Dear all, Please find below the agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting on 14 August 2025 at 21:00 UTC This will be posted on the agenda wiki page<https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/x/MKafBg> shortly. Thank you. Kind regards, Terri Policy Team Supporting the GNSO GNSO Council Agenda 14 August 2025 Please note that all documents referenced in the agenda have been gathered on a Wiki page for convenience and easier access: https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/x/6KefBg This agenda was established according to the GNSO Operating Procedures<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/op-procedu...> v3.5, updated on 15 March 2023. 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 on Thursday, 14 August 2025 at 21:00 UTC: https://tinyurl.com/59esyca8 14:00 Los Angeles; 17:00 Washington DC; 22:00 London; 23:00 Paris; 00:00 Moscow; 07:00 Melbourne GNSO Council Meeting Remote Participation [Published 24 hours prior to meeting]: https://icann83.sched.com/event/246XL/gnso-council-meeting Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if they will not be able to attend and/or need a dial out call. ___________________________________ Item 1: Administrative Matters (5 minutes) 1.1 - Roll Call 1.2 - Updates to Statements of Interest 1.3 - Review / Amend Agenda 1.4 - Note the status of minutes for the previous Council meetings per the GNSO Operating Procedures: Minutes<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2025/minutes/minutes-gnso-...> of the GNSO Council Meeting on 11 June 2025 were posted on 30 June 2025. Minutes<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2025/minutes/minutes-gnso-...> of the GNSO Council Meeting on 10 July 2025 were posted on 28 July 2025. Item 2: Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action List (0 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 (5 minutes) * Deferral of CSC Effectiveness Review * Confirmation of GNSO Non-Registry Liaison and Alternate to the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) * GNSO Non-Registry Liaison: John Gbadamosi * Alternate: Anil Jain * Adoption of Team 14 outcomes document - Board Seat 14 appointment * Confirmation of Support for the Board’s Proposed Non-Adoption of Select IGO Recommendations Item 4: COUNCIL VOTE - Approval of IANA Review Function 2 (IFR2) Final Report (10 minutes) The IANA Naming Function Review is an accountability mechanism created as part of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) stewardship transition to ensure that ICANN’s IANA work through Public Technical Identifiers (PTI) meets the needs and expectations of its naming customers. Under the ICANN Bylaws, the ICANN Board must convene an IFR no less frequently than every five years, measured from the date the previous IFR was convened. The board convened<https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-re...> the first IFR on 16 September 2018. The second IFR team (IFR2) conducted the review in accordance with the scope specified in the ICANN Bylaws<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#article18>. The review focuses on PTI’s performance of the IANA naming function against the contractual requirements in the IANA Naming Function Contract and the IANA Naming Function Statement of Work<https://www.icann.org/iana_pti_docs/151-iana-naming-function-contract-v-30se...>. The naming functions under review include management of the DNS root zone, a critical function for the ongoing operation of the Internet. The IFR2 recently sought public comments<https://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/proceeding/second-iana-naming-functi...> on its Draft Report, which contained findings and recommendations in three key areas: * Presence of specific Domain Name System Security Extensions (DNSSEC) policy details in the IANA Naming Function Contract * Transparency and availability of Contract amendments * Frequency of reviews After considering public comment received and making adjustments as appropriate, the IFR2 team is working to reach consensus on its Final Report. The Draft Report included two recommendations that will amend the IANA Naming Function Contract, including a recommendation on the presence of specific Domain Name System Security Extensions (DNSSEC) policy details in the IANA Naming Function Contract and identifying and pointing to the appropriate policy authority for DNSSEC 98 in the IANA Naming Function Contract. Neither recommendation received objections during the public comment period. However, Section 18.6 (b) of the Bylaws reads that any recommendations by the IFR that would amend the IANA Naming Function Contract shall only become effective if: (i) The IFR Recommendation has been approved by the vote of (A) a supermajority of the ccNSO Council (pursuant to the ccNSO's procedures or, if such procedures do not define a supermajority, two-thirds (2/3) of the ccNSO Council's members) and (B) a GNSO Supermajority;” Here, the Council will vote on the two IFRT recommendations that will amend the IANA Naming Function Contract. 4.1 - Introduction of Topic (Tomslin Samme-NIar, Interim GNSO Co-Chair) 4.2 - Council Vote (Voting Threshold: Supermajority) 4.3 - Next Steps Item 5: COUNCIL VOTE - Approval of Recommendations from GNSO Council Small Team on Accuracy (15 minutes) During the Council’s March 2025 meeting<https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/gnsocouncilmeetings/pages/...>, the Council agreed to form a dedicated small team on accuracy, which would be tasked with: * Reviewing the written input received on the Council’s threshold questions; and * Providing a detailed summary of the input received, taking into consideration the potential other sources that can inform the discussion - i.e. (but not limited to) INFERMAL study, EU NIS2 cooperation group, recommendation CC.1, and provide a recommendation to the Council on how to best make progress on the topic of registration data accuracy, e.g., relaunch scoping team with updated assignment, request Issues Report, request additional study (including the recommended form and aim of the study), etc. The Small Team, led by Paul McGrady, began meeting on 15 May 2025 and agreed to four recommendations for the Council’s consideration related to: * Examining the current timeline for validation and verification of registration data under the 2024 RAA * Creation of educational materials related to the importance of accurate registration data * Further consideration of a previously-approved Whois2 Review Team recommendation (CC.1) related to the inclusion of a notation in the RDDS record that the domain name is suspended due to incorrect data * Discontinuing the Accuracy Scoping Team at this time in light of the above recommendations, while noting these recommendations represent a starting point and do not foreclose further work in the future. Here, the Council will vote on the Accuracy Small Team’s Summary Report. 5.1 - Introduction of Topic (Paul McGrady, Small Team Lead) 5.2 - Council Vote (voting threshold: simple majority) 5.3 - Next Steps Item 6: COUNCIL VOTE - Request Issue Report on DNS Abuse (15 minutes) The Council’s small team on DNS abuse began meeting on 15 May 2025, working on its Assignment Form<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2025/draft/assignment-form...>. The assignment form includes the review and analysis of DNS Abuse mitigation efforts across the broader ICANN ecosystem, the impact of the RA and RAA amendments, the INFERMAL study, as well as other data sources. The goal of the small team was to determine, after reviewing available data sources, whether or not gaps remain in mitigating DNS abuse. The small team quickly came to the conclusion that there are indeed gaps remaining and have worked diligently to catalogue the issues. In developing that catalogue of issues, the small team also solicited input from SG/C/SO/ACs. The small team is putting forward recommendations to the GNSO Council that an Issue Report be requested during its August meeting, based upon the catalogue of issues the small team has developed. The recommendations suggest a specific subset of topics to be focused on in the draft charter and the PDP that is anticipated to follow. Here, the Council will vote to request an Issues Report on DNS Abuse. 6.1 - Presentation of Motion (Jennifer Chung, Small Team Lead) 6.2 - Council Vote (voting threshold: simple majority) 6.3 - Next Steps Item 7: COUNCIL VOTE - Approval of the Review of Reviews Cross Community Group Charter (15 minutes) On 27 May 2025<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/sinha-to-holen-et-al-27...>, the Board wrote to SO/AC Leaders with an update on the ICANN Reviews. Specifically, following input from the community, the Board informed SO/AC leaders that it took the following actions related to reviews during its 19 May meeting: 1. Continue the deferral of Organizational Reviews until the completion of one CIP cycle (estimated at 3 years). 2. Conclude the Pilot Holistic Review and following the completion of the CIP cycle, consider whether to rename and re-charter an effort focused solely on designing a review of the CIP. 3. Continue the community dialogue to support a broader discussion on reviews. This will include an engagement session at ICANN84 focused on the purpose and essential subject areas for reviews. 4. Continue the deferral of the fourth Accountability and Transparency Review (ATRT4) to support the community’s capacity to participate in the dialogues, and any related activities that may result from such discussions. Please see the relevant Board Resolution<https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-re...> for further information. During ICANN83, the SO/AC Chairs met with ICANN org to discuss a potential path forward. During the Council’s Wrap-Up<https://icann83.sched.com/event/246XW/gnso-council-wrap-up> session, GNSO Chair Greg DiBiase shared a high-level overview of that approach, asking that Councilors begin socializing the approach with their respective groups. Additional options were subsequently circulated to the GNSO Council. Shortly thereafter, the SOAC Chairs, in collaboration with select ICANN Board members, agreed to start development on a charter for a Review of Reviews Cross Community Group (RoR CCG). It was determined that the RoR CCG Charter, as well as initiating the work, should proceed expeditiously and separately from efforts to address ICANN’s non-compliance with its Bylaws, in respect of timing issues for Reviews. The SOAC Chairs and select Board members worked tirelessly to come to agreement on a stable draft of the RoR CCG Charter<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/reynoso-to-sinha-30jul2...>, which was shared with the Council on [date]. In preparation for the GNSO to support the CCG, the Council tasked its Standing Selection Committee (SSC) to identify the two (2) GNSO members of the group. The Council recognizes the importance of allowing the RoR CCG to proceed with its work, but not losing sight of the non-compliance issue. Here, the Council will vote to approve the RoR CCG Charter. 7.1 - Presentation of motion<https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/gnsocouncilmeetings/pages/...> (Susan Payne, IPC Councilor) 7.2 - Council Discussion 7.3 - Council Vote (voting threshold: simple majority)] Item 8: COUNCIL UPDATE - Privacy Proxy Services Accreditation Issues Implementation Work - Questions for GNSO Council (10 minutes) On 9 August 2016, the ICANN Board approved the Final Report<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/filefield_48305/ppsai-final-07dec...> of the Privacy Proxy Services Accreditation Issues (PPSAI) Working Group, which contains 21 policy recommendations. ICANN org convened an Implementation Review Team (IRT) in 2016 and worked on the implementation of the policy recommendations until 2019 when the implementation work was paused due to overlapping issues around the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), data processing, and the Temporary Specification<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/gtld-registration-data-specs-en/#temp-...>. In June 2024, ICANN org reconvened the PPSAI IRT and has been refining a set of overarching threshold questions that require input from the GNSO Council in order for ICANN org to, in consultation with the IRT, move forward on implementation of the 21 policy recommendations from the Final Report<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/filefield_48305/ppsai-final-07dec...>. ICANN org recently sent the threshold questions<https://lists.icann.org/hyperkitty/list/council@icann.org/thread/7WQUZAK2VHP...> to the GNSO Council for further guidance. The threshold questions currently under discussion are: 1. Are there any policy questions or items the IRT already wants to bring to the GNSO Council for guidance? 2. Implementation Model: Accreditation Program or Alternative Implementation: a. Can an implementation model without a new standalone accreditation program remain consistent with the policy recommendations? 1. Disclosure Frameworks (Intellectual Property and Law Enforcement) a. Are there specific areas to revisit under new law/policy? b. Can these frameworks be aligned with existing work on the Registration Data Request Service (RDRS), Registration Data Policy, and other existing procedures and remain consistent with the policy recommendations? Here, the Council will discuss how to best address the questions from the PPSAI IRT and determine next steps. 8.1 - Introduction of Topic (Paul McGrady, GNSO Council Liaison to the PPSAI IRT) 8.2 - Council Discussion 8.3 - Next Steps Item 9: COUNCIL UPDATE: Update on Urgents Requests (15 minutes) ICANN org convened an Implementation Review Team to assist ICANN in implementing the EPDP on the Temporary Specification Phase 1 Final Report<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/epdp-gtld-...>, which began meeting in May 2019. ICANN org published the draft Registration Data Policy for public comment<https://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/proceeding/registration-data-consens...> on 24 August 2022. Several commenters expressed dissatisfaction with the implementation of Recommendation 18, specifically around the issue of the response timeline for urgent requests. The relevant portion of Recommendation 18 reads, “A separate timeline of [less than X business days] will considered for the response to ‘Urgent’ Reasonable Disclosure Requests, those Requests for which evidence is supplied to show an immediate need for disclosure [time frame to be finalized and criteria set for Urgent requests during implementation].” On 3 June 2024<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2024/correspondence/tsinha...>, the Board wrote to the GNSO Council, noting concerns with the proposed urgent request timeline of business days as not fit for purpose, as truly urgent requests should be responded to within minutes or hours rather than business days. Recognizing this, the Board also noted there is no universal mechanism for registrars to authenticate law enforcement entities. The GNSO Council responded on 29 August 2024<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2024/correspondence/dibias...>, agreeing with the Board’s concerns and suggesting a trilateral meeting between the Board, GNSO Council, and GAC to discuss a potential path forward in light of the concerns. On 15 October 2024<https://gac.icann.org/contentMigrated/gac-follow-up-on-urgent-requests-gac-r...>, the GAC wrote to the Board, recommending, “[f]or the work on authentication, we would support the establishment of a joint PSWG/CPH task force. For the work on the response time for authenticated requests, we invite the Board and the GNSO Council to identify an expedited procedure for addressing this workstream. We strongly suggest resuming the work of the IRT, which was halted last summer.” A trilateral meeting was held on 4 November 2024<https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/gnsocouncilmeetings/pages/...> and the Board, GAC, and GNSO Council discussed next steps, including potentially resuming discussions with the IRT. The Council discussed this issue in detail during its meeting on 19 December 2024<https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/gnsocouncilmeetings/pages/...> and responded to the GAC on 15 January 2025<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2025/correspondence/dibias...>. A second trilateral meeting was held on 12 February 2025<https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/gnsocouncilmeetings/pages/...>. The IRT has resumed meetings on the issue of response time for urgent requests. Here, the Council will hear an update from the GNSO Council liaison to the IRT and discuss next steps. 9.1 - Introduction of Topic (Thomas Rickert, GNSO Council Liaison to the Registration Data IRT) 9.2 - Council Discussion 9.3 - Next Steps Item 10: COUNCIL UPDATE: Outcome of Transfer Policy Review PDP Human Rights Impact Assessment (15 minutes) During its 12 March 2025 [icann.zoom.us]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/rec/play/c9JJyD0XyDGkIJUQWG...> meeting, the GNSO Council voted to approve all 47 recommendations of the Transfer Policy Review Working Group’s Final Report. While the Working Group’s Charter [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy...> did not include a Human Rights Impact Assessment (HRIA), the Council agreed to conduct an HRIA following the vote on the Final Report. Farzaneh Badii, the GNSO Councilor who volunteered to lead the HRIA effort, met with Roger Carney, the chair of the Transfer Policy Review PDP, on 16 April 2025. Farzaneh presented the outcome of the HRIA discussion to the Council during its meeting on 15 May 2025 [icann.zoom.us]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/rec/play/Vew12tHCU11uhBpXCb...>. Here, the Council will discuss the outstanding items from the HRIA and determine if further action is needed or if additional items need to be added to the continued discussion of the Council’s prioritization of work. 10.1 - Introduction of Topic (Farzaneh Badii, GNSO Councilor) 10.2 - Council Discussion 10.3 - Next Steps Item 11: Any Other Business (15 minutes) 11.1 - ICANN84 planning and GNSO Draft schedule (Terri Agnew) 11.2 - WSIS update (Desiree Miloshevic or Jennifer Chung) 11.2 - GNSO Liaison to the GAC update (Sebastien Ducos) _______________________________ 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-procedu... References for Coordinated Universal Time of 21:00 UTC Local time between March and November in the NORTHERN hemisphere See https://www.timeanddate.com/time/change/ for Dates for Daylight Saving Time and Clock Changes ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PDT) UTC-7 14:00 San José, Costa Rica (CST) UTC-6 15:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EDT) UTC-4 17:00 Buenos Aires, Argentina (ART) UTC-3 18:00 Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo (WAT) UTC+1 22:00 Paris, France (CEST) UTC+2 23:00 Moscow, Russia (MSK) UTC+3 00:00 Singapore (SGT) UTC+8 17:00 Melbourne, Australia (AEST) UTC+10 07:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com<http://www.timeanddate.com/> and https://tinyurl.com/59esyca8