October 2021 - council - lists.icann.org

Re: [council] Motion - GNSO liaison to the GAC
by Nathalie Peregrine Oct. 27, 2021

Oct. 27, 2021

Dear Philippe, The motion has been published on the motion wiki page here<https://community.icann.org/x/_gBmCg>. Thank you, Kind regards, Nathalie From: council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> on behalf of "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Reply to: "philippe.fouquart(a)orange.com" <philippe.fouquart(a)orange.com> Date: Sunday, 17 October 2021 at 21:43 To: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] Motion - GNSO liaison to the GAC Dear Councilors, Please find attached the motion I submit for the reappointment of our GNSO liaison to the GAC. Regards, Philippe _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.

2 2

FW: SSAD OPD - meeting with staff report
by philippe.fouquart＠orange.com Oct. 26, 2021

Oct. 26, 2021

Dear Councilors, Please note Janis’s report of his meeting with the ODP team last week. Feel free to share any questions you may have. Note also the webinar on Thursday, which unfortunately clashes with our wrap-up. Regards Philippe From: Janis Karklins <karklinsj(a)gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2021 12:32 PM To: FOUQUART Philippe INNOV/NET <philippe.fouquart(a)orange.com> Cc: Yuko Green <yuko.green(a)icann.org>; Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen(a)icann.org> Subject: SSAD OPD - meeting with staff report Dear Councilors, I am including a summary of my recent meeting with the ICANN Org SSAD ODP colleagues on 20 October. The SSAD ODP Team identified additional questions and assumptions, which we discussed during our meeting. The assumptions and my responses are annexed to this message for your information. The SSAD ODP Team plans, pending no objection from the GNSO Council, to proceed with its work on the basis of these assumptions and my responses thereto. The verified assumptions will be used by the SSAD ODP Team as it continues to work on an assessment to inform the Board’s review of the EPDP Phase 2 SSAD-related policy recommendations. Lastly, we briefly discussed the upcoming SSAD ODP Project Update #3 and Community Discussion Webinar, which will take place during ICANN72 on Thursday, 28 October at 19:30 UTC. The SSAD ODP Team recognizes that this session conflicts with the GNSO Council Wrap-Up; however, if any councilors have additional questions not addressed during the session, I am happy to bring these to the attention of the SSAP ODP Team during our next meeting in November. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns regarding my responses to the SSAD ODP Team. Thank you. Best regards, JK The areas identified in the SSAD that interact with ICANN Contractual Compliance, like requestor/data subject procedural complaints and Contracted Party SLA issues, appear to integrate well within the existing processes that ICANN Contractual Compliance employs. For instance, the complaints from requestors and data subjects could come through external facing complaint forms that would be developed, and if needed, automated processes may be developed for processing issues such as those related to SLA violations. From there, the complaints can be processed per ICANN Contractual Compliance’s standard approach and processes. Question 1: Does the proposed approach regarding development of potential complaint forms or automated notifications (where possible) fulfill the intentions of the recommendations? Indeed, it was intention – to use the existing ICANN compliance mechanism in case the requestors or registries/registrars could file a compliance complaint in situations prescribed by the policy recommendations. It was never planned, though, that data subjects would use ICANN's compliance mechanism in SSAD context. Automation of Disclosure Request Processing Per recommendation 9.4, only the following categories are considered to meet the criteria for automated processing of data disclosure: · Requests from Law Enforcement in local or otherwise applicable jurisdictions with either 1) a confirmed GDPR 6(1)e lawful basis or 2) processing is to be carried out under a GDPR, Article 2 exemption; · The investigation of an infringement of the data protection legislation allegedly committed by ICANN/Contracted Parties affecting the registrant; · Request for city field only, to evaluate whether to pursue a claim or for statistical purposes; · No personal data on registration record that has been previously disclosed by the Contracted Party. Question 2: We note the first bullet specifically references the GDPR. Our understanding is the above categories were included in the legal guidance provided to the EPDP Team, and the legal guidance specifically referenced the GDPR. Our assumption is the EPDP Team considered this guidance in developing this recommendation but did not intend to exclude privacy laws outside the GDPR. In other words, though this first use case only references the specific scenario in which a law enforcement requestor has a legal basis for processing under GDPR 6(1)e (or whose processing is explicitly exempted from GDPR’s restrictions on data processing), other law enforcement authorities who are outside the EU might also qualify for automated disclosure if they have a comparable legitimate interest in processing such data under their own local law. Can you please confirm if this assumption is correct (or if, conversely, the intention was only for EU law enforcement requests to have the potential for automation under this use case)? If the above assumption is correct, we also note the recommendation provides for the automation of the use cases described in 9.4.1 - 9.4.4 “from the time of the launch of the SSAD”. The SSAD ODP Team will ensure the Operational Design Assessment will include the automation of the specified use cases from Day 1; however, we will note that other use cases outside of the GDPR may be added in future, provided the appropriate processes are followed. The assumption is correct. Even EPDP was created to develop ICANN policy to accommodate the GDPR requirements, the EPDP Team took broader approach and attempted to formulate recommendations that would correspond not only to the GDPR, but also to all existing and possible future privacy regulations in different parts of the world. Reference to specific provisions of GDPR in 9.4.1 is evident as it was existing regulation at the time of the formulation of the recommendation. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.

1 0

Suggested times and dates GNSO Council meetings 2021 - 2022
by Nathalie Peregrine Oct. 26, 2021

Oct. 26, 2021

Dear seated and incoming Councilors, Please see attached the suggested dates and times for GNSO Council meetings in 2022, as well as suggested time changes for the two remaining meetings in 2021 after the AGM. Individual 2021 – 2022 councilor locations, 2021 – 2022 Council leadership locations, as well as Daylight Saving Time impacts (or lack of) have been taken into account. In addition to this, religious and national holidays have been taken into consideration. Given the very welcome diversity of councilor geographic locations, several meeting times especially will be uncomfortable for some. We hope the suggested rotation ensures this will be occasional. Incoming councilors do not yet have posting rights to the Council mailing list, should there be any public holidays for instance which were not taken into consideration, please let gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> know. If there are no objections by Wednesday 27 October 2021, current meeting invitations for November and December 2021 will be updated, and new invitations sent out for the 2022 Council meetings. Happy ICANN72 all! Kind regards, Nathalie

2 3

On in 20 mins! Joint GNSO / GAC Session today 16:30 PDT
by Nathalie Peregrine Oct. 25, 2021

Oct. 25, 2021

Dear all, Please join the joint GNSO Council and GAC meeting on at the bottom of the hour (16:30 PDT – 23:30 UTC). Zoom access details are available on the ICANN72 schedule. Thank you! Nathalie

1 0

Re: [council] [Gnso-sc-budget] Comment on FY23 PTI-IANA Operating Plan and Budget
by Berry Cobb Oct. 25, 2021

Oct. 25, 2021

Dear Council, As an FYI, the GNSO Council’s comments on the FY23 PTI-IANA draft documents has now been posted. https://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/proceeding/draft-pti-and-iana-fy23-… Thank you. B Berry Cobb Policy Development - Portfolio Manager Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) berry.cobb(a)icann.org From: council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Berry Cobb via council <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Reply-To: Berry Cobb <Berry.Cobb(a)icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 21, 2021 at 12:25 To: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] [Gnso-sc-budget] Comment on FY23 PTI-IANA Operating Plan and Budget Dear Council, To tack on to John’s message below, the public comment for the PTI/IANA FY23 closes 25 Oct 2021. As with prior submissions, this comment will be posted if no objections are raised. Please advise if you have questions or concerns to the draft. Thank you. B Berry Cobb Policy Development - Portfolio Manager Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) berry.cobb(a)icann.org From: Gnso-sc-budget <gnso-sc-budget-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of John McElwaine via Gnso-sc-budget <gnso-sc-budget(a)icann.org> Reply-To: John McElwaine <john.mcelwaine(a)nelsonmullins.com> Date: Wednesday, October 20, 2021 at 09:02 To: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Cc: "gnso-sc-budget(a)icann.org" <gnso-sc-budget(a)icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-sc-budget] Comment on FY23 PTI-IANA Operating Plan and Budget Dear Councilors, I have attached a proposed comment prepared by the Standing Committee on Budget and Operations for the draft fiscal year 2023 (FY23) Public Technical Identifiers (PTI) & Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Operating Plan and Budget, both of which were published 15 September 2021. I look forward to receiving any input, revisions or answering any question that you might have. Kind regards, John [Image removed by sender.] JOHN C. MCELWAINE PARTNER john.mcelwaine(a)nelsonmullins.com<mailto:john.mcelwaine@nelsonmullins.com> LIBERTY CENTER | SUITE 600 151 MEETING STREET | CHARLESTON, SC 29401 T 843.534.4302 F 843.722.8700 101 CONSTITUTION AVENUE, NW | SUITE 900 WASHINGTON, D.C., 20001 T 202.689.2939 F 202.689.2862 NELSONMULLINS.COM [nelsonmullins.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.nelsonmullins.com__;!!PtGJab4!qOsYEYt…> VCARD [nelsonmullins.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.nelsonmullins.com/people/john-mcelwai…> VIEW BIO [nelsonmullins.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.nelsonmullins.com/people/john-mcelwai…> Confidentiality Notice This message is intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. This communication may contain information that is proprietary, privileged, confidential or otherwise legally exempt from disclosure. If you are not the named addressee, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately either by phone (800-237-2000) or reply to this e-mail and delete all copies of this message.

1 0

On in 25 mins! PLEASE READ: Reading for the GNSO Council Prep and Priorities session today 12:30 PDT
by Nathalie Peregrine Oct. 25, 2021

Oct. 25, 2021

Dear all, Please join the GNSO Council Priorities and Prep Session on at the bottom of the hour (12:30 PDT – 19:30 UTC). Zoom access details are available on the ICANN72 schedule. Please ensure you have read the attached document ahead of time. Thank you! Nathalie From: Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine(a)icann.org> Date: Monday, 25 October 2021 at 16:36 To: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Cc: "gnso-secs(a)icann.org" <gnso-secs(a)icann.org> Subject: PLEASE READ: Reading for the GNSO Council Prep and Priorities session today 12:30 PDT Dear all, Ahead of our GNSO Council Prep and Priorities session scheduled today, Monday 25 October 2021, 12:30 PDT, please find the attached document outlining the talking points planned for the joint ICANN72 sessions with the GAC and ICANN Board. Thank you, Kind regards, Nathalie

1 0

Review of the GNSO job description for NomCom
by Flip Petillion Oct. 25, 2021

Oct. 25, 2021

Philippe, IPC is still puzzled with regard to item No.5 on the next Council agenda. 1. Procedurally, the IPC fails to understand the reason, yet alone the grounds, for moving the way you propose regarding Agenda item No. 5. As you stated yourself, there is no urgency. This item was not put on the agenda for discussion during a Council meeting, which is the usual way we handle items before proceeding to a vote and would allow all of us to take comments from colleagues from Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies back to our own Constituency for a final determination before it is shared during a next Council meeting. Agenda item No. 5 mentions that ‘the Council is considering revising the job description’. That is inaccurate. There is a motion which is proposed for discussion. Finally, the phrase ‘GNSO Council will vote to approve… ’ is at least premature. Again, there is a motion for discussion, followed by a vote at a later stage. There are reasons to applaud dynamic leadership and efficient agenda management, but not at the expense of an open dialogue. We are confident you had no intention to stifle the debate and that you will agree to discuss this during our next meeting rather than force a premature vote on a motion that originated with Council leadership; the second part of our meeting may be even more appropriate, given the broader relevance of how Council agendas should, or are expected to, be managed. 2. On the substance, the approach in the motion is debatable, at least. The section ‘The Council is considering the job description to reflect a preference for appointees that are not currently affiliated with any Stakeholder Group or Constituency’ is a personal ambition that is contemplated in the draft motion. It is not a consideration of the Council until it becomes the subject of an in-depth discussion. The text of the agenda item seems to be putting the cart before the horse. Attached is a marked-up version for discussion as prepared by the IPC. As you know, I will not be able to attend the Council meeting of 27 October. I hope to see all current and new Councilors at our November meeting. Have a good meeting. Flip Flip Petillion fpetillion(a)petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law> +32484652653 www.petillion.law [id:image001.png@01D3691D.DA7539C0]<https://www.petillion.law/> Attorneys – Advocaten – Avocats

2 1

PLEASE READ: Reading for the GNSO Council Prep and Priorities session today 12:30 PDT
by Nathalie Peregrine Oct. 25, 2021

Oct. 25, 2021

Dear all, Ahead of our GNSO Council Prep and Priorities session scheduled today, Monday 25 October 2021, 12:30 PDT, please find the attached document outlining the talking points planned for the joint ICANN72 sessions with the GAC and ICANN Board. Thank you, Kind regards, Nathalie

1 0

FW: Modifying consensus policies
by philippe.fouquart＠orange.com Oct. 25, 2021

Oct. 25, 2021

Dear Councilors, Please see Theresa's email and attached document developed by ICANN org to the Board's intention on the policy lifecyle. Beyond its educational goal, the paper also identifies potential gaps, shortcomings and room for improvement for which our community's input is sought. It is certainly something we can use for our SPS to plan for the work of the year ahead. Thank you. Regards, Philippe Orange Restricted From: Theresa Swinehart <theresa.swinehart(a)icann.org> Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 1:21 AM To: FOUQUART Philippe INNOV/NET <philippe.fouquart(a)orange.com> Cc: Karen Lentz <karen.lentz(a)icann.org>; Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org>; David Olive <david.olive(a)icann.org>; Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org> Subject: Modifying consensus policies Dear Philippe, I would like to share with you and the GNSO Council a discussion draft of the attached paper, Modifying Consensus Policies. The ICANN organization has developed this paper as a thought exercise to share with the community for information and input on existing processes. As mentioned in some of our previous interactions, this piece has been developed within the org, considering what procedures are in place for modifying consensus policies, and where there may be gaps, ambiguities, or opportunities for additional collaboration. The Board has expressed interest in understanding these processes and discussing possible mechanisms to address where there are identified and agreed needs for greater clarity or elaboration. As the GNSO's processes are interwoven with those of the Board and org in the consensus policy lifecycle, the org is seeking input from GNSO stakeholders before taking this paper to the Board. To date for the org, this review of applicable procedures to modify policies has been helpful in identifying gaps that might benefit from further clarification or discussion, relating to how to modify an existing policy in varying circumstances. Some possible gaps are further described in section 3 of this paper, to provide an opportunity for community discussions on identifying the source of gaps and confirming where they exist. In the spirit of sharing ideas and observations, we hope you also find this useful, and the org looks forward to hearing from GNSO stakeholders on these topics. I appreciate that this comes at a busy time, and look forward to engaging on this in due course. And, wishing the best for a successful ICANN72 meeting. Kind regards, Theresa _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.

1 0

FW: [CORRESPONDENCE] Maarten Botterman to Philippe Fouquart - EPDP Phase 1 Rec 12
by philippe.fouquart＠orange.com Oct. 25, 2021

Oct. 25, 2021

Dear Councilors, The following letter the provides an update on the consideration of EPDP Ph1 Recommendation 12 by the Board. The letter notes that "Board is inclined to accept" Ph1 Rec 12 and "would like to confirm whether [the 7 assumptions provided in the letter align] with the Council's understanding of the Supplemental Recommendation [12]." Ph1 Rec 12 is on today's agenda for our prep session, we'll see how we can do this in a timely manner. Regards, Philippe Orange Restricted From: Wendy Profit <wendy.profit(a)icann.org> Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2021 10:05 PM To: FOUQUART Philippe INNOV/NET <philippe.fouquart(a)orange.com>; gnso-secs(a)icann.org; gnso-chairs(a)icann.org Cc: Correspondence <Correspondence(a)icann.org>; Board Ops Team <board-ops-team(a)icann.org> Subject: Re: [CORRESPONDENCE] Maarten Botterman to Philippe Fouquart - EPDP Phase 1 Rec 12 Resending with the corrected hyperlink to the 4 March 2021 letter<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/fouquart-to-botterman-…>. From: Wendy Profit <wendy.profit(a)icann.org<mailto:wendy.profit@icann.org>> Date: Saturday, October 23, 2021 at 3:48 PM To: "philippe.fouquart(a)orange.com<mailto:philippe.fouquart@orange.com>" <philippe.fouquart(a)orange.com<mailto:philippe.fouquart@orange.com>>, "gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>" <gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>>, "gnso-chairs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-chairs@icann.org>" <gnso-chairs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-chairs@icann.org>> Cc: Maarten Botterman <maarten.botterman(a)board.icann.org<mailto:maarten.botterman@board.icann.org>>, Correspondence <Correspondence(a)icann.org<mailto:Correspondence@icann.org>>, Secretary <secretary(a)icann.org<mailto:secretary@icann.org>>, ICANN Board Ops <board-ops-team(a)icann.org<mailto:board-ops-team@icann.org>> Subject: [CORRESPONDENCE] Maarten Botterman to Philippe Fouquart - EPDP Phase 1 Rec 12 Dear Philippe Fouquart, Please find the attached letter from Maarten Botterman in response to your letter of 4 March 2021<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/draft-cou…> regarding the EPDP Phase 1 Recommendation 12. Thank you and best regards, Wendy Profit ICANN Board Operations Senior Manager 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094 _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.

1 0