council
Threads by month
- ----- 2024 -----
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2023 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2022 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2021 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2020 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2019 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2018 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2017 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2016 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2015 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2014 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2013 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2012 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2011 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2010 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2009 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2008 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2007 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2006 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2005 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2004 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2003 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
October 2020
- 26 participants
- 69 discussions
FW: [CORRESPONDENCE] Maarten Botterman to GNSO and Constituency Leaders RE: GNSO Review
by Drazek, Keith 13 Oct '20
by Drazek, Keith 13 Oct '20
13 Oct '20
Hi all,
Please note the attached letter on the GNSO 3 Review from ICANN Board Chair Maarten Botterman. It was also sent to the Chairs of the GNSO SGs and Cs, so they should be forwarding to your respective groups. It flags the ATRT3 recommendations concerning initiation of new reviews and seeks our input on next steps.
Best,
Keith
From: Wendy Profit <wendy.profit(a)icann.org>
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2020 3:55 PM
To: gnso-chairs(a)icann.org; Drazek, Keith <kdrazek(a)verisign.com>; haforrestesq(a)gmail.com; wolf-ulrich.knoben(a)t-online.de; ed4coa(a)gmail.com; cs574w(a)intl.att.com; bwanner(a)uscib.org; stephanie.perrin(a)mail.utoronto.ca; joankerr(a)fbsc.org; aheineman(a)godaddy.com; donna.austin(a)team.neustar; jennifer.taylor(a)bt.com; bruna.mrtns(a)gmail.com
Cc: Maarten Botterman <maarten.botterman(a)board.icann.org>; Avri Doria <avri.doria(a)board.icann.org>; secretariat(a)icannregistrars.org; rysecretariat(a)gmail.com; Correspondence <Correspondence(a)icann.org>; Secretary <secretary(a)icann.org>; Board Ops Team <board-ops-team(a)icann.org>; Theresa Swinehart <theresa.swinehart(a)icann.org>; Larisa B. Gurnick <larisa.gurnick(a)icann.org>; Jean-Baptiste Deroulez <jean-baptiste.deroulez(a)icann.org>; Carlos Reyes <carlos.reyes(a)icann.org>; Chantelle Doerksen <chantelle.doerksen(a)icann.org>; Brenda Brewer <brenda.brewer(a)icann.org>; Maryam Bakoshi <maryam.bakoshi(a)icann.org>; Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org>; Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org>; gnso-secs(a)icann.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [CORRESPONDENCE] Maarten Botterman to GNSO and Constituency Leaders RE: GNSO Review
Dear GNSO Council and Community Leaders,
Please find the attached letter from Maarten Botterman regarding the upcoming GNSO Review.
Thank you and best wishes,
Wendy Profit
ICANN
Board Operations Senior Manager
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094
1
0
communication from RySG’s EPDP representatives regarding the implementation of Rec.7 from the EPDP Phase 1 Final Report
by Maxim Alzoba 12 Oct '20
by Maxim Alzoba 12 Oct '20
12 Oct '20
Dear Councilors,
Please find attached a communication from the RySG’s EPDP representatives regarding the implementation of Recommendation 7 from the EPDP Phase 1 Final Report. The representatives hope this can be helpful in the Council and the Small Team’s ongoing discussions on the “impasse” over this recommendation and how to respond to the ICANN Board and the EPDP Phase 1 IRT.
Sincerely Yours,
Maxim Alzoba
Special projects manager,
International Relations Department,
FAITID
Current UTC offset: +3.00 (.Moscow)
1
0
Hi all,
As we discussed briefly at the end of our 24 September Council meeting, we
need to finalize the process by which the next GNSO Council will vote for
its new Chair.
So we're all on the same page:
1. Philippe Foucart is the sole candidate for GNSO Chair.
2. The new Council will conduct the vote after the Annual Global
Meeting transition.
3. Appointment of the GNSO Chair requires 60% support of each house.
4. Historically, votes for Chair have been conducted in-person with
paper ballots and votes are anonymous.
5. We are currently in a unique situation that the Chair position is
not contested and we're not able to meet in person to conduct a paper vote.
6. The Council leadership team and staff have discussed a range of
options from acclamation to a secret email vote, and are recommending that
we conduct a simple roll-call vote. This will clearly establish that the
minimum threshold had been met to avoid a run-off between the Candidate and
"none-of-the-above," while avoiding the unnecessary complexity of holding an
email vote for an uncontested seat.
If anyone has concerns about this suggested approach, please let us know
before the end of this week.
Thanks and regards,
Keith
1
2
[http://r20.rs6.net/on.jsp?ca=bec88844-b879-446b-83bc-9cbae268285d&a=1122025…]
Monday, 12 October 2020
ICANN Community Leadership Digest
[https://files.constantcontact.com/304b3fd3501/31f30ab5-1445-45c3-aef7-c0ea4…]
The ICANN org Policy Development Support function publishes this twice-weekly digest
to help ICANN community leaders track requests and follow updates.
Table of Contents
ICANN69 Resources
· Registration
· ICANN69 Participation Guide
· Virtual Backgrounds
· ICANN69 Schedule
· Policy Outlook Report
· GNSO Policy Briefing
· Topics for Joint Meetings with the ICANN Board
Information Sharing
· CLOSES THURSDAY: Nominations for NextGen Selection Committee and Mentor Positions Now Open
· REMINDER: ICANN69 Social Media Sharing Campaign
· REMINDER: Making ICANN Public Meetings Work for You
· REMINDER: Information Transparency Initiative Update: New Content Available on Preview for Your Feedback
Public Comment
· CLOSES THURSDAY: Reference Label Generation Rulesets (LGRs) for the Second Level
· Proposed Amendment 1 to the .JOBS Registry Agreement
· Recommendations for Early Warning for Root Zone Scaling
ICANN69 Resources
Registration [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>
ICANN69 Participation Guide [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>
Virtual Backgrounds [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>
ICANN69 Schedule [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>
Policy Outlook Report [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>
GNSO Policy Briefing [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>
Topics for Joint Meetings with the ICANN Board [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>
Information Sharing
CLOSES THURSDAY: Nominations for NextGen Selection Committee and Mentor Positions Now Open
From: Sally Costerton, Senior Advisor to the President and Senior Vice President, Global Stakeholder Engagement
The ICANN org NextGen Program announced [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…> that it is seeking nominations for mentors and for the NextGen selection committee. Communities may choose to appoint program alumni and are encouraged to appoint active community members who have an interest in mentoring students.
There are three slots available for mentors, and five slots for selection committee members. Each SO/AC is asked to nominate candidates for both positions. Individual self-nominations will not be considered.
Interested community groups should select their respective NextGen@ICANN volunteers by Thursday, 15 October 2020 and notify Deborah Escalera at nextgen(a)icann.org<mailto:nextgen@icann.org>.
Learn more about the guidelines and expectations for Mentors [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…> and for the Selection Committee [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>.
NEW: ICANN69 Topics for Joint Meetings with the ICANN Board
Please refer to this workspace [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…> for a compilation of areas of interest submitted by ICANN community
groups for discussion with the ICANN Board at the ICANN69 Virtual Annual General Meeting. The workspace will be updated as changes are received.
Here are the groups that have submitted topics:
· At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>
· Country Code Names Supporting Organization (ccNSO) [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>
· Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) Council [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>
· Commercial Stakeholder Group (CSG) [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>
· Contracted Parties House (CPH) [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>
· Noncommercial Stakeholder Group (NCSG) [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>
· Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>
· Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC) [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>
· Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>
[https://files.constantcontact.com/304b3fd3501/721cf99a-d05e-4138-afea-e67a5…]
REMINDER: ICANN69 Social Media Sharing Campaign
To get the community excited about and engaged with ICANN69, ICANN is launching a new social media campaign [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>.
For ICANN67, the campaign asked participants to share photos of their workspace; for ICANN68, we asked for photos of the city from where participants joined the meeting.
For ICANN69, the campaign is called #ICANNintermission.
This time, we are asking members of the ICANN community, ICANN Board, and ICANN org to send us photos of what they like to do between sessions (yoga, going for a run, playing with their pets, playing soccer with their kids, etc.). We need a few photos to get the campaign started!
Photos need to be in landscape mode, (see example above) preferably with the subject in the center to crop the image. Please provide the city and any other information you want to let us know.
Send photos and information to icanncontent(a)icann.org<mailto:icanncontent@icann.org>.
REMINDER: Making ICANN Public Meetings Work for You
From: Göran Marby, ICANN President and CEO
The ICANN Board is seeking community feedback to assess the effectiveness of our virtual Public Meetings, the improvements that the org should make to its support for the community’s work at meetings, and any other aspects that should be integrated into our in-person meeting strategy going forward.
ICANN org is sending a survey to our Supporting Organization (SO) and Advisory Committee (AC) chairs to spark a discussion within each group, as this discussion belongs to the community. The chairs will then coordinate and consolidate their respective group’s feedback. The Board will also host a session at ICANN69 to continue the conversation with the community about our meeting strategy. The survey will serve as a guidepost for those discussions.
Participate in the ICANN69 Board/Community Focus on Meetings Session [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…> on Monday, 19 October 2020 at 12:30 UTC.
Learn more. [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>
REMINDER: Information Transparency Initiative Update: New Content Available for Your Feedback
From: Sally Newell Cohen, ICANN Senior Vice President, Global Communications
As ICANN org President and CEO Göran Marby announced in his May 2020 blog [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>, the Information Transparency Initiative (ITI) team is releasing new content to https://preview.icann.org [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>, and content on https://icann.org [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…> has been improved with ITI’s enhanced search features. New and improved content includes:
· Correspondence - New findability improvements include keyword(s) search allowing you to narrow your search within Correspondence files, an advanced year selector, a helpful sub-navigation menu, and an improved table layout to enhance accessibility and readability.
· Board Meeting Materials - We’ve made upgrades to this content type since the May 2020 release. The keyword(s) search has been implemented and improved, and most Board Meeting files and pages from 1998-2019 are now available via filtered or keyword search.
· Acronyms and Terms - Enhancements to the existing release include alignment with ITI’s new user experience, additional terms added in all six U.N. languages, and a new sub-navigation menu.
We Need Your Feedback
To support our current release, we invite the community to join us for two upcoming webinars. The team will demonstrate the enhancements to Correspondence, Board Materials, and Acronyms and Terms, and answer any questions.
ITI Webinar 1
Tuesday, 1 December 2020, 15:00 UTC
Register [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>
ITI Webinar 2
Tuesday, 1 December 2020, 22:00 UTC
Register [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>
Learn more. [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>
Public Comment
CLOSES THURSDAY: [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>Reference Label Generation Rulesets (LGRs) for the Second Level [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>
Close Date: Thursday, 15 October 2020
Proposed Amendment 1 to the .JOBS Registry Agreement [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>
Close Date: 16 November 2020
Recommendations for Early Warning for Root Zone Scaling [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…>
Close Date: Monday, 23 November 2020
Volume 2, Issue 79 | Archive [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001Ga-SiXpBzi6D0POlM…> | Next Issue: Thursday, 15 October 2020
1
0
Dear councilors,
A reminder to access the ICANN69 schedule, you will need to register here<https://69.schedule.icann.org/>. Only members who are registered will be able to access the ICANN69 Zoom session information.
Below are the ICANN69 sessions which GNSO Councilors are expected to attend. Please note both the joint GAC GNSO session (taking place this week) and the pre-ICANN69 GNSO Working Session will NOT appear on the ICANN69 schedule.
* Thursday 1 October 2020
12:00 – 13:00 UTC: Joint GNSO GAC meeting (you will have the join information on your calendars and in your inboxes)
* Tuesday 6 October 2020
11:30 – 13:00 UTC: Pre ICANN69 GNSO Working Session Webinar (you will have the join information on your calendars and in your inboxes)
Councilors will be able to find information on all prep week, SOAC week and Plenary week webinars on the ICANN69 schedule.
Times below are in UTC, on the ICANN69 schedule however they are in local time (UTC +2) but will appear in your time zone once you download the ics invitations.
Prep week:
Thursday 8 October 2020
16:30 – 18:30 UTC: Pre-ICANN69 Policy Webinar
SOAC week:
Tuesday 13 October 2020
07:00 – 08:00 UTC: Joint SSAC and GNSO Council
10:00 – 11:30 UTC: GNSO Council & ICANN Board
Thursday 15 October 2020
08:30 – 09:30 UTC: GNSO Policy topic
Plenary week:
Tuesday 20 October 2020
10:30 – 12:00 UTC: Joint GNSO & ccNSO Councils
Wednesday 21 October 2020:
11:00 – 13:00 UTC: GNSO Council Public meeting
13:15 – 14:00 UTC: GNSO Council Admin meeting
Thursday 22 October 2020:
10:30 – 12:00: GNSO Council Wrap Up
If you have any questions, please reach out to gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>
Thank you!
Nathalie
1
1
Re: [council] Final Proposed Agenda | GNSO Council Meetings part 1 and 2 | 21 October 2020 at 13:00 CET / 11:00 UTC
by policy@bacinblack.com 11 Oct '20
by policy@bacinblack.com 11 Oct '20
11 Oct '20
Dear All,
Please see below for a slight amendment to item #4 of the agenda that was sent a few hours ago.
Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Discuss Small Team Options Regarding EPDP Phase 1 Recommendation 7 (25 minutes)
In adopting the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification Final Report and Recommendations, the Council requested that an informal Implementation Review Team (IRT) be established, which was done. After the recommendations were approved by the ICANN Board, the informal IRT transitioned to a formal IRT and has diligently been working to implement the policy recommendations. Within the IRT, there are diverging views amongst some IRT members on how to implement recommendation 7, especially in relation to the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy for .COM, .NET, and .JOBS
The ICANN Board, taking note of the potential impasse, sent a <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/…> letter to the GNSO Council on 11 March 2020. The Council considered the letter and agreed that recommendation 7 did not explicitly overturn the Thick Whois Transition Policy; to do so will require the GNSO Council to initiate policy development. The Council sent a <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspond…> response to the ICANN Board on 29 May 2020. The IRT has continued to try and implement recommendation 7 but has still been unable to reach agreement. As such and per the Council’s letter, the Council requested a briefing from, ”the GNSO Council liaison detailing the precise nature of the impasse so that the GNSO Council can make an informed determination on how to proceed.” During its September Council meeting, the Council received a briefing from the GNSO Council liaison to the IRT, Sebastien Ducos. The Council agreed to convene a small team of Councilors that was charged with establishing a path forward to try and resolve the impasse. That small team met to determine what the best practical path forward may be.
Here, the Council will consider the options proposed by the small team, including a draft motion [to be sent under separate cover] that would do two things 1) Affirm the intent of EPDP Phase 1 Recommendation 7; and 2) initiate an EPDP on the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy.
4.1 - Introduction of topic (Council Vice-Chair, Pam Little)
4.2 – Council discussion
4.3 – Next steps
Thank you.
B
Berry Cobb
GNSO Policy Consultant
Principal | BAC in Black Consulting <http://bacinblack.com/>
Mob: +1 (720) 839-5735
<https://twitter.com/berrycobb>
<https://www.linkedin.com/in/berrycobb/>
From: council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> On Behalf Of Nathalie Peregrine
Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2020 16:15
To: council(a)gnso.icann.org
Cc: gnso-secs(a)icann.org
Subject: [council] *with correct date in body of email* : Final Proposed Agenda | GNSO Council Meetings part 1 and 2 | 21 October 2020 at 13:00 CET / 11:00 UTC
Dear all,
Please find below the final proposed agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting on 21 October 2020 at 11:00 UTC.
Draft GNSO Council Agenda 21 October 2020 - Part I
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/OAebC> https://community.icann.org/x/OAebC
This agenda was established according to the <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/op-proced…> GNSO Operating Procedures v3.5, updated on 24 October 2019
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 13:00 CET (Hamburg time)
Coordinated Universal Time: 11:00 UTC: <https://tinyurl.com/y3nxs8rf> https://tinyurl.com/y3nxs8rf
04:00 Los Angeles; 07:00 Washington; 12:00 London; 14:00 Moscow; 20:00 Tokyo; 22:00 Melbourne
GNSO Council Meeting Remote Participation: Not available until 24 hours before.
___________________________________
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:
<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2020/minutes/minutes-gnso…> Minutes of the GNSO Council meeting on 20 August 2020 were posted on 04 Sep 2020.
<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2020/minutes/minutes-gnso…> Minutes of the GNSO Council meeting on the 24 September 2020 were posted on 9 October 2020.
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 <https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/project> Projects List and <https://community.icann.org/x/RgZlAg> Action Item List.
Item 3: Consent Agenda (10 minutes)
3.1 - <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/40175174/program_managemen…> Action Decision Radar - Next Steps for WHOIS Conflicts Procedure Implementation Advisory Group
The GNSO Council has considered the proposed immediate actions and subsequent steps as outlined in the WHOIS Conflicts Procedure IAG (WHOIS IAG) Small Team’s <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20201006/2a0c0c3e/Summary…> proposal. The proposal outlines recommended next steps to consider with respect to modifying the implementation of the WHOIS Conflicts Procedure, in light of public comments received and changes to data protection law that may have affected the implementation of the Procedure. Specifically, the GNSO Council requests:
1. ICANN org, in consultation with contracted parties, to draft a proposal for a modification to the existing Procedure based on its past experience with both the WHOIS Conflicts Procedure and the registrar data retention waiver process. In formulating the draft proposal, the GNSO Council recommends that ICANN org consider changes to data protection law that may have affected the previous implementation of this Procedure in light of the contractual requirements, e.g., the General Data Protection Regulation. For example, should the identification of a new trigger to activate the procedure be considered given potential financial penalties under GDPR?
2. Following receipt of the proposal from ICANN org, the GNSO Council will consider the proposal and assess next steps, including seeking input from the community, if appropriate, given the substance of the proposal. Following the GNSO Council’s consideration, the GNSO Council may choose to adopt the proposal.
3. If the GNSO Council does not deem the proposal appropriate:
a. the GNSO Council will recommend a small group of Council volunteers to review the <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/draft-ica…> WHOIS IAG draft charter and confirm it is still fit for purpose; and
b. Following confirmation of the Charter by the GNSO Council, the GNSO Council recommends launching the call for volunteers for the WHOIS IAG, taking into consideration the GNSO Council’s upcoming workload. For example, the call for volunteers may need to be postponed if no community bandwidth is available to immediately consider the issues. In the meantime, ICANN org, in conjunction with the EPDP Phase 1 IRT, will need to update relevant terminology pursuant to EPDP Phase 1, Rec. 27.
1. Should the GNSO Council consider the outcome developed from the WHOIS IAG unacceptable, the GNSO Council will consider initiating an EPDP to either change or repeal the Consensus Policy.
3.2 - <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/40175174/program_managemen…> Action Decision Radar - Per the rationale circulated on 11 October 2020, Council agrees to launch a call for volunteers for a small team to develop both a draft charter and an EPDP scoping document for the IDN Policy Track 2.
3.3 - Following the GNSO Council’s consideration of the proposed immediate actions and subsequent steps as outlined <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/epdp-2-pr…> here, the GNSO Council directs:
EPDP Phase 2a – Legal/natural and feasibility of unique contacts
1. The GNSO Policy Support Team communicate to the groups that have appointed members to the EPDP Team that the Council is expected to instruct the EPDP Team to further consider the topics of legal/natural and feasibility of unique contacts per the instructions above, as well as the expected timeframe, provided herein for reference, “[a]t the latest 3 months after reconvening, the Chair of the EPDP Team and GNSO Council Liaison to the EPDP will report back to the GNSO Council on the status of deliberations. Based on this report, which is expected to include an update on progress made and the expected likelihood of consensus recommendations, the GNSO Council will decide on next steps, which could include providing additional time for the EPDP to finalize its recommendations or termination of the EPDP if it is clear that no progress is being made or consensus is unlikely). Request groups to:
a. Commence process of confirming members availability and/or re- appointing members to work on these topics. Proposed deadline: 15 November.
b. Start developing proposals to address these topics, factoring in deliberations to date, that will allow the EPDP Team to kickstart deliberations on these topics when it reconvenes.”
1. The Council leadership to initiate an Expression of Interest Process to identify a new Chair.
The EPDP Team shall recommence its deliberations upon selection and confirmation of a new Chair; however, should no suitable candidates be found or should the appointment process require significant time, Council leadership will inform the Council accordingly and recommend commencement of deliberations under the leadership of the GNSO Council liaison to the EPDP Team.
Accuracy:
1. The GNSO Policy Support Team communicates to GNSO SG/Cs, as well as ICANN Advisory Committees that have expressed an interest in the topic of accuracy, the intent of the GNSO Council to launch a scoping team on this topic. Request groups to:
a. Start thinking about members that have relevant knowledge and expertise that should join this effort once the scoping team launches.
b. Start compiling relevant information and suggestions that would allow kickstarting the discussions on 1. and 2. once the scoping team is formed (see <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/epdp-2-pr…> here for resources already identified).
1. Council leadership to request ICANN Org to develop a briefing document that outlines both (i) existing accuracy requirements and programs and (ii) the corresponding impact that GDPR has had on implementing / enforcing these requirements and programs. The document, once delivered, will be provided to the scoping team to inform its deliberations.
2. GNSO Council to consider in the context of the Council Action / Decision Radar, the appropriate starting time for this effort, factoring in other projects that are in the pipeline.
3.4 - Confirmation of the <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/draft-epd…> Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board regarding adoption of recommendations 1-22 contained in the Final Report from the EPDP Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data – Phase 2.
3.5 - Appointment of the GNSO Liaison to the Governmental Advisory Committee ( <https://community.icann.org/x/OgebC> motion)
Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Discuss Draft Motion to Affirm intent of EPDP Phase 1 Recommendation 7 and Initiation of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy EPDP (25 minutes)
In adopting the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification Final Report and Recommendations, the Council requested that an informal Implementation Review Team (IRT) be established, which was done. After the recommendations were approved by the ICANN Board, the informal IRT transitioned to a formal IRT and has diligently been working to implement the policy recommendations. Within the IRT, there are diverging views amongst some IRT members on how to implement recommendation 7, especially in relation to the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy for .COM, .NET, and .JOBS
The ICANN Board, taking note of the potential impasse, sent a <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/…> letter to the GNSO Council on 11 March 2020. The Council considered the letter and agreed that recommendation 7 did not explicitly overturn the Thick Whois Transition Policy; to do so will require the GNSO Council to initiate policy development. The Council sent a <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspond…> response to the ICANN Board on 29 May 2020. The IRT has continued to try and implement recommendation 7 but has still been unable to reach agreement. As such and per the Council’s letter, the Council requested a briefing from, ”the GNSO Council liaison detailing the precise nature of the impasse so that the GNSO Council can make an informed determination on how to proceed.” During its September Council meeting, the Council received a briefing from the GNSO Council liaison to the IRT, Sebastien Ducos. The Council agreed to convene a small team of Councilors that was charged with establishing a path forward to try and resolve the impasse. That small team met to determine what the best practical path forward may be.
Here, the Council will consider a draft motion that would do two things 1) Affirm the intent of EPDP Phase 1 Recommendation 7; and 2) initiate an EPDP on the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy.
4.1 - Introduction of topic (Council Vice-Chair, Pam Little)
4.2 – Council discussion
4.3 – Next steps
Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Operational Design Phase for gTLD Policy Implementation (15 minutes)
During the 23 September SO/AC Leaders call, the concept of an "Operational Design Phase" was introduced by Goran. The SO/AC Leaders had a preliminary discussion on the topic and Goran indicated that ICANN would produce a paper for community consideration and feedback. That <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20201005/2000130c/Design-…> paper was prepared and was shared with the Council on 5 October 2020.
The objective for this new proposed design phase is to better prepare the Board by providing operational and resourcing information before making decisions on GNSO-approved policy recommendations. The paper notes that while the GNSO Council is the manager of the PDP and gTLD policy development is within the GNSO's remit, consensus policy making involves all stakeholders (including ACs who give advice to the Board). Further, the paper seeks to be clear that this design phase concept doesn't affect policy development or the Consensus Policy Implementation Framework. It recognizes that if policy issues are impacted, they rightfully go back to the GNSO for its consideration, rather than permitting ICANN Org or Board to make unilateral changes.
The Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies were invited and encouraged to provide feedback to the paper. In addition, on a 6 October GNSO Council pre-ICANN working session, Karen Lentz from ICANN org provided additional information and rationale for the new concept.
Here, Councilors will be invited to share their initial thoughts on the concept and the paper.
5.1 - Introduction of topic (Council leadership)
5.2 - Council discussion
5.3 - Next steps
Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Board Consultation Regarding Questions Surrounding the financial Sustainability of the System for Standardized Access and Disclosure (20 minutes)
On 24 September 2020, the GNSO Council adopted the recommendations contained in the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification Phase 2 <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/epdp-phas…> Final Report. Resolved clause 1b. states:
b. [if 1a. is adopted] Noting some of the questions surrounding the financial sustainability of SSAD and some of the concerns expressed within the different minority statements, the GNSO Council requests a consultation with the ICANN Board as part of the delivery of the GNSO Council Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board to discuss these issues, including whether a further cost-benefit analysis should be conducted before the ICANN Board considers all SSAD-related recommendations for adoption.
The request for a consultation with the ICANN Board is not usually an element of the transition of GNSO-approved recommendations from the GNSO Council to the ICANN Board. As such, the Council will need to consider how best to engage with the Board in seeking this consultation.
Here, the Council will discuss next steps as it relates to resolved clause 1b, including whether the draft <https://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/draft-transmittal-letter-icann-board-08oct…> Transmittal Letter accurately captures the agreed-upon approach of the Council.
6.1 - Introduction of topic (Council leadership)
6.2 - Council discussion
6.3 - Next steps
Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - ADR Item - Council to Consider Delay of the Request for the Policy Status Report for the Expiration Policy(ies) (10 minutes)
As indicated on the <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Items?previe…> Action Decision Radar, the GNSO Council is to consider when to request a Policy Status Report to conduct a review of the two Expiration Policies, the <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/registars/accreditation/eddp-en> Expired Domain Deletion Policy (EDDP) and the <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/errp-2013-02-28-en> Expired Registration Recovery Policy (ERRP). Given the concerns about capacity, along with the circumstances that no known issues have presented themselves, Council leadership is suggesting that the request for Policy Status Reports for these two Consensus Policies can be delayed by a period of 24 months, assuming no substantive issues arise during that time. This would have the effect of deferring the request for a Policy Status Report on the EDDP and ERRP until at least November 2022, where it would then be discussed again to determine if a request is timely.
Here, the Council will consider whether it agrees with this suggestion and if so, agree to include on the November consent agenda.
7.1 - Introduction of topic (Council leadership)
7.2 - Council discussion
7.3 - Next steps
Item 8: ANY OTHER BUSINESS (20 minutes)
8.1 - Farewell to outgoing Councilors (Elsa Saade, Erika Mann, James Gannon, Julf Helsingius, Keith Drazek, Michele Neylon, Rafik Dammak and Scott McCormick.)
8.2 - Open microphone
_______________________________
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> 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…> https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/op-proced…
References for Coordinated Universal Time of 11:00 UTC
Local time between March and October Summer in the NORTHERN hemisphere
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
California, USA (PDT) UTC-7 04:00
San José, Costa Rica (CST) UTC-6 06:00
New York/Washington DC, USA (EDT) UTC-4 07:00
Buenos Aires, Argentina (ART) UTC-3 08:00
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (BRST) UTC-3 08:00
London, United Kingdom (GMT) UTC+1 12:00
Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo (WAT) UTC+1 12:00
Paris, France (CEST) UTC+2 13:00
Moscow, Russia (MST) UTC+3 14:00
Singapore (SGT) UTC+8 19:00
Tokyo, Japan (JST) UTC+9 20:00
Melbourne, Australia (AEDT) UTC+11 22:00
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
DST starts/ends on Sunday 25 of October 2020, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) for EU countries and on Sunday 01 of November 2020 for the US.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For other places see <http://www.timeanddate.com/> http://www.timeanddate.com and <https://tinyurl.com/y3nxs8rf> https://tinyurl.com/y3nxs8rf
Final GNSO Council Agenda 21 October 2020 - Part II (Admin)
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/OAebC> https://community.icann.org/x/OAebC
This agenda was established according to the <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/op-proced…> GNSO Operating Procedures v3.5 updated on 24 October 2019
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 15:15 CET (Hamburg time)
Coordinated Universal Time: 13:15 UTC: <https://tinyurl.com/yyor7bfj> https://tinyurl.com/yyor7bfj
06:15 Los Angeles; 09:15 Washington; 14:15 London; 16:15 Moscow; 22:15 Tokyo; (Thursday 22 October) 00:15 Melbourne
GNSO Council Meeting Remote Participation: Not available until 24 hours before.
___________________________________
Item 1. Seating of the 2020 / 2021 Council (20 mins)
1.1 - Roll Call
1.2 - Statements of Interest
INCOMING COUNCILORS:
Kurt Pritz: <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Kurt+Pritz+SOI> SOI Registries Stakeholder Group
Kristian Ørmen - <https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=66081213> SOI Registrars Stakeholder Group
Mark Datysgeld: <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Mark+Datysgeld+SOI> SOI Business Constituency
Stephanie Perrin: <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Stephanie+Perrin+SOI> SOI Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group
Wisdom Donkor: <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Wisdom+Donkor+SOI> SOI Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group
Tomslin Samme-Nlar - <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Tomslin+Samme-Nlar+SOI> SOI Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group
Olga Cavall- <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Olga+Cavalli+SOI> SOI - Non-Voting NomCom Appointee
Jeffrey Neuman - <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Jeff+Neuman+SOI> SOI - GNSO Council Liaison to the GAC
Thank you again to outgoing Councilors: Elsa Saade, Erika Mann, James Gannon, Julf Helsingius, Keith Drazek, Michele Neylon, Rafik Dammak and Scott McCormick.
1.3 - Review / Amend Agenda
Item 2. Election of the Chair (20 mins)
One nomination was received for this position from Philippe Fouquart of the Non Contracted Party House. The GNSO reviewed the <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/fouquart-…> candidate statement and held a question & answer session with the candidate on 24 September 2020. Here the GNSO Council will proceed to hold the election for its Chair for 2020-2021, according to the GNSO Operating Procedures (note Section 2.2 of the GNSO Operating Procedures on Officer Elections: Chair and Vice-Chairs (see Appendix 1 below)).
Item 3. Any Other Business (0 min)
None
Appendix 1: Excerpt from GNSO Operating Procedures (Section 2.2)
2.2 <https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-01sep16-en.pdf> https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-01sep16-en.pdf
Officer Elections: Chair and Vice-Chairs
The GNSO Council shall select the GNSO Chair and two Vice-Chairs as follows:
1. The GNSO Chair shall be elected by a 60 percent vote of each house.
2. Each house will be allowed to nominate one candidate for GNSO Council Chair. Each house is responsible for determining how to nominate its candidate. A candidate for GNSO Council Chair does not need to be a member of a house, but must be a current or incoming member of the GNSO Council. Should a Chair be elected from outside of the houses that Chair will be a non-voting Chair.
a. All ballots will include the “none of the above” option. In the event that a 60 percent vote of each house selects the “none of the above” option, each house will commence a new nomination period of not longer than 15 days. An election for the new nominees will be scheduled for no sooner than 30 days after the unsuccessful vote.
b. In the case of a tie for the most votes between the two candidates, or between a candidate and “none of above,” a second election will be held no sooner than 30 days. The candidates shall remain the same for this second election. In the case this second election also results in a tie, each house will commence a new nomination period of not longer than 15 days. An election for the new nominees will be rescheduled for no sooner than 30 days after the unsuccessful vote.
c. The leading candidate will be defined as the one with the highest score. The score is calculated by adding together the voting percentages attained from each house. The highest percentage attainable in each house is 100. Thus, the maximum score a candidate can achieve is 200 as a result of attaining 100 percent of the votes from the contracted party house and 100 percent from the non-contracted party house (100 percent + 100 percent = score of 200). In case neither candidate reaches the 60 percent of each house threshold, a second ballot will be held between the leading candidate and “none of the above.”
d. In case neither candidate reaches the 60 percent of each house threshold and the candidates do not tie, a second runoff ballot will be held between the leading candidate and “none of the above.”
e. If the single candidate does not reach the 60 percent of each house threshold in the runoff ballot, then each house will commence a new nomination period of not longer than 15 days. An election for the new nominees will be rescheduled for no sooner than 30 days after the unsuccessful runoff ballot.
1. Each house shall select a Council Vice-Chair from within its respective house.
2. A Chair may not be a member of the same Stakeholder Group of either of the Vice-Chairs.
3. The Chair and Vice-Chairs shall retain their votes (if any) in their respective houses (if any).
4. In the event that the GNSO Council has not elected a GNSO Council Chair by the end of the previous Chair’s term, the Vice-Chairs will serve as Interim GNSO Co- Chairs to jointly oversee the new Chair election and conduct Council business until a successful election can be held. In the event that one or both Vice-Chairs’ terms ends concurrently with the term of the previous Chair, the procedures described in Section 2.2.1 below shall apply.
5. The Council shall inform the Board and the Community appropriately and post the election results on the GNSO website within 2 business days following each election and runoff ballot, whether successful or unsuccessful.
Appendix 2: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds ( <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#article11> ICANN Bylaws, Article 11, Section 3)
(i) Except as otherwise specified in these Bylaws, Annex A, Annex A-1 or Annex A-2 hereto, or the GNSO Operating Procedures, the default threshold to pass a GNSO Council motion or other voting action requires a simple majority vote of each House. The voting thresholds described below shall apply to the following GNSO actions:
(i) Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more than one-fourth (1/4) vote of each House or majority of one House.
(ii) Initiate a Policy Development Process ("PDP") Within Scope (as described in Annex A): requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House.
(iii) Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of GNSO Supermajority (as defined in Section 11.3(i)(xix)).
(iv) Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House.
(v) Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
(vi) Changes to an Approved PDP Team Charter: For any PDP Team Charter approved under (iv) or (v) above, the GNSO Council may approve an amendment to the Charter through a simple majority vote of each House.
(vii) Terminate a PDP: Once initiated, and prior to the publication of a Final Report, the GNSO Council may terminate a PDP only for significant cause, upon a motion that passes with a GNSO Supermajority Vote in favor of termination.
(viii) Approve a PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a majority of each House and further requires that one GNSO Council member representative of at least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups supports the Recommendation.
(ix) Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority,
(x) Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that "a two-thirds vote of the council" demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded.
(xi) Modification of Approved PDP Recommendation: Prior to Final Approval by the Board, an Approved PDP Recommendation may be modified or amended by the GNSO Council with a GNSO Supermajority vote.
(xii) Initiation of an Expedited Policy Development Process ("EPDP"): requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
(xiii) Approve an EPDP Team Charter: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
(xiv) Approval of EPDP Recommendations: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
(xv) Approve an EPDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that "a two-thirds vote of the council" demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded.
(xvi) Initiation of a GNSO Guidance Process ("GGP"): requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House.
(xvii) Rejection of Initiation of a GGP Requested by the Board: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
(xviii) Approval of GGP Recommendations: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
(xix) A "GNSO Supermajority" shall mean: (A) two-thirds (2/3) of the Council members of each House, or (B) three-fourths (3/4) of the Council members of one House and a majority of the Council members of the other House.
<https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-01sep16-en.pdf> https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-01sep16-en.pdf
Appendix 1 GNSO Council Voting Results table
Absentee Voting Procedures <https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-01sep16-en.pdf> https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-01sep16-en.pdf
4.4 Absentee Voting
4.1.1 Applicability
Absentee voting is permitted for the following limited number of Council motions or measures.
1. Initiate a Policy Development Process (PDP);
2. Approve a PDP recommendation;
3. Recommend amendments to the GNSO Operating Procedures (GOP) or ICANN Bylaws;
4. Fill a Council position open for election.
4.1.2 Absentee ballots, when permitted, must be submitted within the announced time limit, which shall be 72 hours from the meeting’s adjournment. In exceptional circumstances, announced at the time of the vote, the Chair may reduce this time to 24 hours or extend the time to 7 calendar days, provided such amendment is verbally confirmed by all Vice-Chairs present.
4.1.3 The GNSO Secretariat will administer, record, and tabulate absentee votes according to these procedures and will provide reasonable means for transmitting and authenticating absentee ballots, which could include voting by telephone, e- mail, web-based interface, or other technologies as may become available.
4.1.4 Absentee balloting does not affect quorum requirements.
1
0
Dear All,
Please find attached the latest version of the GNSO Council's Projects List
for the meeting on 21 October 2020. Per the agenda, the Council will not
review the project list in detail. However, after your preliminary review in
advance of the meeting and should you find an area that you have questions
or parts that need clarification, please send your questions or comments to
the mailing list.
Agenda:
*
https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Final+Proposed+Agend
a+21+October+2020+-+Part+1
*
https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Final+Proposed+Agend
a+21+October+2020+-+Part+2
Key Structural Changes:
* Project List (PL):
* The summary page has adapted to reflect the program that the project
belongs to and the Programs are now color coded. The old "LINK" column was
deleted and the hyperlinks are now set on the Project Code. You will also
notice that the Phase of the project was shifted to the right to better
align with the meta data of the project like Duration, % Complete, Status
and Health. The next version, the Phase column will likely be modified to
reduce its footprint, but still maintain a marker for the phase for which
the project belongs.
* The "0 - Planning" section of the PL Summary Page is now a single
line item which acts as a pointer to the PMT and ADR tools where planning is
housed. The quantity of the "0 - Planning" section, as depicted on the
graph, is based on an initial count of current items on the ADR delineated
by non-PDP and PDP.
* The "1 - Issue Identification" section of the graph is a count of
the GNSO Council Action Items
<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Items> and
the Transfer Policy - Issue Report. In the following months, we will release
a next generation of the Action Items page, currently Wiki, to be align with
these three planning tools. Stay tuned.
* Action/Decision Radar (ADR):
* As with the PL, the ADR also contains the Program color code and the
Project Code to maintain continuity across the tools.
* Program Management Tool (PMT):
* The tool now contains the same Program management color coding of
the PL and ADR. The first two pages of the PMT PDF are a summary view, while
the remaining four are the fully expanded Program/Project/Task details.
Key Project Changes for this Period:
* RPM WG Status upgraded to "Revised Schedule" after PCR adoption in
September, however the Health remains "In-trouble".
* The SubPro WG public comment period closed on its proposed Final
Report.
* EPDP-Phase 2 - migrated to "6 - Board Vote" phase after adoption of
the Final Report by the Council last meeting.
* Action/Decision Radar:
* Several items moved to the "1 Month to 3 Months" Range Marker:
please review this section in detail as it covers work in front of the
Council to the end of calendar year 2020.
* New item added to the "1 Month to 3 Months" Range Marker: SCBO, is
scheduled to spin up in November in preparation for the FY22 Budget and
Operations planning cycle.
* New item added to the "1 Month to 3 Months" Range Marker: GNSO
Review3, Organizational Reviews are scheduled to start 5 years after the
previous review report submitted to the ICANN Board.
Thank you.
B
Berry Cobb
GNSO Policy Consultant
Principal | <http://bacinblack.com/> BAC in Black Consulting
Mob: +1 (720) 839-5735
<https://twitter.com/berrycobb>
<https://www.linkedin.com/in/berrycobb/>
1
0
*with correct date in body of email* : Final Proposed Agenda | GNSO Council Meetings part 1 and 2 | 21 October 2020 at 13:00 CET / 11:00 UTC
by Nathalie Peregrine 11 Oct '20
by Nathalie Peregrine 11 Oct '20
11 Oct '20
Dear all,
Please find below the final proposed agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting on 21 October 2020 at 11:00 UTC.
Draft GNSO Council Agenda 21 October 2020 - Part I
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/OAebC
This agenda was established according to the GNSO Operating Procedures<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/op-proced…> v3.5, updated on 24 October 2019
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 13:00 CET (Hamburg time)
Coordinated Universal Time: 11:00 UTC: https://tinyurl.com/y3nxs8rf
04:00 Los Angeles; 07:00 Washington; 12:00 London; 14:00 Moscow; 20:00 Tokyo; 22:00 Melbourne
GNSO Council Meeting Remote Participation: Not available until 24 hours before.
___________________________________
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/2020/minutes/minutes-gnso…> of the GNSO Council meeting on 20 August 2020 were posted on 04 Sep 2020.
Minutes<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2020/minutes/minutes-gnso…> of the GNSO Council meeting on the 24 September 2020 were posted on 9 October 2020.
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 (10 minutes)
3.1 - Action Decision Radar<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/40175174/program_managemen…> - Next Steps for WHOIS Conflicts Procedure Implementation Advisory Group
The GNSO Council has considered the proposed immediate actions and subsequent steps as outlined in the WHOIS Conflicts Procedure IAG (WHOIS IAG) Small Team’s proposal<http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20201006/2a0c0c3e/Summary…>. The proposal outlines recommended next steps to consider with respect to modifying the implementation of the WHOIS Conflicts Procedure, in light of public comments received and changes to data protection law that may have affected the implementation of the Procedure. Specifically, the GNSO Council requests:
1. ICANN org, in consultation with contracted parties, to draft a proposal for a modification to the existing Procedure based on its past experience with both the WHOIS Conflicts Procedure and the registrar data retention waiver process. In formulating the draft proposal, the GNSO Council recommends that ICANN org consider changes to data protection law that may have affected the previous implementation of this Procedure in light of the contractual requirements, e.g., the General Data Protection Regulation. For example, should the identification of a new trigger to activate the procedure be considered given potential financial penalties under GDPR?
2. Following receipt of the proposal from ICANN org, the GNSO Council will consider the proposal and assess next steps, including seeking input from the community, if appropriate, given the substance of the proposal. Following the GNSO Council’s consideration, the GNSO Council may choose to adopt the proposal.
3. If the GNSO Council does not deem the proposal appropriate:
a. the GNSO Council will recommend a small group of Council volunteers to review the WHOIS IAG draft charter<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/draft-ica…> and confirm it is still fit for purpose; and
b. Following confirmation of the Charter by the GNSO Council, the GNSO Council recommends launching the call for volunteers for the WHOIS IAG, taking into consideration the GNSO Council’s upcoming workload. For example, the call for volunteers may need to be postponed if no community bandwidth is available to immediately consider the issues. In the meantime, ICANN org, in conjunction with the EPDP Phase 1 IRT, will need to update relevant terminology pursuant to EPDP Phase 1, Rec. 27.
1. Should the GNSO Council consider the outcome developed from the WHOIS IAG unacceptable, the GNSO Council will consider initiating an EPDP to either change or repeal the Consensus Policy.
3.2 - Action Decision Radar<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/40175174/program_managemen…> - Per the rationale circulated on 11 October 2020, Council agrees to launch a call for volunteers for a small team to develop both a draft charter and an EPDP scoping document for the IDN Policy Track 2.
3.3 - Following the GNSO Council’s consideration of the proposed immediate actions and subsequent steps as outlined here<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/epdp-2-pr…>, the GNSO Council directs:
EPDP Phase 2a – Legal/natural and feasibility of unique contacts
1. The GNSO Policy Support Team communicate to the groups that have appointed members to the EPDP Team that the Council is expected to instruct the EPDP Team to further consider the topics of legal/natural and feasibility of unique contacts per the instructions above, as well as the expected timeframe, provided herein for reference, “[a]t the latest 3 months after reconvening, the Chair of the EPDP Team and GNSO Council Liaison to the EPDP will report back to the GNSO Council on the status of deliberations. Based on this report, which is expected to include an update on progress made and the expected likelihood of consensus recommendations, the GNSO Council will decide on next steps, which could include providing additional time for the EPDP to finalize its recommendations or termination of the EPDP if it is clear that no progress is being made or consensus is unlikely). Request groups to:
a. Commence process of confirming members availability and/or re- appointing members to work on these topics. Proposed deadline: 15 November.
b. Start developing proposals to address these topics, factoring in deliberations to date, that will allow the EPDP Team to kickstart deliberations on these topics when it reconvenes.”
1. The Council leadership to initiate an Expression of Interest Process to identify a new Chair.
The EPDP Team shall recommence its deliberations upon selection and confirmation of a new Chair; however, should no suitable candidates be found or should the appointment process require significant time, Council leadership will inform the Council accordingly and recommend commencement of deliberations under the leadership of the GNSO Council liaison to the EPDP Team.
Accuracy:
1. The GNSO Policy Support Team communicates to GNSO SG/Cs, as well as ICANN Advisory Committees that have expressed an interest in the topic of accuracy, the intent of the GNSO Council to launch a scoping team on this topic. Request groups to:
a. Start thinking about members that have relevant knowledge and expertise that should join this effort once the scoping team launches.
b. Start compiling relevant information and suggestions that would allow kickstarting the discussions on 1. and 2. once the scoping team is formed (see here<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/epdp-2-pr…> for resources already identified).
1. Council leadership to request ICANN Org to develop a briefing document that outlines both (i) existing accuracy requirements and programs and (ii) the corresponding impact that GDPR has had on implementing / enforcing these requirements and programs. The document, once delivered, will be provided to the scoping team to inform its deliberations.
2. GNSO Council to consider in the context of the Council Action / Decision Radar, the appropriate starting time for this effort, factoring in other projects that are in the pipeline.
3.4 - Confirmation of the Recommendations Report<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/draft-epd…> to the ICANN Board regarding adoption of recommendations 1-22 contained in the Final Report from the EPDP Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data – Phase 2.
3.5 - Appointment of the GNSO Liaison to the Governmental Advisory Committee (motion<https://community.icann.org/x/OgebC>)
Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Discuss Draft Motion to Affirm intent of EPDP Phase 1 Recommendation 7 and Initiation of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy EPDP (25 minutes)
In adopting the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification Final Report and Recommendations, the Council requested that an informal Implementation Review Team (IRT) be established, which was done. After the recommendations were approved by the ICANN Board, the informal IRT transitioned to a formal IRT and has diligently been working to implement the policy recommendations. Within the IRT, there are diverging views amongst some IRT members on how to implement recommendation 7, especially in relation to the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy for .COM, .NET, and .JOBS
The ICANN Board, taking note of the potential impasse, sent a letter<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/…> to the GNSO Council on 11 March 2020. The Council considered the letter and agreed that recommendation 7 did not explicitly overturn the Thick Whois Transition Policy; to do so will require the GNSO Council to initiate policy development. The Council sent a response<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspond…> to the ICANN Board on 29 May 2020. The IRT has continued to try and implement recommendation 7 but has still been unable to reach agreement. As such and per the Council’s letter, the Council requested a briefing from, ”the GNSO Council liaison detailing the precise nature of the impasse so that the GNSO Council can make an informed determination on how to proceed.” During its September Council meeting, the Council received a briefing from the GNSO Council liaison to the IRT, Sebastien Ducos. The Council agreed to convene a small team of Councilors that was charged with establishing a path forward to try and resolve the impasse. That small team met to determine what the best practical path forward may be.
Here, the Council will consider a draft motion that would do two things 1) Affirm the intent of EPDP Phase 1 Recommendation 7; and 2) initiate an EPDP on the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy.
4.1 - Introduction of topic (Council Vice-Chair, Pam Little)
4.2 – Council discussion
4.3 – Next steps
Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Operational Design Phase for gTLD Policy Implementation (15 minutes)
During the 23 September SO/AC Leaders call, the concept of an "Operational Design Phase" was introduced by Goran. The SO/AC Leaders had a preliminary discussion on the topic and Goran indicated that ICANN would produce a paper for community consideration and feedback. That paper<http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20201005/2000130c/Design-…> was prepared and was shared with the Council on 5 October 2020.
The objective for this new proposed design phase is to better prepare the Board by providing operational and resourcing information before making decisions on GNSO-approved policy recommendations. The paper notes that while the GNSO Council is the manager of the PDP and gTLD policy development is within the GNSO's remit, consensus policy making involves all stakeholders (including ACs who give advice to the Board). Further, the paper seeks to be clear that this design phase concept doesn't affect policy development or the Consensus Policy Implementation Framework. It recognizes that if policy issues are impacted, they rightfully go back to the GNSO for its consideration, rather than permitting ICANN Org or Board to make unilateral changes.
The Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies were invited and encouraged to provide feedback to the paper. In addition, on a 6 October GNSO Council pre-ICANN working session, Karen Lentz from ICANN org provided additional information and rationale for the new concept.
Here, Councilors will be invited to share their initial thoughts on the concept and the paper.
5.1 - Introduction of topic (Council leadership)
5.2 - Council discussion
5.3 - Next steps
Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Board Consultation Regarding Questions Surrounding the financial Sustainability of the System for Standardized Access and Disclosure (20 minutes)
On 24 September 2020, the GNSO Council adopted the recommendations contained in the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification Phase 2 Final Report<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/epdp-phas…>. Resolved clause 1b. states:
b. [if 1a. is adopted] Noting some of the questions surrounding the financial sustainability of SSAD and some of the concerns expressed within the different minority statements, the GNSO Council requests a consultation with the ICANN Board as part of the delivery of the GNSO Council Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board to discuss these issues, including whether a further cost-benefit analysis should be conducted before the ICANN Board considers all SSAD-related recommendations for adoption.
The request for a consultation with the ICANN Board is not usually an element of the transition of GNSO-approved recommendations from the GNSO Council to the ICANN Board. As such, the Council will need to consider how best to engage with the Board in seeking this consultation.
Here, the Council will discuss next steps as it relates to resolved clause 1b, including whether the draft Transmittal Letter<https://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/draft-transmittal-letter-icann-board-08oct…> accurately captures the agreed-upon approach of the Council.
6.1 - Introduction of topic (Council leadership)
6.2 - Council discussion
6.3 - Next steps
Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - ADR Item - Council to Consider Delay of the Request for the Policy Status Report for the Expiration Policy(ies) (10 minutes)
As indicated on the Action Decision Radar<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Items?previe…>, the GNSO Council is to consider when to request a Policy Status Report to conduct a review of the two Expiration Policies, the Expired Domain Deletion Policy<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/registars/accreditation/eddp-en> (EDDP) and the Expired Registration Recovery Policy<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/errp-2013-02-28-en> (ERRP). Given the concerns about capacity, along with the circumstances that no known issues have presented themselves, Council leadership is suggesting that the request for Policy Status Reports for these two Consensus Policies can be delayed by a period of 24 months, assuming no substantive issues arise during that time. This would have the effect of deferring the request for a Policy Status Report on the EDDP and ERRP until at least November 2022, where it would then be discussed again to determine if a request is timely.
Here, the Council will consider whether it agrees with this suggestion and if so, agree to include on the November consent agenda.
7.1 - Introduction of topic (Council leadership)
7.2 - Council discussion
7.3 - Next steps
Item 8: ANY OTHER BUSINESS (20 minutes)
8.1 - Farewell to outgoing Councilors (Elsa Saade, Erika Mann, James Gannon, Julf Helsingius, Keith Drazek, Michele Neylon, Rafik Dammak and Scott McCormick.)
8.2 - Open microphone
_______________________________
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 11:00 UTC
Local time between March and October Summer in the NORTHERN hemisphere
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
California, USA (PDT) UTC-7 04:00
San José, Costa Rica (CST) UTC-6 06:00
New York/Washington DC, USA (EDT) UTC-4 07:00
Buenos Aires, Argentina (ART) UTC-3 08:00
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (BRST) UTC-3 08:00
London, United Kingdom (GMT) UTC+1 12:00
Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo (WAT) UTC+1 12:00
Paris, France (CEST) UTC+2 13:00
Moscow, Russia (MST) UTC+3 14:00
Singapore (SGT) UTC+8 19:00
Tokyo, Japan (JST) UTC+9 20:00
Melbourne, Australia (AEDT) UTC+11 22:00
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
DST starts/ends on Sunday 25 of October 2020, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) for EU countries and on Sunday 01 of November 2020 for the US.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com<http://www.timeanddate.com/> and https://tinyurl.com/y3nxs8rf
Final GNSO Council Agenda 21 October 2020 - Part II (Admin)
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/OAebC
This agenda was established according to the GNSO Operating Procedures<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/op-proced…> v3.5 updated on 24 October 2019
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 15:15 CET (Hamburg time)
Coordinated Universal Time: 13:15 UTC: https://tinyurl.com/yyor7bfj
06:15 Los Angeles; 09:15 Washington; 14:15 London; 16:15 Moscow; 22:15 Tokyo; (Thursday 22 October) 00:15 Melbourne
GNSO Council Meeting Remote Participation: Not available until 24 hours before.
___________________________________
Item 1. Seating of the 2020 / 2021 Council (20 mins)
1.1 - Roll Call
1.2 - Statements of Interest
INCOMING COUNCILORS:
Kurt Pritz: SOI<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Kurt+Pritz+SOI> Registries Stakeholder Group
Kristian Ørmen - SOI<https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=66081213> Registrars Stakeholder Group
Mark Datysgeld: SOI<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Mark+Datysgeld+SOI> Business Constituency
Stephanie Perrin: SOI<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Stephanie+Perrin+SOI> Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group
Wisdom Donkor: SOI<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Wisdom+Donkor+SOI> Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group
Tomslin Samme-Nlar - SOI<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Tomslin+Samme-Nlar+SOI> Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group
Olga Cavall- SOI<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Olga+Cavalli+SOI> - Non-Voting NomCom Appointee
Jeffrey Neuman - SOI<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Jeff+Neuman+SOI> - GNSO Council Liaison to the GAC
Thank you again to outgoing Councilors: Elsa Saade, Erika Mann, James Gannon, Julf Helsingius, Keith Drazek, Michele Neylon, Rafik Dammak and Scott McCormick.
1.3 - Review / Amend Agenda
Item 2. Election of the Chair (20 mins)
One nomination was received for this position from Philippe Fouquart of the Non Contracted Party House. The GNSO reviewed the candidate statement<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/fouquart-…> and held a question & answer session with the candidate on 24 September 2020. Here the GNSO Council will proceed to hold the election for its Chair for 2020-2021, according to the GNSO Operating Procedures (note Section 2.2 of the GNSO Operating Procedures on Officer Elections: Chair and Vice-Chairs (see Appendix 1 below)).
Item 3. Any Other Business (0 min)
None
Appendix 1: Excerpt from GNSO Operating Procedures (Section 2.2)
2.2 https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-01sep16-en.pdf
Officer Elections: Chair and Vice-Chairs
The GNSO Council shall select the GNSO Chair and two Vice-Chairs as follows:
1. The GNSO Chair shall be elected by a 60 percent vote of each house.
2. Each house will be allowed to nominate one candidate for GNSO Council Chair. Each house is responsible for determining how to nominate its candidate. A candidate for GNSO Council Chair does not need to be a member of a house, but must be a current or incoming member of the GNSO Council. Should a Chair be elected from outside of the houses that Chair will be a non-voting Chair.
a. All ballots will include the “none of the above” option. In the event that a 60 percent vote of each house selects the “none of the above” option, each house will commence a new nomination period of not longer than 15 days. An election for the new nominees will be scheduled for no sooner than 30 days after the unsuccessful vote.
b. In the case of a tie for the most votes between the two candidates, or between a candidate and “none of above,” a second election will be held no sooner than 30 days. The candidates shall remain the same for this second election. In the case this second election also results in a tie, each house will commence a new nomination period of not longer than 15 days. An election for the new nominees will be rescheduled for no sooner than 30 days after the unsuccessful vote.
c. The leading candidate will be defined as the one with the highest score. The score is calculated by adding together the voting percentages attained from each house. The highest percentage attainable in each house is 100. Thus, the maximum score a candidate can achieve is 200 as a result of attaining 100 percent of the votes from the contracted party house and 100 percent from the non-contracted party house (100 percent + 100 percent = score of 200). In case neither candidate reaches the 60 percent of each house threshold, a second ballot will be held between the leading candidate and “none of the above.”
d. In case neither candidate reaches the 60 percent of each house threshold and the candidates do not tie, a second runoff ballot will be held between the leading candidate and “none of the above.”
e. If the single candidate does not reach the 60 percent of each house threshold in the runoff ballot, then each house will commence a new nomination period of not longer than 15 days. An election for the new nominees will be rescheduled for no sooner than 30 days after the unsuccessful runoff ballot.
1. Each house shall select a Council Vice-Chair from within its respective house.
2. A Chair may not be a member of the same Stakeholder Group of either of the Vice-Chairs.
3. The Chair and Vice-Chairs shall retain their votes (if any) in their respective houses (if any).
4. In the event that the GNSO Council has not elected a GNSO Council Chair by the end of the previous Chair’s term, the Vice-Chairs will serve as Interim GNSO Co- Chairs to jointly oversee the new Chair election and conduct Council business until a successful election can be held. In the event that one or both Vice-Chairs’ terms ends concurrently with the term of the previous Chair, the procedures described in Section 2.2.1 below shall apply.
5. The Council shall inform the Board and the Community appropriately and post the election results on the GNSO website within 2 business days following each election and runoff ballot, whether successful or unsuccessful.
Appendix 2: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws,<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#article11> Article 11, Section 3)
(i) Except as otherwise specified in these Bylaws, Annex A, Annex A-1 or Annex A-2 hereto, or the GNSO Operating Procedures, the default threshold to pass a GNSO Council motion or other voting action requires a simple majority vote of each House. The voting thresholds described below shall apply to the following GNSO actions:
(i) Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more than one-fourth (1/4) vote of each House or majority of one House.
(ii) Initiate a Policy Development Process ("PDP") Within Scope (as described in Annex A): requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House.
(iii) Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of GNSO Supermajority (as defined in Section 11.3(i)(xix)).
(iv) Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House.
(v) Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
(vi) Changes to an Approved PDP Team Charter: For any PDP Team Charter approved under (iv) or (v) above, the GNSO Council may approve an amendment to the Charter through a simple majority vote of each House.
(vii) Terminate a PDP: Once initiated, and prior to the publication of a Final Report, the GNSO Council may terminate a PDP only for significant cause, upon a motion that passes with a GNSO Supermajority Vote in favor of termination.
(viii) Approve a PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a majority of each House and further requires that one GNSO Council member representative of at least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups supports the Recommendation.
(ix) Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority,
(x) Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that "a two-thirds vote of the council" demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded.
(xi) Modification of Approved PDP Recommendation: Prior to Final Approval by the Board, an Approved PDP Recommendation may be modified or amended by the GNSO Council with a GNSO Supermajority vote.
(xii) Initiation of an Expedited Policy Development Process ("EPDP"): requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
(xiii) Approve an EPDP Team Charter: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
(xiv) Approval of EPDP Recommendations: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
(xv) Approve an EPDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that "a two-thirds vote of the council" demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded.
(xvi) Initiation of a GNSO Guidance Process ("GGP"): requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House.
(xvii) Rejection of Initiation of a GGP Requested by the Board: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
(xviii) Approval of GGP Recommendations: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
(xix) A "GNSO Supermajority" shall mean: (A) two-thirds (2/3) of the Council members of each House, or (B) three-fourths (3/4) of the Council members of one House and a majority of the Council members of the other House.
https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-01sep16-en.pdf
Appendix 1 GNSO Council Voting Results table
Absentee Voting Procedures https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-01sep16-en.pdf
4.4 Absentee Voting
4.1.1 Applicability
Absentee voting is permitted for the following limited number of Council motions or measures.
1. Initiate a Policy Development Process (PDP);
2. Approve a PDP recommendation;
3. Recommend amendments to the GNSO Operating Procedures (GOP) or ICANN Bylaws;
4. Fill a Council position open for election.
4.1.2 Absentee ballots, when permitted, must be submitted within the announced time limit, which shall be 72 hours from the meeting’s adjournment. In exceptional circumstances, announced at the time of the vote, the Chair may reduce this time to 24 hours or extend the time to 7 calendar days, provided such amendment is verbally confirmed by all Vice-Chairs present.
4.1.3 The GNSO Secretariat will administer, record, and tabulate absentee votes according to these procedures and will provide reasonable means for transmitting and authenticating absentee ballots, which could include voting by telephone, e- mail, web-based interface, or other technologies as may become available.
4.1.4 Absentee balloting does not affect quorum requirements.
1
0
Final Proposed Agenda | GNSO Council Meetings part 1 and 2 | 21 October 2020 at 13:00 CET / 11:00 UTC
by Nathalie Peregrine 11 Oct '20
by Nathalie Peregrine 11 Oct '20
11 Oct '20
Dear all,
Please find below the final proposed agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting on 24 September 2020 at 12:00 UTC.
Draft GNSO Council Agenda 21 October 2020 - Part I
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/OAebC
This agenda was established according to the GNSO Operating Procedures<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/op-proced…> v3.5, updated on 24 October 2019
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 13:00 CET (Hamburg time)
Coordinated Universal Time: 11:00 UTC: https://tinyurl.com/y3nxs8rf
04:00 Los Angeles; 07:00 Washington; 12:00 London; 14:00 Moscow; 20:00 Tokyo; 22:00 Melbourne
GNSO Council Meeting Remote Participation: Not available until 24 hours before.
___________________________________
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/2020/minutes/minutes-gnso…> of the GNSO Council meeting on 20 August 2020 were posted on 04 Sep 2020.
Minutes<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2020/minutes/minutes-gnso…> of the GNSO Council meeting on the 24 September 2020 were posted on 9 October 2020.
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 (10 minutes)
3.1 - Action Decision Radar<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/40175174/program_managemen…> - Next Steps for WHOIS Conflicts Procedure Implementation Advisory Group
The GNSO Council has considered the proposed immediate actions and subsequent steps as outlined in the WHOIS Conflicts Procedure IAG (WHOIS IAG) Small Team’s proposal<http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20201006/2a0c0c3e/Summary…>. The proposal outlines recommended next steps to consider with respect to modifying the implementation of the WHOIS Conflicts Procedure, in light of public comments received and changes to data protection law that may have affected the implementation of the Procedure. Specifically, the GNSO Council requests:
1. ICANN org, in consultation with contracted parties, to draft a proposal for a modification to the existing Procedure based on its past experience with both the WHOIS Conflicts Procedure and the registrar data retention waiver process. In formulating the draft proposal, the GNSO Council recommends that ICANN org consider changes to data protection law that may have affected the previous implementation of this Procedure in light of the contractual requirements, e.g., the General Data Protection Regulation. For example, should the identification of a new trigger to activate the procedure be considered given potential financial penalties under GDPR?
2. Following receipt of the proposal from ICANN org, the GNSO Council will consider the proposal and assess next steps, including seeking input from the community, if appropriate, given the substance of the proposal. Following the GNSO Council’s consideration, the GNSO Council may choose to adopt the proposal.
3. If the GNSO Council does not deem the proposal appropriate:
a. the GNSO Council will recommend a small group of Council volunteers to review the WHOIS IAG draft charter<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/draft-ica…> and confirm it is still fit for purpose; and
b. Following confirmation of the Charter by the GNSO Council, the GNSO Council recommends launching the call for volunteers for the WHOIS IAG, taking into consideration the GNSO Council’s upcoming workload. For example, the call for volunteers may need to be postponed if no community bandwidth is available to immediately consider the issues. In the meantime, ICANN org, in conjunction with the EPDP Phase 1 IRT, will need to update relevant terminology pursuant to EPDP Phase 1, Rec. 27.
1. Should the GNSO Council consider the outcome developed from the WHOIS IAG unacceptable, the GNSO Council will consider initiating an EPDP to either change or repeal the Consensus Policy.
3.2 - Action Decision Radar<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/40175174/program_managemen…> - Per the rationale circulated on 11 October 2020, Council agrees to launch a call for volunteers for a small team to develop both a draft charter and an EPDP scoping document for the IDN Policy Track 2.
3.3 - Following the GNSO Council’s consideration of the proposed immediate actions and subsequent steps as outlined here<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/epdp-2-pr…>, the GNSO Council directs:
EPDP Phase 2a – Legal/natural and feasibility of unique contacts
1. The GNSO Policy Support Team communicate to the groups that have appointed members to the EPDP Team that the Council is expected to instruct the EPDP Team to further consider the topics of legal/natural and feasibility of unique contacts per the instructions above, as well as the expected timeframe, provided herein for reference, “[a]t the latest 3 months after reconvening, the Chair of the EPDP Team and GNSO Council Liaison to the EPDP will report back to the GNSO Council on the status of deliberations. Based on this report, which is expected to include an update on progress made and the expected likelihood of consensus recommendations, the GNSO Council will decide on next steps, which could include providing additional time for the EPDP to finalize its recommendations or termination of the EPDP if it is clear that no progress is being made or consensus is unlikely). Request groups to:
a. Commence process of confirming members availability and/or re- appointing members to work on these topics. Proposed deadline: 15 November.
b. Start developing proposals to address these topics, factoring in deliberations to date, that will allow the EPDP Team to kickstart deliberations on these topics when it reconvenes.”
1. The Council leadership to initiate an Expression of Interest Process to identify a new Chair.
The EPDP Team shall recommence its deliberations upon selection and confirmation of a new Chair; however, should no suitable candidates be found or should the appointment process require significant time, Council leadership will inform the Council accordingly and recommend commencement of deliberations under the leadership of the GNSO Council liaison to the EPDP Team.
Accuracy:
1. The GNSO Policy Support Team communicates to GNSO SG/Cs, as well as ICANN Advisory Committees that have expressed an interest in the topic of accuracy, the intent of the GNSO Council to launch a scoping team on this topic. Request groups to:
a. Start thinking about members that have relevant knowledge and expertise that should join this effort once the scoping team launches.
b. Start compiling relevant information and suggestions that would allow kickstarting the discussions on 1. and 2. once the scoping team is formed (see here<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/epdp-2-pr…> for resources already identified).
1. Council leadership to request ICANN Org to develop a briefing document that outlines both (i) existing accuracy requirements and programs and (ii) the corresponding impact that GDPR has had on implementing / enforcing these requirements and programs. The document, once delivered, will be provided to the scoping team to inform its deliberations.
2. GNSO Council to consider in the context of the Council Action / Decision Radar, the appropriate starting time for this effort, factoring in other projects that are in the pipeline.
3.4 - Confirmation of the Recommendations Report<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/draft-epd…> to the ICANN Board regarding adoption of recommendations 1-22 contained in the Final Report from the EPDP Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data – Phase 2.
3.5 - Appointment of the GNSO Liaison to the Governmental Advisory Committee (motion<https://community.icann.org/x/OgebC>)
Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Discuss Draft Motion to Affirm intent of EPDP Phase 1 Recommendation 7 and Initiation of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy EPDP (25 minutes)
In adopting the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification Final Report and Recommendations, the Council requested that an informal Implementation Review Team (IRT) be established, which was done. After the recommendations were approved by the ICANN Board, the informal IRT transitioned to a formal IRT and has diligently been working to implement the policy recommendations. Within the IRT, there are diverging views amongst some IRT members on how to implement recommendation 7, especially in relation to the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy for .COM, .NET, and .JOBS
The ICANN Board, taking note of the potential impasse, sent a letter<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/…> to the GNSO Council on 11 March 2020. The Council considered the letter and agreed that recommendation 7 did not explicitly overturn the Thick Whois Transition Policy; to do so will require the GNSO Council to initiate policy development. The Council sent a response<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspond…> to the ICANN Board on 29 May 2020. The IRT has continued to try and implement recommendation 7 but has still been unable to reach agreement. As such and per the Council’s letter, the Council requested a briefing from, ”the GNSO Council liaison detailing the precise nature of the impasse so that the GNSO Council can make an informed determination on how to proceed.” During its September Council meeting, the Council received a briefing from the GNSO Council liaison to the IRT, Sebastien Ducos. The Council agreed to convene a small team of Councilors that was charged with establishing a path forward to try and resolve the impasse. That small team met to determine what the best practical path forward may be.
Here, the Council will consider a draft motion that would do two things 1) Affirm the intent of EPDP Phase 1 Recommendation 7; and 2) initiate an EPDP on the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy.
4.1 - Introduction of topic (Council Vice-Chair, Pam Little)
4.2 – Council discussion
4.3 – Next steps
Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Operational Design Phase for gTLD Policy Implementation (15 minutes)
During the 23 September SO/AC Leaders call, the concept of an "Operational Design Phase" was introduced by Goran. The SO/AC Leaders had a preliminary discussion on the topic and Goran indicated that ICANN would produce a paper for community consideration and feedback. That paper<http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20201005/2000130c/Design-…> was prepared and was shared with the Council on 5 October 2020.
The objective for this new proposed design phase is to better prepare the Board by providing operational and resourcing information before making decisions on GNSO-approved policy recommendations. The paper notes that while the GNSO Council is the manager of the PDP and gTLD policy development is within the GNSO's remit, consensus policy making involves all stakeholders (including ACs who give advice to the Board). Further, the paper seeks to be clear that this design phase concept doesn't affect policy development or the Consensus Policy Implementation Framework. It recognizes that if policy issues are impacted, they rightfully go back to the GNSO for its consideration, rather than permitting ICANN Org or Board to make unilateral changes.
The Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies were invited and encouraged to provide feedback to the paper. In addition, on a 6 October GNSO Council pre-ICANN working session, Karen Lentz from ICANN org provided additional information and rationale for the new concept.
Here, Councilors will be invited to share their initial thoughts on the concept and the paper.
5.1 - Introduction of topic (Council leadership)
5.2 - Council discussion
5.3 - Next steps
Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Board Consultation Regarding Questions Surrounding the financial Sustainability of the System for Standardized Access and Disclosure (20 minutes)
On 24 September 2020, the GNSO Council adopted the recommendations contained in the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification Phase 2 Final Report<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/epdp-phas…>. Resolved clause 1b. states:
b. [if 1a. is adopted] Noting some of the questions surrounding the financial sustainability of SSAD and some of the concerns expressed within the different minority statements, the GNSO Council requests a consultation with the ICANN Board as part of the delivery of the GNSO Council Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board to discuss these issues, including whether a further cost-benefit analysis should be conducted before the ICANN Board considers all SSAD-related recommendations for adoption.
The request for a consultation with the ICANN Board is not usually an element of the transition of GNSO-approved recommendations from the GNSO Council to the ICANN Board. As such, the Council will need to consider how best to engage with the Board in seeking this consultation.
Here, the Council will discuss next steps as it relates to resolved clause 1b, including whether the draft Transmittal Letter<https://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/draft-transmittal-letter-icann-board-08oct…> accurately captures the agreed-upon approach of the Council.
6.1 - Introduction of topic (Council leadership)
6.2 - Council discussion
6.3 - Next steps
Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - ADR Item - Council to Consider Delay of the Request for the Policy Status Report for the Expiration Policy(ies) (10 minutes)
As indicated on the Action Decision Radar<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Items?previe…>, the GNSO Council is to consider when to request a Policy Status Report to conduct a review of the two Expiration Policies, the Expired Domain Deletion Policy<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/registars/accreditation/eddp-en> (EDDP) and the Expired Registration Recovery Policy<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/errp-2013-02-28-en> (ERRP). Given the concerns about capacity, along with the circumstances that no known issues have presented themselves, Council leadership is suggesting that the request for Policy Status Reports for these two Consensus Policies can be delayed by a period of 24 months, assuming no substantive issues arise during that time. This would have the effect of deferring the request for a Policy Status Report on the EDDP and ERRP until at least November 2022, where it would then be discussed again to determine if a request is timely.
Here, the Council will consider whether it agrees with this suggestion and if so, agree to include on the November consent agenda.
7.1 - Introduction of topic (Council leadership)
7.2 - Council discussion
7.3 - Next steps
Item 8: ANY OTHER BUSINESS (20 minutes)
8.1 - Farewell to outgoing Councilors (Elsa Saade, Erika Mann, James Gannon, Julf Helsingius, Keith Drazek, Michele Neylon, Rafik Dammak and Scott McCormick.)
8.2 - Open microphone
_______________________________
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 11:00 UTC
Local time between March and October Summer in the NORTHERN hemisphere
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
California, USA (PDT) UTC-7 04:00
San José, Costa Rica (CST) UTC-6 06:00
New York/Washington DC, USA (EDT) UTC-4 07:00
Buenos Aires, Argentina (ART) UTC-3 08:00
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (BRST) UTC-3 08:00
London, United Kingdom (GMT) UTC+1 12:00
Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo (WAT) UTC+1 12:00
Paris, France (CEST) UTC+2 13:00
Moscow, Russia (MST) UTC+3 14:00
Singapore (SGT) UTC+8 19:00
Tokyo, Japan (JST) UTC+9 20:00
Melbourne, Australia (AEDT) UTC+11 22:00
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
DST starts/ends on Sunday 25 of October 2020, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) for EU countries and on Sunday 01 of November 2020 for the US.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com<http://www.timeanddate.com/> and https://tinyurl.com/y3nxs8rf
Final GNSO Council Agenda 21 October 2020 - Part II (Admin)
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/OAebC
This agenda was established according to the GNSO Operating Procedures<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/op-proced…> v3.5 updated on 24 October 2019
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 15:15 CET (Hamburg time)
Coordinated Universal Time: 13:15 UTC: https://tinyurl.com/yyor7bfj
06:15 Los Angeles; 09:15 Washington; 14:15 London; 16:15 Moscow; 22:15 Tokyo; (Thursday 22 October) 00:15 Melbourne
GNSO Council Meeting Remote Participation: Not available until 24 hours before.
___________________________________
Item 1. Seating of the 2020 / 2021 Council (20 mins)
1.1 - Roll Call
1.2 - Statements of Interest
INCOMING COUNCILORS:
Kurt Pritz: SOI<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Kurt+Pritz+SOI> Registries Stakeholder Group
Kristian Ørmen - SOI<https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=66081213> Registrars Stakeholder Group
Mark Datysgeld: SOI<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Mark+Datysgeld+SOI> Business Constituency
Stephanie Perrin: SOI<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Stephanie+Perrin+SOI> Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group
Wisdom Donkor: SOI<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Wisdom+Donkor+SOI> Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group
Tomslin Samme-Nlar - SOI<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Tomslin+Samme-Nlar+SOI> Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group
Olga Cavall- SOI<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Olga+Cavalli+SOI> - Non-Voting NomCom Appointee
Jeffrey Neuman - SOI<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Jeff+Neuman+SOI> - GNSO Council Liaison to the GAC
Thank you again to outgoing Councilors: Elsa Saade, Erika Mann, James Gannon, Julf Helsingius, Keith Drazek, Michele Neylon, Rafik Dammak and Scott McCormick.
1.3 - Review / Amend Agenda
Item 2. Election of the Chair (20 mins)
One nomination was received for this position from Philippe Fouquart of the Non Contracted Party House. The GNSO reviewed the candidate statement<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/fouquart-…> and held a question & answer session with the candidate on 24 September 2020. Here the GNSO Council will proceed to hold the election for its Chair for 2020-2021, according to the GNSO Operating Procedures (note Section 2.2 of the GNSO Operating Procedures on Officer Elections: Chair and Vice-Chairs (see Appendix 1 below)).
Item 3. Any Other Business (0 min)
None
Appendix 1: Excerpt from GNSO Operating Procedures (Section 2.2)
2.2 https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-01sep16-en.pdf
Officer Elections: Chair and Vice-Chairs
The GNSO Council shall select the GNSO Chair and two Vice-Chairs as follows:
1. The GNSO Chair shall be elected by a 60 percent vote of each house.
2. Each house will be allowed to nominate one candidate for GNSO Council Chair. Each house is responsible for determining how to nominate its candidate. A candidate for GNSO Council Chair does not need to be a member of a house, but must be a current or incoming member of the GNSO Council. Should a Chair be elected from outside of the houses that Chair will be a non-voting Chair.
a. All ballots will include the “none of the above” option. In the event that a 60 percent vote of each house selects the “none of the above” option, each house will commence a new nomination period of not longer than 15 days. An election for the new nominees will be scheduled for no sooner than 30 days after the unsuccessful vote.
b. In the case of a tie for the most votes between the two candidates, or between a candidate and “none of above,” a second election will be held no sooner than 30 days. The candidates shall remain the same for this second election. In the case this second election also results in a tie, each house will commence a new nomination period of not longer than 15 days. An election for the new nominees will be rescheduled for no sooner than 30 days after the unsuccessful vote.
c. The leading candidate will be defined as the one with the highest score. The score is calculated by adding together the voting percentages attained from each house. The highest percentage attainable in each house is 100. Thus, the maximum score a candidate can achieve is 200 as a result of attaining 100 percent of the votes from the contracted party house and 100 percent from the non-contracted party house (100 percent + 100 percent = score of 200). In case neither candidate reaches the 60 percent of each house threshold, a second ballot will be held between the leading candidate and “none of the above.”
d. In case neither candidate reaches the 60 percent of each house threshold and the candidates do not tie, a second runoff ballot will be held between the leading candidate and “none of the above.”
e. If the single candidate does not reach the 60 percent of each house threshold in the runoff ballot, then each house will commence a new nomination period of not longer than 15 days. An election for the new nominees will be rescheduled for no sooner than 30 days after the unsuccessful runoff ballot.
1. Each house shall select a Council Vice-Chair from within its respective house.
2. A Chair may not be a member of the same Stakeholder Group of either of the Vice-Chairs.
3. The Chair and Vice-Chairs shall retain their votes (if any) in their respective houses (if any).
4. In the event that the GNSO Council has not elected a GNSO Council Chair by the end of the previous Chair’s term, the Vice-Chairs will serve as Interim GNSO Co- Chairs to jointly oversee the new Chair election and conduct Council business until a successful election can be held. In the event that one or both Vice-Chairs’ terms ends concurrently with the term of the previous Chair, the procedures described in Section 2.2.1 below shall apply.
5. The Council shall inform the Board and the Community appropriately and post the election results on the GNSO website within 2 business days following each election and runoff ballot, whether successful or unsuccessful.
Appendix 2: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws,<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#article11> Article 11, Section 3)
(i) Except as otherwise specified in these Bylaws, Annex A, Annex A-1 or Annex A-2 hereto, or the GNSO Operating Procedures, the default threshold to pass a GNSO Council motion or other voting action requires a simple majority vote of each House. The voting thresholds described below shall apply to the following GNSO actions:
(i) Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more than one-fourth (1/4) vote of each House or majority of one House.
(ii) Initiate a Policy Development Process ("PDP") Within Scope (as described in Annex A): requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House.
(iii) Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of GNSO Supermajority (as defined in Section 11.3(i)(xix)).
(iv) Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House.
(v) Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
(vi) Changes to an Approved PDP Team Charter: For any PDP Team Charter approved under (iv) or (v) above, the GNSO Council may approve an amendment to the Charter through a simple majority vote of each House.
(vii) Terminate a PDP: Once initiated, and prior to the publication of a Final Report, the GNSO Council may terminate a PDP only for significant cause, upon a motion that passes with a GNSO Supermajority Vote in favor of termination.
(viii) Approve a PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a majority of each House and further requires that one GNSO Council member representative of at least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups supports the Recommendation.
(ix) Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority,
(x) Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that "a two-thirds vote of the council" demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded.
(xi) Modification of Approved PDP Recommendation: Prior to Final Approval by the Board, an Approved PDP Recommendation may be modified or amended by the GNSO Council with a GNSO Supermajority vote.
(xii) Initiation of an Expedited Policy Development Process ("EPDP"): requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
(xiii) Approve an EPDP Team Charter: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
(xiv) Approval of EPDP Recommendations: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
(xv) Approve an EPDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that "a two-thirds vote of the council" demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded.
(xvi) Initiation of a GNSO Guidance Process ("GGP"): requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House.
(xvii) Rejection of Initiation of a GGP Requested by the Board: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
(xviii) Approval of GGP Recommendations: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
(xix) A "GNSO Supermajority" shall mean: (A) two-thirds (2/3) of the Council members of each House, or (B) three-fourths (3/4) of the Council members of one House and a majority of the Council members of the other House.
https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-01sep16-en.pdf
Appendix 1 GNSO Council Voting Results table
Absentee Voting Procedures https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-01sep16-en.pdf
4.4 Absentee Voting
4.1.1 Applicability
Absentee voting is permitted for the following limited number of Council motions or measures.
1. Initiate a Policy Development Process (PDP);
2. Approve a PDP recommendation;
3. Recommend amendments to the GNSO Operating Procedures (GOP) or ICANN Bylaws;
4. Fill a Council position open for election.
4.1.2 Absentee ballots, when permitted, must be submitted within the announced time limit, which shall be 72 hours from the meeting’s adjournment. In exceptional circumstances, announced at the time of the vote, the Chair may reduce this time to 24 hours or extend the time to 7 calendar days, provided such amendment is verbally confirmed by all Vice-Chairs present.
4.1.3 The GNSO Secretariat will administer, record, and tabulate absentee votes according to these procedures and will provide reasonable means for transmitting and authenticating absentee ballots, which could include voting by telephone, e- mail, web-based interface, or other technologies as may become available.
4.1.4 Absentee balloting does not affect quorum requirements.
1
0
Dear Councilors,
When the proposed Council meeting agenda is circulated today, you will see that Council leadership has suggested a Consent Agenda item regarding IDN variant TLDs, to convene a small team to prepare a draft charter and a draft EPDP scoping document (see section 3 here: https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/annex-4-e…), as a precursor to launching an EPDP. Noting that most members of the IDN Scoping Team believed that an EPDP was appropriate for this subject (i.e., that the topic is substantially scoped previously such that extensive, pertinent background information already exists, and therefore no Issue Report is necessary), Council leadership nevertheless wanted to be sure that an EPDP can be applicable for this subject. Accordingly, staff prepared the attached document to help the Council determine if an EPDP is an appropriate vehicle to develop policy for IDN variant TLDs.
Best,
Steve
Steven Chan
Policy Director, GNSO Support
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
Email: steve.chan(a)icann.org
Skype: steve.chan55
Mobile: +1.310.339.4410
Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/
Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO
Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar
1
0