policy directives that may be inherent here but rather, passes on such elements of the recommendation to the relevant community groups to consider”. * Recommendation 27. * Recommendation 28. * Recommendation 29. Note: this recommendation was also passed through to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG, as suggested by the CCT-RT. To inform work relating to recommendations 29 and 30, the ICANN Board suggested that the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG could take on, “should they choose to do so, defining the term ‘Global South’ or agreeing on another term to describe underserved or underrepresented regions or stakeholders in coordination with ICANN org”. The Board noted in its resolution that: “in passing these recommendations through, the Board is neither accepting, nor rejecting the recommendations. […] Passing recommendations through to community groups is not a directive that the groups identified should formally address any of the issues within those recommendations. It is within the purview of each group to identify whether work will be taken on and the topics that the group will address” A small group of Council volunteers reviewed the recommendations passed through to the GNSO Council as well as a number of Recommendations were passed through to gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP Working Group and/or Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPM) PDP Working Group. In order to have a better picture of where all the Recommendations passed to the GNSO and its PDPs stand, the GNSO Chair is planning to write to the leadership of the Working Groups seeking their feedback. An initial draft with the small team's proposed GNSO Council response to those 5 Recommendations passed through directly to the GNSO were circulated to the GNSO Council on 23 July for review and consideration with an updated version circulated on 30 August [https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/proposed-…] Here the Council will consider the initial draft and whether and how to coordinate with the PDP WGs to which recommendations were also passed through. 4.1 – Introduction of topic (Pam Little) 4.2 – Council discussion 4.3 – Next steps Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps (15 minutes) The Consensus Policy Implementation Framework (CPIF) provides guidance to ICANN org and the community for implementing policy. However, there is minimal guidance in this document or in other documentation around the review of implemented policies adopted by the GNSO Council. In some cases, a review is explicitly mandated as an element of the PDP WG’s recommendations to the Council, but in some cases, the recommendations are silent in this respect. ICANN org, in consultation with the Council, prepared a draft framework<https://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/post-implementation-policy-review-framewor…> on the approach for post-implementation reviews of Council adopted policy recommendations. The framework provides guidance on a number of questions (e.g., When should a review be initiated when there is no PDP recommendation to do so? What triggers should initiate a review? What are the expected outcomes of the review? Etc.). During its 26 April 2018 meeting, the Council agreed to have ICANN org conduct a review of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP). ICANN org utilized the draft framework for conducting the post-implementation review of the IRTP. On 14 November 2018, ICANN org published<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/irtp-status-2018-11-14-en> the IRTP Policy Status Report for public comment. ICANN org has worked to integrate elements identified in public comment and on 22 April 2019, shared a Revised Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Status Report<https://gnso.icann.org/issues/transfers/irtp-status-22apr19-en.pdf>. As noted in the report, there are no prescribed next steps once the Council is in receipt of the report. As such, here, the Council will discuss possible next steps for the Transfer Policy taking into account the Transfer Policy Review briefing document<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_draf…> prepared by staff and the recent feedback from the Registrar Stakeholder Group (RrSG) regarding its suggested approach. 5.1 – Introduction of topic (Council leadership) 5.2 – Council discussion 5.3 – Next Steps Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report (15 minutes) On 18 April 2019, the Council voted<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+18+April+20…> to approve recommendations 1-4 of Final Report from the IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms PDP WG. The Council also resolved to not approve Recommendation 5 and, ” directs the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs (RPM) PDP to consider, as part of its Phase 2 work, whether an appropriate policy solution can be developed that is generally consistent with Recommendations 1, 2, 3 & 4 of the PDP Final Report and: * accounts for the possibility that an IGO may enjoy jurisdictional immunity in certain circumstances; * does not affect the right and ability of registrants to file judicial proceedings in a court of competent jurisdiction; * preserves registrants’ rights to judicial review of an initial UDRP or URS decision; and * recognizes that the existence and scope of IGO jurisdictional immunity in any particular situation is a legal issue to be determined by a court of competent jurisdiction.” The GNSO Council resolved also to, “amend the charter for the RPMs PDP Working Group to reflect this new instruction accordingly.” Some members of the GNSO Council met with certain members of the GAC and IGOs at ICANN65, where there appeared to be agreement from the GAC/IGOs to support the chartering of this separate work. A small team of Councilors was convened to prepare draft amendments<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/rpms-char…> to the RPMs PDP charter, which was shared with the Council on 10 September 2019. Here, the Council will discuss the draft, but take no action at this time. Consultation with the GAC/IGOs is still required before a motion can be submitted. 6.1 – Introduction of topic (Council leadership / Small team) 6.2 – Council discussion 6.3 – Next Steps Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Org’s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data (10 minutes) On 21 June 2019, the GNSO Council received a letter<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/marby-to-…> from ICANN Org, which was seeking a better understanding of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) Team’s plans “to consider the subject of "data accuracy" as it relates to gTLD registration data and related services, such as the WHOIS Accuracy Reporting System (ARS)<https://whois.icann.org/en/whoisars>.” Further, “ICANN org notes that footnote #6 on page 7 of the EPDP Phase 1 Final Report states: “The topic of accuracy as related to GDPR compliance is expected to be considered further as well as the WHOIS Accuracy Reporting System.” However, it is not clear who would consider this topic and when. Therefore, ICANN org seeks the GNSO Council’s clarification on whether the Phase 2 EPDP Team will be considering the subject of data accuracy, including projects that utilize gTLD registration data, such as WHOIS ARS.” The GNSO Council prepared a response to acknowledge the letter reception. However, the Council still needs to prepare its substantive input to the request from ICANN org. A small team has been working on that substantive response and will provide their initial thoughts on the key themes to be contained in the response. Here, the small team will lead a discussion on the themes of the substantive response. 7.1 – Introduction of topic (Council leadership / small team) 7.2 – Council discussion 7.3 – Next steps Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org’s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures (15 minutes) In the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Expedited Policy Development Process Team Phase 1 (EPDP P1) Final Report<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/epdp-gtld…>, recommendation #27 asked that during the implementation of the policy recommendations, existing policies / procedures be made consistent with the changes to required data elements. ICANN org prepared a draft work plan to address EPDP Phase 1 Recommendation 27, which was shared<https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/2019-August/022994.html> with the GNSO Council and IRT on 27 August. Here, the Council will receive an update from ICANN Org on the status of its implementation work to date on this recommendation. 8.1 – Introduction of topic (ICANN org - Karen Lentz) 8.2 – Council discussion 8.3 – Next steps Item 9: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion (10 minutes) In advance of the 22 August 2019 GNSO Council meeting, the PDP 3.0 Small Team completed five (5) out of fourteen (14) PDP 3.0 improvements, provided an update, and requested feedback by 13 September 2019. Work continued on the rest of the nine (9) improvements in the pipeline, which are at various levels of progress. While a number of improvements are nearing completion, they are not yet at a point where they are ready for Council review. The PDP 3.0 small group has prepared a work plan that covers items leading up to ICANN66, as well as additional elements needed to complete the project. The PDP 3.0 small group is expected to provide a factual update of the work to date to the public comment period for the Next Steps to Improve the Effectiveness of ICANN’s Multistakeholder Model<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/multistakeholder-model-next-steps-201…>. Given the connections between the topics, the PDP 3.0 small group believes that it is in a good position to provide that update. Here, the Council will receive an update on progress made to date and the work plan to complete the PDP 3.0 implementation. 9.1 - Introduction of topic (Rafik Dammak) 9.2 - Council discussion 9.3 - Next steps Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy (10 minutes) On 29 July 2019, Verisign wrote<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/kane-to-namazi-29jul19…> to ICANN org again requesting an extension to the current implementation plan for the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy by one year. The ICANN Board wrote<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/chalaby-t…> to the GNSO Council, asking for the Council’s views on whether it believes the request should be granted. The ICANN Board requested response during or immediately following the GNSO Council meeting on 19 September. A draft response<https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/2019-September/023022.html> was circulated on 6 September, which notes the expected policy work related to the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy, but also notes that the request for deferral is from an ICANN Contracted Party and is not a matter of policy development. Here, the Council will discuss the draft and the underlying conclusions and rationale. 10.1 - Introduction of topic (Rafik Dammak and Pam Little) 10.2 - Council discussion 10.3 - Next steps Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) (10 minutes) On 09 May 2019, ICANN org published a Call to Action for the Independent Review Process Standing Panel, which was intended to help the Independent Review Process Implementation Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) in its critical role of implementing the updated IRP. ICANN org published a series of questions, posed to the various Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees, seeking input to pending issues. The GNSO convened a small team, tasked with preparing a draft response<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/drazek-et…> on behalf of the Council. Here, the small team will seek feedback from the Council on its draft response. 11.1 - Introduction of topic (Small Team) 11.2 - Council discussion 11.3 - Next steps Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS (5 minutes) 12.1 - Draft GNSO Council letter<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/gnso-coun…> to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. 12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote

2 1

Global Public Interest Framework Webinar
by Pam Little Sept. 18, 2019

Sept. 18, 2019

Change of subject line to avoid confusion. Indeed, it seems timely to raise the topic of public interest in the letter from the Council to the Board. However, I do have two concerns over this Global Stakeholder Engagement effort: Overall timeline: This is a highly complex topic so a barely 6-month timeline to finalise this work seems over-ambitious to me, considering the community is already stretched thin with the three major ongoing PDPs, PDP3.0, Evolving ICANN's Governance Model, ATRT3, etc. Timing of the webinar: Could staff please confirm whether there will only be one webinar scheduled for Tuesday, 17 September 2019 at 15:00 UTC and only community leaders are invited to such webinar. If so, it seems odd that a webinar on Global Public Interest Framework is scheduled at a time that disadvantages those from the APAC time zones. I would urge ICANN org to consider hosting two webinars (one of which at a time slot that is APAC region friendly) with both open to all community members. Kind regards, Pam ------------------------------------------------------------------ Sender:Elsa S <elsa.saade(a)gmail.com> Sent At:2019 Sep. 6 (Fri.) 14:33 Recipient:"Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek(a)verisign.com> Cc:gnso-secs@icann.org <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>; council(a)gnso.icann.org <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject:Re: [council] FW: Draft GNSO Council Letter to ICANN Board on EPDP Phase 1 Recommendations I guess it is the best time to highlight the subject! Thank you for sharing Marika. Best, Elsa — On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 11:39 PM Drazek, Keith <kdrazek(a)verisign.com> wrote: Thanks Marika! On Sep 5, 2019, at 7:56 PM, Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org> wrote: In light of Elsa’s comments, you may be particularly interested in the following announcement from the Leadership Digest: NEW: Global Public Interest Framework Webinar Executive: Sally Costerton, Senior Adviser to President and Senior Vice President, Global Stakeholder Engagement FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING You are invited to attend a webinar to learn more about one of the ICANN Board’s operational priorities: the public interest. The global public interest is central to many of ICANN’s primary governance documents, and the ICANN Board hopes to play a role in facilitating a bottom-up, community-driven process to develop a framework as a toolkit for the ICANN community to consider the global public interest. These considerations would not change the process by which decisions are made but could instead serve as tools for the community to reinforce the commitment to the public interest and to demonstrate how specific recommendations, advice, and public comments are in the global public interest. This includes the ICANN community guiding the ICANN Board about the public interest determination the latter must make in its decisions. To learn more about the framework, please read the discussion paper [r20.rs6.net] The Global Public Interest Framework Webinar has been scheduled for Tuesday, 17 September 2019 at 15:00 UTC. To join the webinar, please visit https://icann.zoom.us/j/288558444 Zoom call details Meeting ID: 288 558 444 Find your local number [r20.rs6.net] Time zone converter [r20.rs6.net] Best regards, Marika From: council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Elsa S <elsa.saade(a)gmail.com> Date: Friday, August 30, 2019 at 10:30 To: "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek(a)verisign.com> Cc: "gnso-secs(a)icann.org" <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>, "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] FW: Draft GNSO Council Letter to ICANN Board on EPDP Phase 1 Recommendations Hi Keith and all, Thank you for the edits. I apologize that I haven't had the chance to incorporate this into the document in a new redlined version, but here is my suggested language about Global Public Interest, I'd be happy to review any amendments: We are aware that one of ICANN's core values is to ascertain the global public interest through the bottom-up, multistakeholder policy development processes (1.2(b)(ii) of ICANN's bylaws). However, as the term Global Public Interest is not in the bylaw language for PDPs such as in Section 9a of Annex A of the GNSO Policy Development Process, whereby: "Any PDP Recommendations approved by a GNSO Supermajority Vote shall be adopted by the Board unless, by a vote of more than two-thirds (2/3) of the Board, the Board determines that such policy is not in the best interests of the ICANN community or ICANN" and given that the board has invoked global public interest (or public interest) a number of times in its resolution as the basis of its decision regarding the EPDP phase 1 policy recommendations, the council is concerned with the use of the terms, particularly "Global Public Interest", in the board's letter to the council on EPDP Phase 1. It is important that when invoking public interest generally, that the Board be specific about the material effect that the recommendation has on public interest. Invoking GAC advice is not on its own sufficient. It is also important that when the term Global Public Interest is used, there should be a rationale as to why it is being used instead of the PDP bylaw language. The council is generally concerned about the process that the Board has used to assess the effect of the recommendations on global public interest and would be happy to have a bigger conversation on the issue going forward. Happy to follow up, Elsa -- On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 10:21 AM Drazek, Keith via council <council(a)gnso.icann.org> wrote: Hi all, Final reminder on this letter. We will send at 2000 UTC. Thanks, Keith From: council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> On Behalf Of Drazek, Keith via council Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2019 1:48 PM To: council(a)gnso.icann.org Cc: gnso-secs(a)icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] Draft GNSO Council Letter to ICANN Board on EPDP Phase 1 Recommendations Hi all, Thanks to Darcy, Marie and Tatiana for their continued input on this letter. I have incorporated most of the suggested edits and added the SG/C information we discussed on 22 August and mentioned below. Attached are clean and redlined versions for your review. Please look these over and send me any final comments by this Friday at 2000 UTC. We need to wrap this up and get it sent. Thanks, Keith From: Tatiana Tropina <tatiana.tropina(a)gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2019 1:16 PM To: Marie Pattullo <marie.pattullo(a)aim.be> Cc: Darcy Southwell <darcy.southwell(a)endurance.com>; Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele(a)blacknight.com>; Drazek, Keith <kdrazek(a)verisign.com>; council(a)gnso.icann.org; gnso-secs(a)icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] Draft GNSO Council Letter to ICANN Board on EPDP Phase 1 Recommendations Dear all, during the call, it was agreed that in the bullet point two we could add which constituencies/SGs supported which position - maybe as a footnote? I don't have any language suggested because I wanted to ask Terri or Nathalie for help to get the "headcount" in the footnote right so I won't make any mistakes. Would this be possible? If there are any alternative suggestions to the footnote, I can propose the text, of course. Warm regards, Tanya On Wed, 28 Aug 2019 at 19:06, Marie Pattullo <marie.pattullo(a)aim.be> wrote: Hi all, Following from Darcy’s mail below, please find the suggested amendments from the BC in the attached. Best to all, Marie From: council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> On Behalf Of Darcy Southwell Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2019 4:08 PM To: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele(a)blacknight.com>; Drazek, Keith <kdrazek(a)verisign.com>; council(a)gnso.icann.org Cc: gnso-secs(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [council] Draft GNSO Council Letter to ICANN Board on EPDP Phase 1 Recommendations In follow up to my email below and today's Council discussion, please find my proposed edits to section 2 attached. Thanks, Darcy On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 10:13 AM Darcy Southwell <darcy.southwell(a)endurance.com> wrote: Thanks, all, for preparing this. I’m struggling a bit with section 2. I agree we’ve characterized Council’s position accurately in section 2. But the rest seems confusing. Did we already provide the Board with the written explanation of what was discussed in Marrakech? If not, we should consider explaining that it’s provided now and then be more specific in our ask to the Board. Thanks, Darcy From: council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele(a)blacknight.com> Date: Friday, August 16, 2019 at 8:35 AM To: Keith Drazek <kdrazek(a)verisign.com>, "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Cc: "gnso-secs(a)icann.org" <gnso-secs(a)icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Draft GNSO Council Letter to ICANN Board on EPDP Phase 1 Recommendations Keith and Co Thanks for your work on this. I think it captures pretty accurately where we are at Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ [blacknight.com] https://blacknight.blog/ [blacknight.blog] Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ [michele.blog] Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ [ceo.hosting] ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> on behalf of "Drazek, Keith via council" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Reply to: Keith Drazek <kdrazek(a)verisign.com> Date: Thursday 15 August 2019 at 17:59 To: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Cc: "gnso-secs(a)icann.org" <gnso-secs(a)icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Draft GNSO Council Letter to ICANN Board on EPDP Phase 1 Recommendations Hi all, In preparation for our 22 August GNSO Council meeting, and further Council discussion on this topic, I am attaching an updated draft letter for your review. We have attempted to incorporate everyone’s comments and expressed views in this draft. To summarize, the goal of this letter is to: Ensure the Council is proceeding as expected under Annex A-1 Section 6 of the ICANN Bylaws. Create a record of the Council-Board engagement in Marrakech. Advise the Board of the Council’s current thinking around Recommendation #1, Purpose 2 and Recommendation #12. Seek further input from the Board, and ideally confirm a common understanding or more clearly understand any difference of opinion. Ensure that the Council is setting good precedent in terms of how we engage in this kind of situation. In response to comments from Marie and Flip, we have added language that acknowledges a difference of opinion among Councilors on the subject of Rec #12 and the deletion of data. Please review and provide any comments to the list. We will also discuss next week. Let me know if I missed anything. Thanks to all and I appreciate your patience on this one. Best, Keith From: council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> On Behalf Of Rubens Kuhl Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2019 2:08 PM To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion(a)petillion.law> Cc: gnso-secs(a)icann.org; council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] Draft GNSO Council Letter to ICANN Board on EPDP Phase 1 Recommendations Em 30 de jul de 2019, à(s) 10:14:000, Flip Petillion <fpetillion(a)petillion.law> escreveu: Rubens, I share the feeling that it is uncommon to have a substantive discussion within the Council. However, that is exactly what the Bylaws mandate us to do within the atypical framework of expedited PDPs. Doesn’t the proposed one pager attached to the draft letter also address substance? I don't think the bylaws mandate who specifically does that. It's a substantive discussion, but in the same way we ask WGs to take them, we can ask the RegData EPDP WG to answer the substance. If we engage ourselves in a discussion where we first delegated authority to a WG, we would be disenfranchising them. BTW, Expedited PDPs only differ from Standard PDPs by not having an Issue Report to frame discussions. So everything we does here is a precedent for any future PDP, being an EPDP or not. As to your second comment, I think we owe it to the community to provide the Board with recommendations and reasoning that is legally sound. If certain aspects of privacy have been previously overlooked, now seems the time to correct them. IPC can send Board, PDP or anyone else any communication they see fit at any time. But the discussion here is not that, it's only the Board rationale for not approving the PDP recommendation. Rubens Best regards, Flip Flip Petillion fpetillion(a)petillion.law +32484652653 www.petillion.law [petillion.law] <image001.png> [petillion.law] Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: Rubens Kuhl <rubensk(a)nic.br> Date: Tuesday, 30 July 2019 at 13:22 To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion(a)petillion.law> Cc: Ayden Férdeline <icann(a)ferdeline.com>, "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Draft GNSO Council Letter to ICANN Board on EPDP Phase 1 Recommendations Flip, I find strange we are having a substantive discussion on the topic within the Council. I believe our approach to board denials of PDP recommendation should be to ask the PDP WG what clarifications or positions they have, and relay them to the board. IPC is represented in the PDP so the same content you posted here could be used there while formulating the response, whatever that response would look like. And still on process grounds, it's clear that the board rationale for not approving part of Rec. 12 is different from the IPC rationale you relayed to the Council. But the rationale that needs to be answered to is the Board one, because they've made the decision to not fully approve rec. 12. So while it's interesting to know the overall IPC position on the matter, the topic at hand is the Board decision. Rubens On 30 Jul 2019, at 06:54, Flip Petillion <fpetillion(a)petillion.law> wrote: Hi Ayden, Thank you for your questions and for the opportunity to clarify our position. I understand your questions address the substance of the recommendations and not the GNSO Council’s remit within the Board Approval Process. Regarding your first question: You are correct that the ‘Organisation’ field pertains to information of legal entities and thus should not be subject to GDPR principles (and thus should not be deleted or even redacted). However, this is not treated as such in the Final Report. To avoid that we enter into circular discussions, we started from the premise in the Final Report (and the draft rationale for rec. #12) that the GDPR could apply to the ‘Organisation’ field. Our point is that, in such a case, the practices of both disclosing AND deleting data are subject to GDPR according to article 4 (2). ,The deletion of previously provided data can likewise not occur without a solid purpose, legal basis and safeguards. Regarding your second question: (i) You are correct that the GDPR requires consent to be informed, affirmative and freely given. However, active opt-in consent is only required when relying on consent as a legal basis (art. 6.1.a). The Final Report and the guidance of the EU Authorities and DPAs have established that, depending on the purpose, the performance of the registration contract (art. 6.1.b) and legitimate interest (art. 6.1.f) are the valid legal bases. For the latter, an opt-out mechanism or redaction mechanism can be sufficient to shift the balance in favour of the interested party (cfr. Article 29 WP Guidance on Legitimate Interest) and active opt-in consent is not required. (ii) If you were to rely on consent as a legal basis, normally (and ideally) consent is obtained at the time of collection of the personal data (i.e. the registration of the domain name). It is at this point in time that the data subject (registrant) is properly informed of the processing activities and is engaged in providing the necessary information related to the purpose and legal bases (i.e., performance of the registration agreement). Practice has shown that there are a lot of problems with obtaining consent after the fact (i.e., during the performance of the registration agreement). Quite often data subjects cannot be contacted, are confused about the nature of the opt-in communication, are simply not interested, etc. Accordingly, the requirement of an active opt-in consent on the basis of a ‘review request’ to existing registrants unnecessarily risks losing valid organisation information on a wide scale. I hope this sufficiently answers your questions and clarifies the position of the IPC on this matter. Best regards, Flip Flip Petillion fpetillion(a)petillion.law +32484652653 www.petillion.law [petillion.law] <image001.png> [petillion.law] Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: Ayden Férdeline <icann(a)ferdeline.com> Reply to: Ayden Férdeline <icann(a)ferdeline.com> Date: Tuesday, 30 July 2019 at 00:41 To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion(a)petillion.law> Cc: Maxim Alzoba <m.alzoba(a)gmail.com>, Darcy Southwell <darcy.southwell(a)endurance.com>, "gnso-secs(a)icann.org" <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>, "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Draft GNSO Council Letter to ICANN Board on EPDP Phase 1 Recommendations Hi Flip, Thanks for sharing this input from the IPC. Sorry if this is a stupid question, but since data that does not pertain to natural persons is beyond the scope of the GDPR, I do not understand how you can make the claim that article 4 (2) of the GDPR does not allow for the organisation field to be deleted. Could you please clarify? Thanks. I am also concerned that what you describe below - "Practice has shown that data subjects are generally reluctant to take active steps after their data has been collected to provide active opt-in consent (cfr. opt-in emails)" - sounds like a proposal for not obtaining consent that is valid under the GDPR, which I understand requires consent to be freely given. Kind regards, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Monday, 29 July 2019 18:29, Flip Petillion <fpetillion(a)petillion.law> wrote: Dear Keith, Dear All, The IPC shares the Board’s concern that the option to delete the Organisation fields contents as a result of a refusal or failure to respond by the registrant upon a ‘review request’ by the registrar, risks resulting in a wide scale loss of crucial information about the registrant's identity. While the IPC acknowledges that Recommendation #12 achieved consensus support in the EPDP Team’s Phase 1 Final Report, we agree with the Board that the “or delete the field contents” part of recommendation #12 2) b) is not in the best interests of the ICANN community or ICANN. We therefore do not agree that the recommendation should be resubmitted as is, and also not together with the presented rationale in the draft letter to the Board. Irrespective of the debate as to whether the organisation field may contain personal data or not, the issues considered in the current rationale and the concerns of the Board can both be met by redacting the organisation data in case of an opt-out (or lack of active opt-in) instead of deleting. · The concept of ‘privacy by default/design’ in the GDPR does not automatically necessitate the implementation of an opt-in mechanism (especially considering the legitimate interests attached to the transparency of organisation information online); · The deletion/erasure by a controller of previously provided personal data is also considered ‘processing’ (article 4 (2) GDPR), for which the controller must determine a purpose and proper legal basis. As a result, a registrar cannot simply delete important information provided by the registrant unless (i) the registrant has requested the erasure of the ‘Organisation’ field by exercising his right to erasure (this right must be actively exercised and cannot be inferred), (ii) the retention of the ‘Organisation’ field is no longer necessary for the purposes of processing the domain name registration data (Recommendation #15 implies that the retention period of the data elements would at the minimum be the ‘life of the registration’), or (iii) the registrar can justify the deletion on the basis of another valid legal basis (such as the consent of the registrant). Practice has shown that data subjects are generally reluctant to take active steps after their data has been collected to provide active opt-in consent (cfr. opt-in emails). Together with the expected difficulties in contacting the registrants and verifying their (lack of) consent on a wide scale, the IPC believes (in accordance with the Board Statement) that this would pose a serious and unnecessary risk to lose important registrant information. Procedurally, we fail to see the use of the checks and balances incorporated in the ‘Board Approval Process’ of Annex A-1 Section 6 of the Bylaws if it would be outside the GNSO Council’s remit to allow a modification to the Consensus Policy recommendation delivered by the EPDP Team. Section 6 of Annex A-1 of the Bylaws specifically provides: “At the conclusion of the Council and Board discussions, the Council shall meet to affirm or modify its recommendation, and communicate that conclusion (the "Supplemental Recommendation") to the Board, including an explanation for the then-current recommendation.” The IPC therefore believes it is in the GNSO Council’s remit to consult with the Board and modify a Consensus Policy Recommendation if such modification alleviates concerns raised in the Board Statement and is in the best interest of the ICANN community and ICANN. In accordance with the concern raised in the Board Statement, the IPC therefore believes that the “or delete the field contents” part (deletion option) of Recommendation #12 2) b) should be deleted. Best regards, Flip Flip Petillion fpetillion(a)petillion.law +32484652653 www.petillion.law [petillion.law] <image002.png> [petillion.law] Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: Flip Petillion <fpetillion(a)petillion.law> Date: Monday, 29 July 2019 at 21:41 To: Maxim Alzoba <m.alzoba(a)gmail.com>, Darcy Southwell <darcy.southwell(a)endurance.com> Cc: "gnso-secs(a)icann.org" <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>, "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Draft GNSO Council Letter to ICANN Board on EPDP Phase 1 Recommendations Dear Keith, Dear All, Due to the vacation period, we will be able to send in the IPC comments later today or tomorrow morning my time. Sorry for the inconvenience. Best regards, Flip Flip Petillion fpetillion(a)petillion.law +32484652653 www.petillion.law [petillion.law] <image003.png> [petillion.law] Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Maxim Alzoba <m.alzoba(a)gmail.com> Date: Thursday, 25 July 2019 at 18:53 To: Darcy Southwell <darcy.southwell(a)endurance.com> Cc: "gnso-secs(a)icann.org" <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>, "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Draft GNSO Council Letter to ICANN Board on EPDP Phase 1 Recommendations We support the current draft of the letter and comments of Darcy. Also I'd like to underline , that the modification of the recommendations is for GNSO Council, not for the Board ,and that doing micro management of PDPs is not in the GNSO Council's role. Maxim Alzoba On Wed, Jul 24, 2019, 22:44 Darcy Southwell <darcy.southwell(a)endurance.com> wrote: Thanks you, Keith. The Registrar Stakeholder Group (RrSG) agrees that it's outside the Council's remit to modify, or even suggest modification of, a consensus recommendation from a PDP working group and therefore objects to modifying Recommendation 12 to remove the deletion option. The Council should seek to formalize the rationale provided to the Board in Marrakech and resubmit the consensus recommendation to the Board for approval. Therefore, RrSG supports the Council's letter to the Board as written regarding Recommendation 12. Regarding Recommendation 1, Purpose 2, the EPDP Team and Board have been quite clear that further legal analysis is necessary to ensure Purpose 2 is drafted consistent with applicable laws. In its Final Report, the EPDP Team recommended Purpose 2 be further evaluated during phase 2 of the EPDP. In its resolution, the Board clearly instructed ICANN Org to engage the DPAs to accomplish the necessary legal analysis to perform the work. That legal analysis must be completed before the EPDP Team can even begin to consider how to revise Purpose 2. Further, it is not typical for the Council to instruct a PDP as to when it works on such specific tasks. It is up to the PDP Working Group, with its leadership and coordinating with ICANN staff, to prioritize its work. So far, the EPDP Team has prioritized the work related to the System for Standardized Access to Non-Public Registration Data, consistent with its Charter, and with the concerns of many of the GNSO Councilors. At this point, the RrSG sees no reason for the Council to intervene to reprioritize the Purpose 2 work ahead of the chartered work. Best, Darcy On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 12:30 AM Drazek, Keith via council <council(a)gnso.icann.org> wrote: Hi Marie, Thanks for your initial feedback here, and for the discussion during yesterday’s Council call. On your second point below, related to the Board’s treatment of Recommendation 12, I believe it is outside the Council’s remit to suggest, or even allow, a modification to the Consensus Policy recommendation delivered to us by the EPDP Team, and subsequently delivered by Council to the Board. In my view, it is the role of Council to now hold the Board accountable for its decision to not accept Rec 12 in full, and to call for the Board to accept it following the clarification they requested. I welcome further discussion on these items following discussion with our respective SGs and Cs, but that’s my current view. Best, Keith From: Marie Pattullo <marie.pattullo(a)aim.be> Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2019 10:53 PM To: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek(a)verisign.com> Cc: gnso-secs(a)icann.org; council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Draft GNSO Council Letter to ICANN Board on EPDP Phase 1 Recommendations Hi Keith, Thanks for sharing the draft. I’m afraid I haven’t been able to discuss this much with our members yet (sorry) but on an initial reading, the BC does have some concerns. On your first point, on rec 1, while the first sentence is great, we have problems with the second. As you know from the comments we attached to Janis’ letter, we really need to give the EPDP Team a clear instruction to reword this and replace the placeholder language; I understand that it’s not on the Team-- -- Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade

3 3

FYI: 16 September Update
by Michelle DeSmyter Sept. 16, 2019

Sept. 16, 2019

FYI: [http://r20.rs6.net/on.jsp?ca=ba6fe1f3-e823-497a-83b0-266f801ffcb3&a=1122025…] Monday, 16 September 2019 ICANN Community Leadership Digest [https://files.constantcontact.com/304b3fd3501/31f30ab5-1445-45c3-aef7-c0ea4…] This twice-weekly digest helps ICANN community leaders track requests and provides updates from ICANN org. TABLE OF CONTENTS Information Sharing · ICANN Board Leadership Slate · THIS WEEK: Global Public Interest Framework Webinars ICANN66 Planning · THIS WEEK: Publication Support for ICANN66 · SAVE THE DATES: ICANN66 Prep Week · SAVE THE DATE: ICANN66 Community Leadership Reception Public Comment · Next Steps to Improve the Effectiveness of ICANN's Multistakeholder Model · Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice Review Team (CCT-RT) Accepted Recommendations – Plan for Implementation and Next Steps Information Sharing ICANN Board Leadership Slate Executive: David Olive, Senior Vice President, Policy Development Support FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING Please read the blog post [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> by ICANN Board Chair Cherine Chalaby about the selection of Maarten Botterman as the next ICANN Board Chair and Léon Felipe Sánchez Ambia as the next ICANN Board Vice Chair. THIS WEEK: Global Public Interest Framework Webinars Executive: Sally Costerton, Senior Adviser to President and Senior Vice President, Global Stakeholder Engagement FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING The global public interest is central to many of ICANN’s primary governance documents, and the ICANN Board hopes to play a role in facilitating a bottom-up, community-driven process to develop a framework as a toolkit for the ICANN community to consider the global public interest. These considerations would not change the process by which decisions are made but could instead serve as tools for the community to reinforce the commitment to the public interest and to demonstrate how specific recommendations, advice, and public comments are in the global public interest. This includes the ICANN community guiding the ICANN Board about the public interest determination the latter must make in its decisions. To learn more about the framework, please read the discussion paper (PDF) [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> and for more information, visit the wiki [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>. Two Global Public Interest Framework webinars have been scheduled. The information will be the same in both webinars. Following the webinars, there will be a community consultation to gather community input on the proposed framework. The consultation will run from Wednesday, 18 September 2019 to Friday, 18 October 2019. Community feedback is welcome via email at gpitoolkit(a)icann.org<mailto:gpitoolkit@icann.org>. Webinar #1 Tuesday, 17 September 2019 15:00 UTC Remote Participation: https://icann.zoom.us/j/288558444 [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Meeting ID: 288 558 444 Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/abhtJZkRdd [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Webinar #2 Thursday, 19 September 2019 03:00 UTC Remote Participation: https://icann.zoom.us/j/532026397 [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Meeting ID: 532 026 397 Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/abhtJZkRdd [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> ICANN66 Planning THIS WEEK: Publication Support for ICANN66 Executive: David Olive, Senior Vice President, Policy Development Support FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING Print-Only Deadline If you only need your ICANN66 publication printed (meaning your publication is ready to send directly to the printer and needs no translation or design/layout modifications), please provide the file along with the quantity you want printed and dimensions of the publication by Friday, 20 September 2019. Please work directly with your Policy support staff to submit these requests to chantelle.doerksen(a)icann.org and liana.teo(a)icann.org. SAVE THE DATES: ICANN66 Prep Week Executive: David Olive, Senior Vice President, Policy Development Support FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING ICANN66 Prep Week will take place 14-17 October 2019. This initiative aims to streamline the pre-ICANN Public Meeting experience to improve community preparation and increase awareness of plenary session topics. Stay tuned for an announcement with the full schedule and remote participation details. SAVE THE DATE: ICANN66 Community Leadership Reception Executive: David Olive, Senior Vice President, Policy Development Support FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING The ICANN66 Community Leadership Reception with members of the ICANN Board and Executive Team will be held on Friday, 1 November 2019. More details including location and specific time will be shared later. Public Comment Next Steps to Improve the Effectiveness of ICANN's Multistakeholder Model [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Close Date: Monday, 14 October 2019 Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice Review Team (CCT-RT) Accepted Recommendations – Plan for Implementation and Next Steps [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Close Date: Monday, 21 October 2019 Volume 1, Issue 50 | Archive [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> | Next Issue: Thursday, 19 September 2019 ICANN | 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300, Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Unsubscribe so-ac-sg-cleaders(a)icann.org [visitor.constantcontact.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__visitor.constantcontac…> Update Profile [visitor.constantcontact.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__visitor.constantcontac…> | About Constant Contact [constantcontact.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.constantcontact.com…> Sent by david.olive(a)icann.org<mailto:david.olive@icann.org> in collaboration with [Trusted Email from Constant Contact - Try it FREE today.][constantcontact.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.constantcontact.com…> Try email marketing for free today! [constantcontact.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.constantcontact.com…>

1 0

PLEASE SHARE: ICANN66 Prep Week Announcement
by Terri Agnew Sept. 16, 2019

Sept. 16, 2019

Dear all, Please find the ICANN66 Prep Week announcement published on the ICANN website below. This includes the link to register for Pre-ICANN66 Policy Update Webinar along with six other webinars scheduled that week. Please share it with your groups and mailing lists as appropriate. https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2019-09-16-en Kind regards, Terri Register for ICANN66 Prep Week Webinars LOS ANGELES – 16 September 2019 – Today, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) released the schedule for ICANN66 Prep Week, which features a series of seven webinars to prepare the community ahead of its Annual General Meeting in November. To attend any of the below webinars, please register here<http://go.icann.org/prepweeksignup> by 11 October to receive joining instructions. You may also submit questions during the registration process. All registered attendees will receive participation details days before the webinar dates. ICANN66 Prep Week Webinars Schedule Monday, 14 October 2019 16:00 UTC | Global Stakeholder Engagement (GSE) Update: What to Expect at ICANN66 Tuesday, 15 October 2019 16:00 UTC | ICANN66 Plenary Session: DNS Abuse 23:00 UTC | Pre-ICANN66 Contractual Compliance Update Wednesday, 16 October 2019 16:00 UTC | ICANN66 Plenary Session: Evolution of ICANN's Multistakeholder Model 23:00 UTC | Multistakeholder Strategy and Strategic Initiatives (MSSI) Update Thursday, 17 October 2019 12:00 UTC | Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) Policy Update 16:00 UTC | Pre-ICANN66 Policy Update All webinars be in English. Materials from the Pre-ICANN66 Policy Update will also be available in French. Recordings and materials will be posted here<https://meetings.icann.org/en/montreal66-prep-week>. Prep Week was established to help streamline the pre-meeting experience, as well as increase awareness of plenary topics, foster deeper conversations and enhance briefings and readout sessions.

1 0

Re: [council] ICANN Org reply to the GNSO Council regarding the Evolution of the Multistakeholder Model of Governance Project
by Michele Neylon - Blacknight Sept. 14, 2019

Sept. 14, 2019

The question both I and I believe Maxim asked was very simple. The response we’ve been sent, however, does not really answer it. I also find it more than a little odd that it took this long to get a response. Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org> Date: Friday 13 September 2019 at 00:28 To: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] ICANN Org reply to the GNSO Council regarding the Evolution of the Multistakeholder Model of Governance Project Dear Councilors, Please find below a note from Theresa Swinehart, Senior Vice President for ICANN Org’s Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI) department, responding to the Council’s question as to the anticipated timing, funding and expected deliverables for the Evolution of the Multistakeholder Model of Governance project. SENT ON BEHALF OF THERESA SWINEHART Dear GNSO Council members, Thank you for the questions about the Evolution of ICANN’s Multistakeholder Model project. The project derives from ICANN’s Strategic Plan; specifically the strategic objective on governance, which stems from community input during trend identification exercises. The project is on track to conclude shortly after ICANN66, with the publication of a work plan outlining issues affecting the effective and efficient functioning of ICANN’s MSM, which groups will address those issues, how and by when. The work plan will be published for public comment in conjunction with ICANN’s Five-Year Operating and Financial Plan, which itself will be open for public comment in late 2019. A public comment period<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/multistakeholder-model-next-steps-201…> recently opened to gather community feedback on the issues to be addressed in the work plan, including whether the issues are already addressed by other solutions that are either being developed or are being implemented; what solutions may be developed if no solution exists; which group (community, Board or org) should be tasked with developing a solution; and how the issue ought to be prioritized. This project is funded from the FY20 adopted budget. The MSSI team is providing support, including help with hosting webinars, ICANN meeting sessions, posting documents and communications for public comment, etc. We hope the GNSO community will participate, and we hope they will find the two webinars<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2019-08-27-en> held on 11 and 12 September on the public comment proceedings helpful regarding any questions they may have. Thank you. Best regards, Theresa

2 1

Re: [council] IRP-IOT Small Team: DRAFT GNSO Input on Questions Relating to the Issues for Considerations Regarding the IRP IOT
by Julie Hedlund Sept. 13, 2019

Sept. 13, 2019

Dear GNSO Councilors, Please see the attached slightly revised version of the document. Kind regards, Julie From: council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org> Date: Monday, September 9, 2019 at 7:11 PM To: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] IRP-IOT Small Team: DRAFT GNSO Input on Questions Relating to the Issues for Considerations Regarding the IRP IOT Dear GNSO Councilors, As you may recall, Elsa Saade and Flip Petillion volunteered to be the small team to draft a possible GNSO Council response to the request for the community to respond to the questions relating to the IRP Implementation Oversight Team (IOT) as requested at ICANN65. The original deadline to respond to ICANN Org was 15 April 2019, per the Blog Post from Göran Marby dated 09 March 2019: https://www.icann.org/news/blog/independent-review-process-standing-panel-c… [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_news_blo…>. In May Samantha Eisner and David McCauley gave a presentation on the IRP-IOT to the GNSO Council. At ICANN65 the Council asked for volunteers to draft possible GNSO Council responses, which Elsa and Flip have now done and it is attach for your consideration after considerable discussion and upon reviewing the comments provided by the GNSO Community. We have confirmed with Samantha Eisner that ICANN Org is still interested in receiving input from the GNSO. This document is on the agenda for discussion for the GNSO Council meeting on Thursday, 19 September. In the meantime, please let us know if you have any questions or comments. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund on behalf of Elsa Saade and Flip Petillion

1 0

GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#323]
by ICANN Sept. 13, 2019

Sept. 13, 2019

1 0

Final Proposed Agenda GNSO Council Meeting - 19 September 2019 at 21:00 UTC
by Andrea Glandon Sept. 13, 2019

Sept. 13, 2019

Dear all, Please find below the final proposed agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting on 19 September 2019 at 21:00 UTC. Final GNSO Council Agenda 19 September 2019 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/MY-kBg This agenda was established according to the GNSO Operating Procedures<https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-30jan18-en.pdf> v3.3, updated on 30 January 2018 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. GNSO Council meeting held at 21:00 UTC Coordinated Universal Time: 21:00 UTC: https://tinyurl.com/y29q6mfl 16:00 Los Angeles; 17:00 Washington; 22:00 London; (next day) 02:00 Islamabad; 06:00 Tokyo; 07:00 Melbourne GNSO Council Meeting Audio Cast Listen in browser: http://stream.icann.org:8000/stream0<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__stream.icann.org-3A8000…>1 Listen in application such as iTunes: http://stream.icann.org:8000/stream01.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 (10 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<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2019/minutes/draft-minute…> of the GNSO Council meeting on the 18 July 2019 were posted on the 02 August 2019 Minutes<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2019/minutes/minutes-coun…> of the GNSO Council meeting on the 22 August 2019 were posted on the 6 September 2019 Item 2: Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action List (10 minutes) 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 minutes) * None Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs (10 minutes) On 10 June 2019, ICANN org communicated to the GNSO Council that the ICANN Board resolution passed on 1 March 2019 – see https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2019-03-01-en [icann.org]<https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2019-03-01-en%20…> - calls for a set of Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice Review Team (CCT-RT) Final Recommendations to be passed through to community groups. As articulated in the Board resolution, “recognizing that the Board has the obligation and responsibility to balance the work of ICANN in order to preserve the ability for ICANN org to serve its Mission and the public interest, the Board decided on three categories of action”: * Accepting recommendations, subject to costing and implementation considerations; * Placing recommendations (in whole or in part) in "Pending" status, directing ICANN org to perform specific actions to enable the Board to take further actions; * Passing recommendations (in whole or in part) to community groups the CCT-RT identified for their consideration. The Board noted fourteen such recommendations (9, 10, 12, 16, 19, 20, 25, 27, 28, 29, 32, 33, 34, 35). The Council was specifically invited to review to pages 1-4 of the scorecard https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/resolutions-final-cct-recs-scor…<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/resolutions-final-cct-recs-scor…> which compile pass-through recommendations, including the groups they are addressed to. The recommendations the ICANN Board resolved to pass through to the GNSO Council, in whole or in part, for its consideration: * Recommendation 10. * Recommendation 16 (in part) Note: this recommendation was also passed through to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG, Registries Stakeholder Group, Registrar Stakeholder Group, Generic Names Supporting Organization, Second Security, Stability & Resiliency of DNS Review Team as suggested by the CCT-RT. In the scorecard, the Board noted that “it is not accepting the policy directives that may be inherent here but rather, passes on such elements of the recommendation to the relevant community groups to consider”. * Recommendation 27. * Recommendation 28. * Recommendation 29. Note: this recommendation was also passed through to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG, as suggested by the CCT-RT. To inform work relating to recommendations 29 and 30, the ICANN Board suggested that the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG could take on, “should they choose to do so, defining the term ‘Global South’ or agreeing on another term to describe underserved or underrepresented regions or stakeholders in coordination with ICANN org”. The Board noted in its resolution that: “in passing these recommendations through, the Board is neither accepting, nor rejecting the recommendations. […] Passing recommendations through to community groups is not a directive that the groups identified should formally address any of the issues within those recommendations. It is within the purview of each group to identify whether work will be taken on and the topics that the group will address” A small group of Council volunteers reviewed the recommendations passed through to the GNSO Council as well as a number of Recommendations were passed through to gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP Working Group and/or Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPM) PDP Working Group. In order to have a better picture of where all the Recommendations passed to the GNSO and its PDPs stand, the GNSO Chair is planning to write to the leadership of the Working Groups seeking their feedback. An initial draft with the small team's proposed GNSO Council response to those 5 Recommendations passed through directly to the GNSO were circulated to the GNSO Council on 23 July for review and consideration [https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/proposed-…] Here the Council will consider the initial draft and whether and how to coordinate with the PDP WGs to which recommendations were also passed through. 4.1 – Introduction of topic (Pam Little) 4.2 – Council discussion 4.3 – Next steps Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps (15 minutes) The Consensus Policy Implementation Framework (CPIF) provides guidance to ICANN org and the community for implementing policy. However, there is minimal guidance in this document or in other documentation around the review of implemented policies adopted by the GNSO Council. In some cases, a review is explicitly mandated as an element of the PDP WG’s recommendations to the Council, but in some cases, the recommendations are silent in this respect. ICANN org, in consultation with the Council, prepared a draft framework<https://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/post-implementation-policy-review-framewor…> on the approach for post-implementation reviews of Council adopted policy recommendations. The framework provides guidance on a number of questions (e.g., When should a review be initiated when there is no PDP recommendation to do so? What triggers should initiate a review? What are the expected outcomes of the review? Etc.). During its 26 April 2018 meeting, the Council agreed to have ICANN org conduct a review of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP). ICANN org utilized the draft framework for conducting the post-implementation review of the IRTP. On 14 November 2018, ICANN org published<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/irtp-status-2018-11-14-en> the IRTP Policy Status Report for public comment. ICANN org has worked to integrate elements identified in public comment and on 22 April 2019, shared a Revised Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Status Report<https://gnso.icann.org/issues/transfers/irtp-status-22apr19-en.pdf>. As noted in the report, there are no prescribed next steps once the Council is in receipt of the report. As such, here, the Council will discuss possible next steps for the Transfer Policy taking into account the Transfer Policy Review briefing document<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_draf…> prepared by staff and the recent feedback from the Registrar Stakeholder Group (RrSG) regarding its suggested approach. 5.1 – Introduction of topic (Council leadership) 5.2 – Council discussion 5.3 – Next Steps Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report (15 minutes) On 18 April 2019, the Council voted<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+18+April+20…> to approve recommendations 1-4 of Final Report from the IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms PDP WG. The Council also resolved to not approve Recommendation 5 and, ” directs the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs (RPM) PDP to consider, as part of its Phase 2 work, whether an appropriate policy solution can be developed that is generally consistent with Recommendations 1, 2, 3 & 4 of the PDP Final Report and: * accounts for the possibility that an IGO may enjoy jurisdictional immunity in certain circumstances; * does not affect the right and ability of registrants to file judicial proceedings in a court of competent jurisdiction; * preserves registrants’ rights to judicial review of an initial UDRP or URS decision; and * recognizes that the existence and scope of IGO jurisdictional immunity in any particular situation is a legal issue to be determined by a court of competent jurisdiction.” The GNSO Council resolved also to, “amend the charter for the RPMs PDP Working Group to reflect this new instruction accordingly.” Some members of the GNSO Council met with certain members of the GAC and IGOs at ICANN65, where there appeared to be agreement from the GAC/IGOs to support the chartering of this separate work. A small team of Councilors was convened to prepare draft amendments<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/rpms-char…> to the RPMs PDP charter, which was shared with the Council on 10 September 2019. Here, the Council will discuss the draft, but take no action at this time. Consultation with the GAC/IGOs is still required before a motion can be submitted. 6.1 – Introduction of topic (Council leadership / Small team) 6.2 – Council discussion 6.3 – Next Steps Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Org’s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data (10 minutes) On 21 June 2019, the GNSO Council received a letter<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/marby-to-…> from ICANN Org, which was seeking a better understanding of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) Team’s plans “to consider the subject of "data accuracy" as it relates to gTLD registration data and related services, such as the WHOIS Accuracy Reporting System (ARS)<https://whois.icann.org/en/whoisars>.” Further, “ICANN org notes that footnote #6 on page 7 of the EPDP Phase 1 Final Report states: “The topic of accuracy as related to GDPR compliance is expected to be considered further as well as the WHOIS Accuracy Reporting System.” However, it is not clear who would consider this topic and when. Therefore, ICANN org seeks the GNSO Council’s clarification on whether the Phase 2 EPDP Team will be considering the subject of data accuracy, including projects that utilize gTLD registration data, such as WHOIS ARS.” The GNSO Council prepared a response to acknowledge the letter reception. However, the Council still needs to prepare its substantive input to the request from ICANN org. A small team has been working on that substantive response and will provide their initial thoughts on the key themes to be contained in the response. Here, the small team will lead a discussion on the themes of the substantive response. 7.1 – Introduction of topic (Council leadership / small team) 7.2 – Council discussion 7.3 – Next steps Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org’s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures (15 minutes) In the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Expedited Policy Development Process Team Phase 1 (EPDP P1) Final Report<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/epdp-gtld…>, recommendation #27 asked that during the implementation of the policy recommendations, existing policies / procedures be made consistent with the changes to required data elements. ICANN org prepared a draft work plan to address EPDP Phase 1 Recommendation 27, which was shared<https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/2019-August/022994.html> with the GNSO Council and IRT on 27 August. Here, the Council will receive an update from ICANN Org on the status of its implementation work to date on this recommendation. 8.1 – Introduction of topic (ICANN org - Karen Lentz) 8.2 – Council discussion 8.3 – Next steps Item 9: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion (10 minutes) In advance of the 22 August 2019 GNSO Council meeting, the PDP 3.0 Small Team completed five (5) out of fourteen (14) PDP 3.0 improvements, provided an update, and requested feedback by 13 September 2019. Work continued on the rest of the nine (9) improvements in the pipeline, which are at various levels of progress. While a number of improvements are nearing completion, they are not yet at a point where they are ready for Council review. The PDP 3.0 small group has prepared a work plan that covers items leading up to ICANN66, as well as additional elements needed to complete the project. The PDP 3.0 small group is expected to provide a factual update of the work to date to the public comment period for the Next Steps to Improve the Effectiveness of ICANN’s Multistakeholder Model<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/multistakeholder-model-next-steps-201…>. Given the connections between the topics, the PDP 3.0 small group believes that it is in a good position to provide that update. Here, the Council will receive an update on progress made to date and the work plan to complete the PDP 3.0 implementation. 9.1 - Introduction of topic (Rafik Dammak) 9.2 - Council discussion 9.3 - Next steps Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy (10 minutes) On 29 July 2019, Verisign wrote<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/kane-to-namazi-29jul19…> to ICANN org again requesting an extension to the current implementation plan for the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy by one year. The ICANN Board wrote<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/chalaby-t…> to the GNSO Council, asking for the Council’s views on whether it believes the request should be granted. The ICANN Board requested response during or immediately following the GNSO Council meeting on 19 September. A draft response<https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/2019-September/023022.html> was circulated on 6 September, which notes the expected policy work related to the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy, but also notes that the request for deferral is from an ICANN Contracted Party and is not a matter of policy development. Here, the Council will discuss the draft and the underlying conclusions and rationale. 10.1 - Introduction of topic (Rafik Dammak and Pam Little) 10.2 - Council discussion 10.3 - Next steps Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) (10 minutes) On 09 May 2019, ICANN org published a Call to Action for the Independent Review Process Standing Panel, which was intended to help the Independent Review Process Implementation Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) in its critical role of implementing the updated IRP. ICANN org published a series of questions, posed to the various Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees, seeking input to pending issues. The GNSO convened a small team, tasked with preparing a draft response<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/drazek-et…> on behalf of the Council. Here, the small team will seek feedback from the Council on its draft response. 11.1 - Introduction of topic (Small Team) 11.2 - Council discussion 11.3 - Next steps Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS (5 minutes) 12.1 - Draft GNSO Council letter<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/gnso-coun…> to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. 12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote _______________________________ 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/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/op-proced… References for Coordinated Universal Time of 21:00 UTC Local time between March and October Summer in the NORTHERN hemisphere ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PDT) UTC-7 14:00 San José, Costa Rica (CST) UTC-6 15:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EDT) UTC-4 17:00 Buenos Aires, Argentina (ART) UTC-3 18:00 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (BRT) UTC-3 18:00 London, United Kingdom (GMT) UTC+1 22:00 Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo (WAT) UTC+1 22:00 Paris, France (CET) UTC+2 23:00 Moscow, Russia (MSK) UTC +3 (+1 day) 00:00 Islamabad, Pakistan (PKT) UTC+5 (+1 day) 02:00 Singapore (SGT) UTC+8 (+1 day) 05:00 Tokyo, Japan (JST) UTC+9 (+1 day) 06:00 Melbourne, Australia (AEDT) UTC+11 (+1 day) 07:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- DST starts/ends on Sunday 27 of October 2019, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) for EU countries and on Sunday 03 of November 2019 for the US. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com<http://www.timeanddate.com/> and https://tinyurl.com/y29q6mfl

1 0

FOR REVIEW: Draft GNSO Council Letter to ICANN Board on NCAP-SubPro Dependencies
by Drazek, Keith Sept. 13, 2019

Sept. 13, 2019

Hi all, Attached for your review is a draft letter from the GNSO Council to the ICANN Board concerning dependencies between the NCAP and Subsequent Procedures PDP. Please review and advise if you have any comments or questions. We can discuss on the list and this will be included on the agenda for our 19 September GNSO Council meeting. Thanks, Keith

1 1

ICANN Org reply to the GNSO Council regarding the Evolution of the Multistakeholder Model of Governance Project
by Mary Wong Sept. 13, 2019

Sept. 13, 2019

Dear Councilors, Please find below a note from Theresa Swinehart, Senior Vice President for ICANN Org’s Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI) department, responding to the Council’s question as to the anticipated timing, funding and expected deliverables for the Evolution of the Multistakeholder Model of Governance project. SENT ON BEHALF OF THERESA SWINEHART Dear GNSO Council members, Thank you for the questions about the Evolution of ICANN’s Multistakeholder Model project. The project derives from ICANN’s Strategic Plan; specifically the strategic objective on governance, which stems from community input during trend identification exercises. The project is on track to conclude shortly after ICANN66, with the publication of a work plan outlining issues affecting the effective and efficient functioning of ICANN’s MSM, which groups will address those issues, how and by when. The work plan will be published for public comment in conjunction with ICANN’s Five-Year Operating and Financial Plan, which itself will be open for public comment in late 2019. A public comment period<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/multistakeholder-model-next-steps-201…> recently opened to gather community feedback on the issues to be addressed in the work plan, including whether the issues are already addressed by other solutions that are either being developed or are being implemented; what solutions may be developed if no solution exists; which group (community, Board or org) should be tasked with developing a solution; and how the issue ought to be prioritized. This project is funded from the FY20 adopted budget. The MSSI team is providing support, including help with hosting webinars, ICANN meeting sessions, posting documents and communications for public comment, etc. We hope the GNSO community will participate, and we hope they will find the two webinars<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2019-08-27-en> held on 11 and 12 September on the public comment proceedings helpful regarding any questions they may have. Thank you. Best regards, Theresa

2 1

Update: PDP 3.0 and Council Comments on the MSM Evolution Effort
by Drazek, Keith Sept. 12, 2019

Sept. 12, 2019

Hi all, In preparation for our next Council call on 19 September, I'm providing a brief update here on next steps for developing Council comments on the MSM Evolution effort. As you know, there were two webinars this week hosted by Brian Cute providing the community an update on his work, and a public comment period has been opened. The deadline for those comments is 28 October 2019. Here's the link: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/multistakeholder-model-next-steps-201… Given that the GNSO Council's PDP 3.0 work and the MSM Evolution effort have some potential overlap and commonality, the Council leadership team believes it's appropriate for our PDP 3.0 small group to take the lead on drafting Council's MSM Evolution comments. If anyone else would like to join the effort, you are welcome to do so, but it will be led by Rafik and Pam under PDP 3.0 small team coordination. Of course, any comments developed will be subject to full Council review. Please let me know if you have any questions. Best, Keith

1 0

Reminder: Volunteer(s) needed! ICANN66 GNSO Informal Council dinner
by Nathalie Peregrine Sept. 12, 2019

Sept. 12, 2019

Dear all, A friendly reminder to please let me know if you are able to assist with the ICANN66 GNSO Informal Council dinner. As per usual, staff will be undergoing the initial research and presenting to the councilor-sponsor a selection of venues. And who doesn’t enjoy perusing restaurant menu options? ☺ Thank you for your input! Kind regards, Nathalie From: Gnso-secs <gnso-secs-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine(a)icann.org> Date: Friday, August 30, 2019 at 3:57 PM To: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Cc: "gnso-secs(a)icann.org" <gnso-secs(a)icann.org> Subject: [gnso-secs] Volunteer(s) needed! ICANN66 GNSO Informal Council dinner Dear councilors, ICANN66 is fast approaching, and with that, as per tradition, the GNSO Informal Council dinner will need a councilor or councilors to sponsor the event. The dinner is scheduled to take place on Sunday 3rd November 2019 from 19:00 local time onwards. Staff is on hand of course to assist the councilor-sponsor with venue research, RSVP gathering and liaising with the selected venue once it is confirmed. Please let me know if you would like to take part in organizing this event, or are familiar with Montreal, you may have any venues to suggest. Thank you! Kind regards, Nathalie Nathalie Peregrine Manager, Operations Support (GNSO) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: nathalie.peregrine(a)icann.org <nathalie.peregrine(a)icann.org%20> Skype: nathalie.peregrine.icann Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<applewebdata://EB3A6F47-9760-400D-A39B-A7EFFC56B467/learn.icann.org/courses…> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gn…>

2 2

FYI: [ICANN Community Leaders] 12 September Update
by Michelle DeSmyter Sept. 12, 2019

Sept. 12, 2019

FYI: [http://r20.rs6.net/on.jsp?ca=46b90359-31cf-4a75-9d52-9098a44bb3ad&a=1122025…] Thursday, 12 September 2019 ICANN Community Leadership Digest [https://files.constantcontact.com/304b3fd3501/31f30ab5-1445-45c3-aef7-c0ea4…] This twice-weekly digest helps ICANN community leaders track requests and provides updates from ICANN org. TABLE OF CONTENTS Requests · TOMORROW: Third Accountability and Transparency Review Survey Available for Community Input Information Sharing · TODAY: Next Steps to Improve the Effectiveness of ICANN's Multistakeholder Model · TOMORROW: FY21 Planning Process Webinars · REMINDER: Global Public Interest Framework Webinar ICANN66 Planning · TOMORROW: CROP Deadline for ICANN66 · REMINDER: Publication Support for ICANN66 · SAVE THE DATES: ICANN66 Prep Week · SAVE THE DATE: ICANN66 Community Leadership Reception Public Comment · Next Steps to Improve the Effectiveness of ICANN's Multistakeholder Model · NEW: Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice Review Team (CCT-RT) Accepted Recommendations – Plan for Implementation and Next Steps Requests TOMORROW: Third Accountability and Transparency Review Survey Available for Community Input Executive: Theresa Swinehart, Senior Vice President, Multistakeholder Strategy and Strategic Initiatives FOR: All Community Leaders REQUEST The third Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3) has published a survey for community input. The aim of this survey is to collect opinions from individuals and groups in the ICANN community on ICANN’s accountability and transparency, and to help the ATRT3 Review Team identify areas which require improvement and could benefit from a recommendation. The individual survey is available here: http://input.icann.org/go?iv=eupcis2ldyww The group survey (intended to capture group responses from ICANN community groups) is available here: http://input.icann.org/go?iv=3j46tfx0r5yzt Following the close of both surveys on Friday, 13 September 2019 at 23:59 UTC, the ATRT3 Review Team will evaluate responses as input to its draft final report. Information Sharing TODAY: Next Steps to Improve the Effectiveness of ICANN's Multistakeholder Model Executive: Theresa Swinehart, Senior Vice President, Multistakeholder Strategy and Strategic Initiatives FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING A Public Comment proceeding [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> seeking input on the “Next Steps to Improve the Effectiveness of ICANN’s Multistakeholder Model [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>” launched on 27 August 2019. The proceeding will provide input for developing a work plan to address issues hampering the effectiveness and efficiency of ICANN’s multistakeholder model. To discuss the proceeding and next steps, the community is invited to participate in a webinar [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> on Thursday, 12 September 2019 at 16:00 UTC. Brian Cute, the facilitator for Evolving ICANN’s Multistakeholder Model, is available to discuss this work with any ICANN community group at its convenience. To contact Brian, please send your request to the mailing list [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>. TOMORROW: FY21 Planning Process Webinar Executive: Xavier Calvez, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING ICANN’s Planning Team would like to invite you to attend a webinar on the Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21) Planning Process which includes Operating Plans and Budgets for PTI, IANA, and ICANN. We will hold two webinars that will cover the following: · FY21 Operating Plan and Budget · FY21-FY25 Operating and Financial Plan · Timeline · Community Participation Opportunities · Questions Below are the details for the two sessions. If you are unable to participate in one of these sessions, they will be recorded and posted to the ICANN Finance Community Wiki [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> for future viewing and additional questions. It is not necessary to attend both sessions, each session will cover the same material. We are hosting two sessions to better accommodate time zones. Webinar Friday, 13 September 2019 16:00-17:00 UTC Remote Participation: https://icann.zoom.us/j/826234297 [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> We look forward to your participation and invite you to share this information with other community members who would like to learn more about ICANN’s Planning Process. REMINDER: Global Public Interest Framework Webinar Executive: Sally Costerton, Senior Adviser to President and Senior Vice President, Global Stakeholder Engagement FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING The global public interest is central to many of ICANN’s primary governance documents, and the ICANN Board hopes to play a role in facilitating a bottom-up, community-driven process to develop a framework as a toolkit for the ICANN community to consider the global public interest. These considerations would not change the process by which decisions are made but could instead serve as tools for the community to reinforce the commitment to the public interest and to demonstrate how specific recommendations, advice, and public comments are in the global public interest. This includes the ICANN community guiding the ICANN Board about the public interest determination the latter must make in its decisions. To learn more about the framework, please read the discussion paper (PDF) [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> and for more information, visit the wiki [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>. Two Global Public Interest Framework webinars have been scheduled. The information will be the same in both webinars. Following the webinars, there will be a community consultation to gather community input on the proposed framework. The consultation will run from Wednesday, 18 September 2019 to Friday, 18 October 2019. Community feedback is welcome via email at gpitoolkit(a)icann.org<mailto:gpitoolkit@icann.org>. Webinar #1 Tuesday, 17 September 2019 15:00 UTC Remote Participation: https://icann.zoom.us/j/288558444 [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Meeting ID: 288 558 444 Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/abhtJZkRdd [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Webinar #2 Thursday, 19 September 2019 03:00 UTC Remote Participation: https://icann.zoom.us/j/532026397 [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Meeting ID: 532 026 397 Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/abhtJZkRdd [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> ICANN66 Planning TOMORROW: CROP Deadline for ICANN66 Executive: David Olive, Senior Vice President, Policy Development Support FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING For eligible groups planning to use Community Regional Outreach Program (CROP) funds to conduct outreach during ICANN66, requests must be submitted no later than Friday, 13 September 2019. No exceptions will be made. When submitting a CROP travel request, please keep in mind the following: · Trip requests must be approved by the respective community leadership team. · For FY20, the trip request must be filled in by the CROP participant via the CROP Wikispace. · In order to access the CROP Wikispace, applicants must first have an account; please let the CROP Coordinator know if an account is needed. · All individuals requesting CROP funding must also review the CROP Guidelines prior to submitting a request: https://community.icann.org/x/046jBg Please contact crop-staff(a)icann.org with any questions. REMINDER: Publication Support for ICANN66 Executive: David Olive, Senior Vice President, Policy Development Support FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING Print-Only Deadline If you only need your ICANN66 publication printed (meaning your publication is ready to send directly to the printer and needs no translation or design/layout modifications), please provide the file along with the quantity you want printed and dimensions of the publication by Friday, 20 September 2019. Please work directly with your Policy support staff to submit these requests to chantelle.doerksen(a)icann.org and liana.teo(a)icann.org. SAVE THE DATES: ICANN66 Prep Week Executive: David Olive, Senior Vice President, Policy Development Support FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING ICANN66 Prep Week will take place 14-17 October 2019. This initiative aims to streamline the pre-ICANN Public Meeting experience to improve community preparation and increase awareness of plenary session topics. Stay tuned for an announcement with the full schedule and remote participation details. SAVE THE DATE: ICANN66 Community Leadership Reception Executive: David Olive, Senior Vice President, Policy Development Support FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING The ICANN66 Community Leadership Reception with members of the ICANN Board and Executive Team will be held on Friday, 1 November 2019. More details including location and specific time will be shared later. Public Comment Next Steps to Improve the Effectiveness of ICANN's Multistakeholder Model [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Close Date: Monday, 14 October 2019 NEW: Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice Review Team (CCT-RT) Accepted Recommendations – Plan for Implementation and Next Steps [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Close Date: Monday, 21 October 2019 Volume 1, Issue 49 | Archive [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> | Next Issue: Monday, 16 September 2019 ICANN | 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300, Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Unsubscribe so-ac-sg-cleaders(a)icann.org [visitor.constantcontact.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__visitor.constantcontac…> Update Profile [visitor.constantcontact.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__visitor.constantcontac…> | About Constant Contact [constantcontact.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.constantcontact.com…> Sent by david.olive(a)icann.org<mailto:david.olive@icann.org> in collaboration with [Trusted Email from Constant Contact - Try it FREE today.][constantcontact.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.constantcontact.com…> Try email marketing for free today! [constantcontact.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.constantcontact.com…>

1 0

FW: [Ext] ICANN News Alert -- Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice Review Team (cct-rt) Accepted Recommendations – Plan for Implementation and Next Steps
by Nathalie Peregrine Sept. 12, 2019

Sept. 12, 2019

FYI From: ICANN <no-reply(a)external.icann.org> Reply-To: "no-reply(a)external.icann.org" <no-reply(a)external.icann.org> Date: Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 1:34 AM To: Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine(a)icann.org> Subject: [Ext] ICANN News Alert -- Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice Review Team (cct-rt) Accepted Recommendations – Plan for Implementation and Next Steps [ICANN Announcement Alerts] Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice Review Team (cct-rt) Accepted Recommendations – Plan for Implementation and Next Steps [newsalerts.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newsalerts.icann.org_M…> 11 September 2019 Open Date: 11 September 2019 Close Date: 21 October 2019 Originating Organization: Multistakeholder Strategy and Strategic Initiatives Categories/Tags: Specific Review, competition, consumer trust, consumer choice, new gTLDs Brief Overview: On 1 March 2019, the ICANN Board took action on the Final Recommendations produced by the Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice Review Team (CCT-RT) – see https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2019-03-01-en [newsalerts.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newsalerts.icann.org_C…> and directed ICANN org to "develop and submit to the Board a plan for the implementation of the accepted recommendations". The Board resolution called for the plan to be completed and provided to the community for consideration no later than six months after Board action. The plan for implementation [newsalerts.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newsalerts.icann.org_o…> provides an overview of implementation activities to be undertaken, where possible, highlights dependencies, and enumerates resources requirements (if any). It sets out the approach for future implementation of the six CCT-RT recommendations the Board resolved to accept and assembles estimates that are directional for understanding. Community input is requested to determine whether the path suggested by ICANN org to implement the six Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice Review Team (CCT-RT) recommendations the Board resolved to accept on 1 March 2019 is reasonable in the context of the intent of CCT-RT. Additionally, community feedback is invited on the next steps for accepted recommendations. In exercising its fiduciary duty, the Board intends to consider the proposed plan for implementation as well as community feedback received on the proposed path forward and considerations specific to each recommendation. Once the community input adequately considered, the ICANN Board will direct ICANN org to produce a detailed implementation plan that results in the implementation of recommendations 1, 17, 21, 22, 30, 31, including any adjustments the input received through the public comment proceeding may potentially prompt. Further implementation details, including resources availability, scheduling, will be supplemented with specific details and budget plans once the implementation steps are underway. Link: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/cct-rt-implementation-plan-2019-09-11… [newsalerts.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newsalerts.icann.org_X…> About ICANN ICANN’s mission is to help ensure a stable, secure, and unified global Internet. To reach another person on the Internet, you need to type an address – a name or a number – into your computer or other device. That address must be unique so computers know where to find each other. ICANN helps coordinate and support these unique identifiers across the world. ICANN was formed in 1998 as a not-for-profit public-benefit corporation with a community of participants from all over the world. [shadow] [Twitter][newsalerts.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newsalerts.icann.org_T…> [Facebook][newsalerts.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newsalerts.icann.org_n…> [Instagram][newsalerts.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newsalerts.icann.org_N…> [Linkedin][newsalerts.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newsalerts.icann.org_H…> [YouTube][newsalerts.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newsalerts.icann.org_I…> [shadow1] Unsubscribe [newsalerts.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newsalerts.icann.org_B…> | https://www.icann.org [newsalerts.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newsalerts.icann.org_B…> [newsalerts.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newsalerts.icann.org_Q…>

1 0

Reminder input needed: ICANN org's preparation toward implementation of a new round of gTLDs
by Nathalie Peregrine Sept. 10, 2019

Sept. 10, 2019

Dear councilors, A reminder that an action item from the GNSO Council meeting held on the 22 August 2019 was: “Council to consider if they would like to provide a written response to ICANN Org, to be delivered by the end of September. Councilors to inform their respective SG/Cs of the timeline for providing input.” Please find the Assumptions Paper attached for your review. Kind regards, Nathalie From: council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> on behalf of "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Reply-To: "kdrazek(a)verisign.com" <kdrazek(a)verisign.com> Date: Monday, June 17, 2019 at 8:53 PM To: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Cc: "gnso-secs(a)icann.org" <gnso-secs(a)icann.org> Subject: [council] FW: ICANN org's preparation toward implementation of a new round of gTLDs FYI From: Cyrus Namazi <cyrus.namazi(a)icann.org> Sent: Monday, June 17, 2019 1:29 PM To: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek(a)verisign.com> Cc: Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org>; David Olive <david.olive(a)icann.org>; Trang Nguyen <trang.nguyen(a)icann.org>; Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] ICANN org's preparation toward implementation of a new round of gTLDs Dear Keith; As you likely recall, in December 2015 the GNSO initiated a Policy Development Process (PDP) to determine if changes to existing policy recommendations are needed before the next round of gTLDs. We understand that the PDP Working Group expects to publish its final report with its recommendations by December 2019. These recommendations may lead to procedural changes for subsequent rounds of gTLD applications, which ICANN org must implement and manage. In the course of our preparatory work toward the planning and implementation of the new policy, ICANN org has compiled a number of fundamental operationally focused assumptions to help with the preliminary planning and operational readiness of the organization. I have shared these assumptions with the ICANN Board, and am now sharing them with all ICANN constituencies in the briefing document attached. We plan to meet face-to-face with the Subsequent Procedures PDP Working Group in Marrakech to further discuss these assumptions. If the GNSO Council members are also interested in further engagement and providing feedback and perspective on these assumptions please let me know and we will be happy to arrange a mutually convenient time for a discussion. For your information, this information will also be included in the ICANN Community Digest which is planned to be issued later this week. Sincerely, Cyrus Namazi Senior Vice President | Global Domains Division Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) 801 17th St NW, Suite 400 | Washington, DC 20006 USA Office +1 202 249 7543 | Mobile +1 408 421 6894 Skype : cnamazi www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org>

1 0

Reminder: EPDP-Phase 2 Project Management and Work Plan Package
by Nathalie Peregrine Sept. 10, 2019

Sept. 10, 2019

Dear councilors, A reminder to please submit input on the EPDP Phase 2 Project Management and Work Plan Package at your earliest convenience. Kind regards, Nathalie From: council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> on behalf of "rafik.dammak(a)gmail.com" <rafik.dammak(a)gmail.com> Date: Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 1:51 AM To: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] EPDP-Phase 2 Project Management and Work Plan Package Dear GNSO Council Members, Please find attach the EPDP-Phase 2 project and work plan package that outlines the group’s key deliverables and milestones. Apologies up front for the large number of documents contained in the package, but each one plays a distinct role in managing and communicating the status and condition of this project. Below is brief highlight of each of the work products contained within the package. The full substance of project plan can be found on page 4. In short, the EPDP-P2 team targets early December 2019 to deliver an Initial Report for public comment, and shortly after ICANN67 (Cancun) the group plans to deliver its Final Report. This package was reviewed 13 August with the EPDP and if you prefer an in-depth briefing, the recording is now available<https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/2019-08-13+EPDP-+Phase+2+call+…>. While the GNSO Council, as normal procedure, adopts a group’s charter before initiating policy deliberations, to our knowledge, this is the first time the GNSO Council will approve a detailed plan like what is attached here for the EPDP. This is largely due to the fact that this is also the first policy development process executed that is funded separately from ICANN’s Contingency fund and therefore the extra procedures and attention. The Council’s adoption of this plan is a crucial step by which the GNSO Council can request additional dedicated resources required to complete the Phase 2 effort. Very much like Phase 1, the Phase 2 EPDP will request additional resources to complete the formal request from the ICANN Board. You will recall two such interim requests made in April and June of 2019. Shortly after the Council’s approval of this plan, the resource request to the Board will be initiated and details of that request will be supplied at that time. We are targeting the 22 Aug 2019 Council meeting to obtain approval of the plan. It should be noted however, that the EPDP-P2 leadership team will reassess the project plan based on outcomes of the Los Angeles face-to-face in early September. One final thing to consider when reviewing the plan at a high-level and as communicated in Marrakech, an aspirational target was set for Dec 2019 to launch an Initial Report for public comment. You’ll see this represented in the work products that make up this package. Berry would like to reinforce the notion that this plan attempts to allocate tasks based on the number of hours it takes for the group to deliberate the policy topics and agree on some sort of outcome. While the project plan is represented on a 5 business day work week, in reality that only translates to 4 or 6 hours of conference calls per week. So, it is important to think of tasks being resourced in those terms instead of being driven only by calendar dates. As an example and assuming we do not take any breaks, considering plenary calls are 2 hours and secondary/legal calls are 1.5 hours, and finally considering total hours for the face-to-face in LA, it only equates to a total of 38 hours to deliberate topics verbally through 11 September 2019. That’s less than one business week assuming that it could be condensed into a single week. EPDP-P2 Project and Work Plan Package: * The general intent is this will be compiled and reviewed once per month in preparation for EPDP planning/progress, but also to prepare for updates required by the GNSO Council. Individual work products will be updated more frequently and as necessary by the EPDP leadership team to meet the project communication and planning requirements. * Page 1 - a high-level, simple Gantt view of key deliverable dates for the primary phases of the project including engagement opportunities such as ICANN meetings or dedicated face-to-face sessions. The summary timeline will typically be presented on a rolling twelve months and updated monthly. * Page 2- this Fact Sheet work product is primarily used for projects with dedicated funds and acts as an overall communications vehicle. It displays the status, activities, milestone completion, and a summary of the financial resources. The project leadership team, as well as the Project Cost Support Team will manage and update the Fact Sheet with the assistance of staff. The milestones section, such as the % complete, will be derived from the four primary phases of the project plan Gantt chart. * Page 3 – Project SitRep, this work product is a copy of the project document presented in the GNSO Council’s Project List to enhance status reporting consistency to broader GNSO. It contains the project summary, scope, composition, summary, and deliverables/milestones. The lower section describes in more detail the current, planned, and completed tasks. The Status and Condition codes are the primary feature, and it’s complemented by an escalation process (described later) where At-Risk or In-Trouble projects can be properly managed. * Page 4 – Collapsed version of the Gantt Project Plan; a full expanded version of the plan can be found on the EPDP’s wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/6BdIBg>. The Gantt is a detailed view of the project’s tasks and deliverables from beginning to end. The project typically begins with the adoption of a group’s charter that contains all detailed tasks to be accomplished in between major milestones in a manner that also identifies dependencies and duration of each task. The Gantt chart is an effective tool to demonstrate impacts should key deliverable dates be missed that may impact the critical path and downstream tasks or deliverables. * Page 5 – is screen print of the work plan and action items. this work product presents a tactical view of the tasks and deliverables for the group. Unlike the Gantt, it takes a simple form of a table listing the task, who is assigned, when it was assigned, due dates, and notes related to the task. In most cases, this should only contain those activities that occur the next several weeks and no longer than two months as to maintain focus on the current tasks. It will be updated each week with the tasks from the project plan. This work product now resides on Google Sheets [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_spread…>. Enjoy the review of the project package and staff is happy to answer any questions over the list in the meantime. Thank you. Best Regards, Rafik Dammak

1 0

Reminder: For Review: Initial draft of Proposed GNSO Council Response to CCT-RT Recommendations Passed Through to GNSO
by Nathalie Peregrine Sept. 10, 2019

Sept. 10, 2019

Dear councilors, A reminder that the closing date for input on the initial draft of the proposed GNSO Council response to CCT-RT Recommendations is this coming Friday, 13 September 2019. Kind regards, Nathalie From: council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> on behalf of PAMELALITTLE <pam.little(a)alibaba-inc.com> Reply-To: PAMELALITTLE <pam.little(a)alibaba-inc.com> Date: Friday, August 30, 2019 at 5:45 AM To: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org>, Flip Petillion <fpetillion(a)petillion.law> Cc: "carlosraulg(a)gmail.com" <carlosraulg(a)gmail.com> Subject: Re: [council] For Review: Initial draft of Proposed GNSO Council Response to CCT-RT Recommendations Passed Through to GNSO Hi Flip - Thank you for taking the time to review the draft. Dear Councilors, This item was on 22 August Council meeting agenda but was deferred to our next monthly meeting on 19 September. There are 5 recommendations under consideration and the small team's proposed response is as follows: #10 (initiating a PDP to create a privacy baseline across all registries) - No action at this time #16 (abuse and Domain Abuse Activity Reporting (DAAR)) - Redirect to ICANN org #27 & #28 - Refer to the RPM WG #29 be - Refer to Sub-pro WG It would be greatly appreciated if you could take a moment to review the draft (attached again) and, if appropriate, seek input from your respective group by 13 September 2019. It would hopefully make our discussion during the Council meeting more efficient. Kind regards, Pam ------------------------------------------------------------------ Sender:Flip Petillion <fpetillion(a)petillion.law> Sent At:2019 Aug. 20 (Tue.) 16:47 Recipient:PAMELALITTLE <pam.little(a)alibaba-inc.com>; council(a)gnso.icann.org <council(a)gnso.icann.org>; council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> Cc:"Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez G." <carlosraulg(a)gmail.com> Subject:Re: [council] For Review: Initial draft of Proposed GNSO Council Response to CCT-RT Recommendations Passed Through to GNSO Thank you Pam I have no comments. Best regards, Flip Flip Petillion fpetillion(a)petillion.law +32484652653 www.petillion.law [signature_1247444843][petillion.law]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.petillion.law_&d=Dw…> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Pam Little <pam.little(a)alibaba-inc.com> Reply to: Pam Little <pam.little(a)alibaba-inc.com> Date: Tuesday, 20 August 2019 at 02:42 To: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org>, council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> Cc: "Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez G." <carlosraulg(a)gmail.com> Subject: Re: [council] For Review: Initial draft of Proposed GNSO Council Response to CCT-RT Recommendations Passed Through to GNSO Dear Councilors, The small team would like to suggest some changes to the draft that was sent to the Council list late July: #16 on DAAR and DNS abuse - In light of the on-going conversations within the ICANN community, including a Plenary session on DNS Abuse to be held at ICANN66, we've made some suggested edits to the proposed Council response and new language to reflect this. #28 on cost-benefit analysis of TMCH - Staff recently clarified that the RPM WG did not carry out a cost-benefit analysis. While this was one of the specific Charter questions, Analysis Group's Final Report indicates that their data did not provide quantifiable information to include such analysis in its review. In light of this, we are suggesting a change to the proposed Council response: From: The GNSO Council will seek feedback/comment from the RPM WG whether its Phase 1 work has carried out a cost-benefit analysis consistent with the scope described in this Recommendation #28. To: The GNSO Council will refer this recommendation to the RPM WG. A redline version is attached for your review. Please let us know if you have any questions or comments. We look forward to discussing this further at the upcoming Council meeting later this week. Kind regards, Pam ------------------------------------------------------------------ Sender:PAMELALITTLE <pam.little(a)alibaba-inc.com> Sent At:2019 Jul. 23 (Tue.) 16:31 Recipient:council@gnso.icann.org <council(a)gnso.icann.org>; council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> Cc:"Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez G." <carlosraulg(a)gmail.com>; Carlos Raul Gutierrez <carlosraul(a)gutierrez.se>; Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele(a)blacknight.com> Subject:For Review: Initial draft of Proposed GNSO Council Response to CCT-RT Recommendations Passed Through to GNSO Dear Councilors, You may recall that the Council discussed this topic during the wrap-up session in Marrakesh and the action item was for a small team (Carlos, Michele and myself) to take a look at the 5 Recommendations that were passed through to GNSO (see the message below from Larisa Gurnick forwarded by Mary to Council). In addition, a number of Recommendations were passed through to gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP Working Group and/or Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPM) PDP Working Group. In order to have a better picture of where all the Recommendations passed to the GNSO and its PDPs stand, Keith is planning to write to the leadership of the Working Groups seeking their feedback. In the meantime, I attach an initial draft with the small team's proposed GNSO Council response to those 5 Recommendations passed through directly to the GNSO for your review and consideration. It is likely to be included in our August Council meeting agenda so please take some time to consider the proposed responses before the meeting. All feedback/comments/suggested edits are welcome! Kind regards, Pam ------------------------------------------------------------------ Sender:Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org> Sent At:2019 Jun. 10 (Mon.) 16:43 Recipient:council@gnso.icann.org <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject:[council] Message regarding CCT-RT recommendations Dear Councilors, I am forwarding the message below on behalf of Larisa Gurnick, Vice-President in ICANN’s Multi-stakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI) department. You may recall that the Competition, Consumer Protection & Consumer Trust Review Team’s (CCT-RT) final recommendations included several that were directed at the GNSO Council. This notification should provide you with additional information and context for the ICANN Board’s action in respect of those recommendations. Dear Members of the GNSO Council, The purpose of this note is to highlight the Board resolution passed on 1 March 2019 - see https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2019-03-01-en [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resource…> - that calls for a set of Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice Review Team (CCT-RT) Final Recommendations to be passed through to community groups. As articulated in the Board resolution, “recognizing that the Board has the obligation and responsibility to balance the work of ICANN in order to preserve the ability for ICANN org to serve its Mission and the public interest, the Board decided on three categories of action”: * Accepting recommendations, subject to costing and implementation considerations; * Placing recommendations (in whole or in part) in "Pending" status, directing ICANN org to perform specific actions to enable the Board to take further actions; * Passing recommendations (in whole or in part) to community groups the CCT-RT identified for their consideration. The Board noted fourteen such recommendations (9, 10, 12, 16, 19, 20, 25, 27, 28, 29, 32, 33, 34, 35). We invite you to refer to pages 1-4 of the scorecard https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/resolutions-final-cct-recs-scor… [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_syste…> which compile pass-through recommendations, including the groups they are addressed to. Accordingly, ICANN org wishes to notify you of the recommendations the ICANN Board resolved to pass through to you, in whole or in part, for your consideration: * Recommendation 10. * Recommendation 16 (in part) Note: this recommendation was also passed through to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG, Registries Stakeholder Group, Registrar Stakeholder Group, Generic Names Supporting Organization, Second Security, Stability & Resiliency of DNS Review Team as suggested by the CCT-RT. In the scorecard, the Board noted that “it is not accepting the policy directives that may be inherent here but rather, passes on such elements of the recommendation to the relevant community groups to consider”. * Recommendation 27. * Recommendation 28. * Recommendation 29. Note: this recommendation was also passed through to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG, as suggested by the CCT-RT. To inform work relating to recommendations 29 and 30, the ICANN Board suggested that the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG could take on, “should they choose to do so, defining the term ‘Global South’ or agreeing on another term to describe underserved or underrepresented regions or stakeholders in coordination with ICANN org”. We would like to highlight the following language of the Board resolution: “in passing these recommendations through, the Board is neither accepting, nor rejecting the recommendations. […] Passing recommendations through to community groups is not a directive that the groups identified should formally address any of the issues within those recommendations. It is within the purview of each group to identify whether work will be taken on and the topics that the group will address”. As indicated in the resolution, the Board encourages community groups to be “mindful of any interdependencies with ongoing work and discussions”. Additionally,the Board suggests “to the referenced community groups that the CCT-RT's proposed priority levels be taken into account as the groups decide whether, how and when to address the CCT-RT recommendations that are being passed through […]”. Additionally, we would like to flag the Board suggestion that for transparency purposes, “it would be helpful to have records or reporting made available to the ICANN community on how the community group considered the items coming out of the CCT-RT. The Board encourages any level of reporting that the groups are able to provide as the ICANN org and Board track action on the CCT-RT's recommendations”. Please consider providing updates on your progress in addressing (as appropriate) these recommendations, to be included with ICANN org’s reporting. Background The Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice Review Team (CCT-RT) released its Final Report on 8 September 2018 – see https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cct-final-08sep18-en.pdf [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_syste…>. The CCT-RT Final Report contains 35 recommendations and is the culmination of nearly three years of work, reviewing how the expansion of top-level domain names impacted competition, consumer trust and choice. For more information on the CCT Review and Specific Reviews, please read https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en#article4.6 [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resource…>. The ICANN Board took action on each of the 35 recommendations produced by the CCT-RT - see https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2019-03-01-en [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resource…> - on 1 March 2019 and was informed by public comment input received on the Final report (see https://www.icann.org/public-comments/cct-final-recs-2018-10-08-en [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_public-2…>). The Board’s decisions on each recommendation is documented in the scorecard published at https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/resolutions-final-cct-recs-scor… [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_syste…>. A blog post on the Board action can be found at https://www.icann.org/news/blog/board-action-on-competition-consumer-trust-… [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_news_blo…> for more context. We thank you for your collaboration in considering the CCT-RT output. Please let us know whether you have any questions. Thank you. Best regards. Larisa Gurnick Vice-President, Multi-stakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives, ICANN

1 0

Reminder: PDP 3.0 Package 1: Final Documents for Improvements 1, 2, 3 & 6
by Nathalie Peregrine Sept. 10, 2019

Sept. 10, 2019

Dear councilors, A reminder that the closing date for input on the PDP3.0 Package 1 is this coming Friday, 13 September 2019. Kind regards, Nathalie From: council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ariel Liang <ariel.liang(a)icann.org> Date: Thursday, August 22, 2019 at 5:38 PM To: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] PDP 3.0 Package 1: Final Documents for Improvements 1, 2, 3 & 6 Dear GNSO Councilors, Following up on today’s Council meeting, please be so kind to review the Small Team’s conclusions and proposed implementation of Improvements #1, #2, #3, and #6. Please provide your input/feedback for the final documents (links in the email below) directly via this thread on the Council list by COB Friday, 13 September. For your convenience, staff have attached the slides shown during the Council call. The slides provide a high-level overview of each completed improvement, as well as next steps/actions for the Council to consider. In addition, staff also attached an update project list indicating the status of PDP 3.0 project. This project list follows the proposed new format as part of the implementation of Improvements #16 (Criteria for PDP WG Updates), which the Council will review in further detail in the near future. Thank you for your time and input! Best Regards, Ariel From: Ariel Liang <ariel.liang(a)icann.org> Date: Tuesday, August 13, 2019 at 7:30 PM To: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: PDP 3.0 Package 1: Final Documents for Improvements 1, 2, 3 & 6 Dear GNSO Councilors, On behalf of the PDP 3.0 Small Team, staff would like to inform you that the Small Team has completed five (5) out of fourteen (14) PDP 3.0 improvements so far. The rest of the nine (9) improvements are all in the pipeline with various levels of progress. In advance of the 22 August Council meeting, the PDP 3.0 Small Team are sending the following documents for four (4) completed PDP 3.0 improvements as the first deliverable to the GNSO Council for review. They are packaged together as they are concerned with the expectations, requirements, and/or participation methods for PDP working groups members and/or leaders. Note that Improvement #14 (Criteria to Evaluate Request for Data Gathering) has also been completed, but it will be delivered in a separate package together with other completed, related improvements prior to future GNSO Council meetings. * Improvement #1: Terms of participation for working group members [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> * Improvement #2: Consider alternatives to open working group model [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> * Improvement #3: Criteria for joining of new members after a PDP working group is formed or re-chartered * Main document [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> * Working Group Member Skills Guide [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> * Improvement #6: Document expectations for working group leaders (Chairs/Co- Chairs/Leads) that outlines role & responsibilities as well as minimum skills / expertise required [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> The Small Team invites the GNSO Council to review these documents and welcomes your questions and feedback. The Small Team looks forward to further discussions with the GNSO Council during the meeting on 22 August. == Background The GNSO Council identified a number of challenges as well as possible improvements related to the Policy Development Process (PDP), as a result of a number of discussions throughout 2018. These efforts started in the form of a staff discussion paper [drive.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__drive.google.com_file_…>, shared on 10 January 2018 and discussed at the GNSO Council’s 2018 Strategic Planning Session. In order to engage the broader GNSO community in this discussion, the GNSO Council organized a collaborative session [61.schedule.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__61.schedule.icann.org_…> involving the members of the PDP Leadership Teams as well as the broader community to summarize key points from the Strategic Planning Session, elaborate on the challenges that PDPs presently face and identified, and begin to brainstorm possible solutions. On 11 May 2018, an updated paper [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_d…> was prepared, taking into account feedback received. The GNSO Council solicited additional feedback from the GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies, summarizing input received [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_d…>. An updated report [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_draf…> was prepared as well as an Implementation Plan [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_draf…>. On 24 October 2018, the Council resolved [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_coun…> to adopt the Final Report and begin implementation, as well as report on progress no less than on a quarterly basis. At the 2019 GNSO Council Strategic Planning Session, the Council discussed early drafts for select implementation areas, ultimately agreeing that a small team of Councilors be convened to support implementation efforts. That small team of Councilors first convened at ICANN64 in Kobe, Japan and met on a bi-weekly basis between April and June 2019. During its informal status meeting at ICANN65 in Marrakech, Morocco, the small team decided to make a few enhancements on its working methods in order to meet its goal of completing implementation of all fourteen (14) PDP 3.0 improvements by ICANN66 Montreal, Canada. These enhancements include: * Increase its meeting frequency to weekly basis; * Designate small team lead who works with GNSO support staff to tackle each improvement; * Track completion status and set target dates for final call and document finalization; * Use google docs for all improvement documents to facilitate collaboration. In addition, the small team has also decided to deliver the final documents of completed improvements in an incremental manner -- selected few improvements, which often have a common theme or relate to each other, are delivered to the GNSO Council in one package. With fewer documents to review each time, the GNSO Council should be able to digest the documents more easily and provide timely input to help the small team improve its future deliverables to the Council. Best Regards, Ariel Ariel Xinyue Liang GNSO Policy Support Specialist Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Mobile: +1 310 804 2761 Skype: ariel.liang.icann www.icann.org

1 0

FW: [Ext] ICANN News Alert -- Join the Webinar on ICANN’s FY21 Annual Operating Plan and Budget and 5-Year Operating and Financial Plan
by Nathalie Peregrine Sept. 10, 2019

Sept. 10, 2019

FYI From: ICANN <no-reply(a)external.icann.org> Reply-To: "no-reply(a)external.icann.org" <no-reply(a)external.icann.org> Date: Tuesday, September 10, 2019 at 12:56 AM To: Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine(a)icann.org> Subject: [Ext] ICANN News Alert -- Join the Webinar on ICANN’s FY21 Annual Operating Plan and Budget and 5-Year Operating and Financial Plan [ICANN Announcement Alerts] Join the Webinar on ICANN’s FY21 Annual Operating Plan and Budget and 5-Year Operating and Financial Plan [newsalerts.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newsalerts.icann.org_K…> 09 September 2019 LOS ANGELES – 9 September 2019 – The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) invites the ICANN community to participate in a webinar on the planning process for the FY21 Operating Plan and Budget and FY21-FY25 Operating and Financial Plan. There are two options to participate: * 11 September 2019 at 0000 UTC https://icann.zoom.us/j/462178439 [newsalerts.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newsalerts.icann.org_j…> * 13 September 2019 at 1600 UTC https://icann.zoom.us/j/826234297 [newsalerts.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newsalerts.icann.org_Z…> The ICANN Planning Team will discuss the timeline and process for the FY21 Operating Plan and Budget, and the FY21-FY25 Operating and Financial Plan. There will be an opportunity to ask questions. Community participation in ICANN's planning process is a cornerstone of transparency and accountability to the global multistakeholder community. ICANN thanks all community members who contribute to this important process. About ICANN ICANN's mission is to help ensure a stable, secure, and unified global Internet. To reach another person on the Internet, you need to type an address – a name or a number – into your computer or other device. That address must be unique so computers know where to find each other. ICANN helps coordinate and support these unique identifiers across the world. ICANN was formed in 1998 as a not-for-profit public-benefit corporation with a community of participants from all over the world. [shadow] [Twitter][newsalerts.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newsalerts.icann.org_Z…> [Facebook][newsalerts.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newsalerts.icann.org_w…> [Instagram][newsalerts.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newsalerts.icann.org_I…> [Linkedin][newsalerts.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newsalerts.icann.org_L…> [YouTube][newsalerts.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newsalerts.icann.org_q…> [shadow1] Unsubscribe [newsalerts.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newsalerts.icann.org_h…> | https://www.icann.org [newsalerts.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newsalerts.icann.org_W…> [newsalerts.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newsalerts.icann.org_E…>

1 0

IRP-IOT Small Team: DRAFT GNSO Input on Questions Relating to the Issues for Considerations Regarding the IRP IOT
by Julie Hedlund Sept. 10, 2019

Sept. 10, 2019

Dear GNSO Councilors, As you may recall, Elsa Saade and Flip Petillion volunteered to be the small team to draft a possible GNSO Council response to the request for the community to respond to the questions relating to the IRP Implementation Oversight Team (IOT) as requested at ICANN65. The original deadline to respond to ICANN Org was 15 April 2019, per the Blog Post from Göran Marby dated 09 March 2019: https://www.icann.org/news/blog/independent-review-process-standing-panel-c… [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_news_blo…>. In May Samantha Eisner and David McCauley gave a presentation on the IRP-IOT to the GNSO Council. At ICANN65 the Council asked for volunteers to draft possible GNSO Council responses, which Elsa and Flip have now done and it is attach for your consideration after considerable discussion and upon reviewing the comments provided by the GNSO Community. We have confirmed with Samantha Eisner that ICANN Org is still interested in receiving input from the GNSO. This document is on the agenda for discussion for the GNSO Council meeting on Thursday, 19 September. In the meantime, please let us know if you have any questions or comments. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund on behalf of Elsa Saade and Flip Petillion

2 1

FW: [ICANN Community Leaders] 9 September Update
by Julie Bisland Sept. 9, 2019

Sept. 9, 2019

FYI: [http://r20.rs6.net/on.jsp?ca=cc7fb8f1-9e84-4225-8ff6-ab8e43d0d088&a=1122025…] Monday, 9 September 2019 ICANN Community Leadership Digest [https://files.constantcontact.com/304b3fd3501/31f30ab5-1445-45c3-aef7-c0ea4…] This twice-weekly digest helps ICANN community leaders track requests and provides updates from ICANN org. TABLE OF CONTENTS Requests · TODAY: NextGen@ICANN Survey · THIS WEEK: Third Accountability and Transparency Review Survey Available for Community Input Information Sharing · NEW: FY21 Planning Process Webinars · THIS WEEK: Next Steps to Improve the Effectiveness of ICANN's Multistakeholder Model · REMINDER: Global Public Interest Framework Webinar ICANN66 Planning · THIS WEEK: CROP Deadline for ICANN66 · REMINDER: Publication Support for ICANN66 · SAVE THE DATES: ICANN66 Prep Week · SAVE THE DATE: ICANN66 Community Leadership Reception Public Comment · Next Steps to Improve the Effectiveness of ICANN's Multistakeholder Model Requests TODAY: NextGen@ICANN Survey Executive: Sally Costerton, Senior Adviser to President and Senior Vice President, Global Stakeholder Engagement FOR: All Community Leaders REQUEST The ICANN organization is initiating a community consultation [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> to identify improvement opportunities for the NextGen@ICANN Program [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>. The review will start with gathering community input via a survey about several aspects of the NextGen@ICANN Program, including its purpose, goals, processes, and synergies with the ICANN academic community. The survey [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> (PDF with background at the beginning and questionnaire questions at the end) is intended for all ICANN community groups; individuals are encouraged to work with their relevant Supporting Organizations, Advisory Committees, stakeholder groups, and constituencies. Responses are due Monday, 9 September 2019. Based on the input received from the survey, ICANN org will draft a proposal for program improvements that will be published for Public Comment. Once all feedback is received, ICANN org will prepare the final proposal for program improvements. Sally Costerton's blog post about the NextGen@ICANN Community Consultation [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> THIS WEEK: Third Accountability and Transparency Review Survey Available for Community Input Executive: Theresa Swinehart, Senior Vice President, Multistakeholder Strategy and Strategic Initiatives FOR: All Community Leaders REQUEST The third Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3) has published a survey for community input. The aim of this survey is to collect opinions from individuals and groups in the ICANN community on ICANN’s accountability and transparency, and to help the ATRT3 Review Team identify areas which require improvement and could benefit from a recommendation. The individual survey is available here: http://input.icann.org/go?iv=eupcis2ldyww The group survey (intended to capture group responses from ICANN community groups) is available here: http://input.icann.org/go?iv=3j46tfx0r5yzt Following the close of both surveys on Friday, 13 September 2019 at 23:59 UTC, the ATRT3 Review Team will evaluate responses as input to its draft final report. Information Sharing NEW: FY21 Planning Process Webinars Executive: Xavier Calvez, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING ICANN’s Planning Team would like to invite you to attend a webinar on the Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21) Planning Process which includes Operating Plans and Budgets for PTI, IANA, and ICANN. We will hold two webinars that will cover the following: · FY21 Operating Plan and Budget · FY21-FY25 Operating and Financial Plan · Timeline · Community Participation Opportunities · Questions Below are the details for the two sessions. If you are unable to participate in one of these sessions, they will be recorded and posted to the ICANN Finance Community Wiki [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> for future viewing and additional questions. It is not necessary to attend both sessions, each session will cover the same material. We are hosting two sessions to better accommodate time zones. Webinar #1 Wednesday, 11 September 2019 00:00-1:00 UTC Remote Participation: https://icann.zoom.us/j/462178439 [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Webinar #2 Friday, 13 September 2019 16:00-17:00 UTC Remote Participation: https://icann.zoom.us/j/826234297 [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> We look forward to your participation and invite you to share this information with other community members who would like to learn more about ICANN’s Planning Process. THIS WEEK: Next Steps to Improve the Effectiveness of ICANN's Multistakeholder Model Executive: Theresa Swinehart, Senior Vice President, Multistakeholder Strategy and Strategic Initiatives FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING A Public Comment proceeding [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> seeking input on the “Next Steps to Improve the Effectiveness of ICANN’s Multistakeholder Model [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>” launched on 27 August 2019. The proceeding will provide input for developing a work plan to address issues hampering the effectiveness and efficiency of ICANN’s multistakeholder model. To discuss the proceeding and next steps, the community is invited to participate in a webinar [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> on Wednesday, 11 September 2019 at 23:00 UTC or Thursday, 12 September 2019 at 16:00 UTC. Brian Cute, the facilitator for Evolving ICANN’s Multistakeholder Model, is available to discuss this work with any ICANN community group at its convenience. To contact Brian, please send your request to the mailing list [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>. REMINDER: Global Public Interest Framework Webinar Executive: Sally Costerton, Senior Adviser to President and Senior Vice President, Global Stakeholder Engagement FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING You are invited to attend a webinar to learn more about one of the ICANN Board’s operational priorities: the public interest. The webinar is open to all community members. The global public interest is central to many of ICANN’s primary governance documents, and the ICANN Board hopes to play a role in facilitating a bottom-up, community-driven process to develop a framework as a toolkit for the ICANN community to consider the global public interest. These considerations would not change the process by which decisions are made but could instead serve as tools for the community to reinforce the commitment to the public interest and to demonstrate how specific recommendations, advice, and public comments are in the global public interest. This includes the ICANN community guiding the ICANN Board about the public interest determination the latter must make in its decisions. To learn more about the framework, please read the discussion paper (PDF) [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>. For more information, visit the wiki [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>. The Global Public Interest Framework Webinar has been scheduled for Tuesday, 17 September 2019 at 15:00 UTC. To join the webinar, please visit https://icann.zoom.us/j/288558444 Zoom call details Meeting ID: 288 558 444 Find your local number [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Time zone converter [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> ICANN66 Planning THIS WEEK: CROP Deadline for ICANN66 Executive: David Olive, Senior Vice President, Policy Development Support FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING For eligible groups planning to use Community Regional Outreach Program (CROP) funds to conduct outreach during ICANN66, requests must be submitted no later than Friday, 13 September 2019. No exceptions will be made. When submitting a CROP travel request, please keep in mind the following: · Trip requests must be approved by the respective community leadership team. · For FY20, the trip request must be filled in by the CROP participant via the CROP Wikispace. · In order to access the CROP Wikispace, applicants must first have an account; please let the CROP Coordinator know if an account is needed. · All individuals requesting CROP funding must also review the CROP Guidelines prior to submitting a request: https://community.icann.org/x/046jBg Please contact crop-staff(a)icann.org with any questions. REMINDER: Publication Support for ICANN66 Executive: David Olive, Senior Vice President, Policy Development Support FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING Print-Only Deadline If you only need your ICANN66 publication printed (meaning your publication is ready to send directly to the printer and needs no translation or design/layout modifications), please provide the file along with the quantity you want printed and dimensions of the publication by Friday, 20 September 2019. Please work directly with your Policy support staff to submit these requests to chantelle.doerksen(a)icann.org and liana.teo(a)icann.org. SAVE THE DATES: ICANN66 Prep Week Executive: David Olive, Senior Vice President, Policy Development Support FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING ICANN66 Prep Week will take place 14-17 October 2019. This initiative aims to streamline the pre-ICANN Public Meeting experience to improve community preparation and increase awareness of plenary session topics. Stay tuned for an announcement with the full schedule and remote participation details. SAVE THE DATE: ICANN66 Community Leadership Reception Executive: David Olive, Senior Vice President, Policy Development Support FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING The ICANN66 Community Leadership Reception with members of the ICANN Board and Executive Team will be held on Friday, 1 November 2019. More details including location and specific time will be shared later. Public Comment Next Steps to Improve the Effectiveness of ICANN's Multistakeholder Model [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Close Date: Monday, 14 October 2019 Volume 1, Issue 48 | Archive [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> | Next Issue: Thursday, 12 September 2019 ICANN | 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300, Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Unsubscribe so-ac-sg-cleaders(a)icann.org [visitor.constantcontact.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__visitor.constantcontac…> Update Profile [visitor.constantcontact.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__visitor.constantcontac…> | About Constant Contact [constantcontact.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.constantcontact.com…> Sent by david.olive(a)icann.org<mailto:david.olive@icann.org> in collaboration with [Trusted Email from Constant Contact - Try it FREE today.][constantcontact.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.constantcontact.com…> Try email marketing for free today! [constantcontact.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.constantcontact.com…>

1 0

FOR REVIEW: Draft GNSO Council Response to ICANN Board on Thick Whois Deferral Request
by Drazek, Keith Sept. 6, 2019

Sept. 6, 2019

Hi all, For your review and consideration, attached is a draft GNSO Council response to the ICANN Board's letter of 27 August 2019 (also attached) concerning Verisign's request for a deferral of the Thick Whois implementation. Please review the Board's letter, which requested a response shortly after our 19 September Council meeting, and the draft reply. We can discuss this on the list, and we will add it to the agenda for our meeting. Pam, Rafik and I coordinated on this proposed draft, which acknowledges the work ahead of Council on reviewing existing policies and procedures, including the Thick Whois consensus policy, in the context of EPDP Phase One Recommendation 27. It also points out that a single contracted party request for an implementation compliance deferral is not policy, per se, and is therefore the responsibility of ICANN Org and not the GNSO Council. I will note here that I am sensitive to views or concerns around a conflict of interest on this topic, in that Verisign is the contracted party requesting the deferral and is also my employer. As such, Pam, Rafik and I coordinated drafting this proposed response, and they have agreed to take the lead on shepherding the draft to a conclusion, so we can respond to the Board's request in a timely manner. I feel that this draft strikes the right procedural balance and avoids the substantive discussions that will need to take place in the near future as we tackle the issue of reviewing and amending the Thick Whois Consensus Policy in the context of the EPDP's Recommendations 7 and 27. If anyone has feedback for me on this, please let me know. Please respond with any comments on the draft letter so we can finalize and approve it at our next meeting. Best, Keith

1 0

FW: Implementation of Privacy and Proxy Service Provider Accreditation Issues Working Group [ ref:_00D1aY7OU._5001Pqrn9S:ref ]
by Drazek, Keith Sept. 6, 2019

Sept. 6, 2019

Hi all, Please see the attached letter from Cyrus related to PPSAI implementation and the IRTP. Thanks, Keith From: Correspondence <correspondence(a)icann.org> Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2019 11:35 AM To: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek(a)verisign.com>; pam.little(a)alibaba-inc.com; rafik.dammak(a)gmail.com Cc: cyrus.namazi(a)icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Implementation of Privacy and Proxy Service Provider Accreditation Issues Working Group [ ref:_00D1aY7OU._5001Pqrn9S:ref ] Dear Keith Drazek, Pam Little and Rafik Dammak, Thank you for your letter of . Please find attached a response to your letter from Cyrus Namazi, Senior Vice President, Global Domains Division at ICANN. This response will be posted shortly to the ICANN Correspondence page (https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/correspondence) Please submit any questions you may have about this message to correspondence(a)icann.org<mailto:correspondence@icann.org>. Best Regards, Hope Shafer The Correspondence Team Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) correspondence(a)icann.org www.icann.org ref:_00D1aY7OU._5001Pqrn9S:ref

1 0

Reminder: Document and Motion deadline Monday 9 September 2019 at 23:59 UTC for GNSO Council Meeting 19 September 2019 at 21:00 UTC
by Nathalie Peregrine Sept. 6, 2019

Sept. 6, 2019

Dear all, Reports, motions and documents for consideration are due no later than (NLT) 10 days in advance (i.e. Monday 9 September 2019 at 23:59 UTC) of the GNSO Council Meeting on Thursday 19 September 2019 at 21:00 UTC. Motions should be sent to the Council mailing list by a councilor and will then be posted on the Wiki at: https://community.icann.org/x/M4-kBg Thank you very much. With kind regards, Nathalie Nathalie Peregrine Manager, Operations Support (GNSO) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: nathalie.peregrine(a)icann.org <nathalie.peregrine(a)icann.org%20> Skype: nathalie.peregrine.icann Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwM…> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGN…> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_grou…> See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global calendar [features.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_cal…>

1 2