- Gac-gnso-cg - lists.icann.org

MP3 recording GAC / GNSO Consultation Group teleconference Tuesday 18 November 2014 1400 UTC
by Terri Agnew Nov. 18, 2014

Nov. 18, 2014

Dear All, Please find the MP3 recording of the GAC / GNSO Consultation Group teleconference held on Tuesday 18 November 2014 at 1400 UTC at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-gac-20141118-en.mp3 On page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#nov The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ Attendees: Government Advisory Committee Manal Ismail - co-chair - Egypt Ana Neves, Portugal GNSO Council Brian Winterfeldt, Councilor David Cake, Vice Chair GNSO Liaison to the GAC: Mason Cole Apology: Amr Elsadr, Councilor Suzanne Radell, US Avri Doria, Councillor Jonathan Robinson, Chair ICANN Staff: Marika Konings Olof Nordling Glen de Saint Gery Karine Perset Nathalie Peregrine ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Public archives of the mailing list can be found at: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gac-gnso-cg/ Thank you. Kind regards, Nathalie Adobe Chat transcript: Marika Konings:Welcome to the GAC-GNSO CG meeting of 18 November 2014 Nathalie Peregrine:Brian Winterfeldt has joined the AC room Nathalie Peregrine:David cake has joined the call Ana Neves:sure Ana Neves:still listening... Marika Konings:See http://ccnso.icann.org/about/council/decisions.htm for ccNSO decisions Marika Konings:You can see here the recommendation from the triage committee and the action taken by the ccNSO Council Marika Konings:Quickly skimming through it, it looks like that in almost all (if not all) cases, the ccNSO Council has followed the recommendation of the triage committee Marika Konings:OK, will do Ana Neves:keep the momentum is the motto, indeed... Ana Neves:Thank you and bye David Cake:Thak you

1 0

FW: [Ntfy-gac-gnso-cg] REMINDER: Meeting Invitation: GAC GNSO Consultation Meeting, Tuesday 18 November 2014 at 14:00 UTC
by Manal Ismail Nov. 18, 2014

Nov. 18, 2014

Re-sending on behalf of Suzanne (and myself J) as the below message did not get through .. Kind Regards --Manal From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 1:29 AM To: ntfy-gac-gnso-cg(a)icann.org Subject: FW: [Ntfy-gac-gnso-cg] REMINDER: Meeting Invitation: GAC GNSO Consultation Meeting, Tuesday 18 November 2014 at 14:00 UTC Hi everyone, as per my email exchange with Manal, we both thought the whole group might be interested in it, so I'm sending it along. With apologies as well for not being able to join you tomorrow. I am looking forward to your thoughts on this chain. Best regards, Suz Suzanne Murray Radell Senior Policy Advisor NTIA/Office of International Affairs PH: 202-482-3167 FX: 202-482-1865 ________________________________ From: Manal Ismail [manal(a)tra.gov.eg] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 5:10 PM To: Suzanne Radell Cc: Mason Cole; jonathan.robinson(a)ipracon.com Subject: Re: [Ntfy-gac-gnso-cg] REMINDER: Meeting Invitation: GAC GNSO Consultation Meeting, Tuesday 18 November 2014 at 14:00 UTC I'm fine with either .. Maybe forwarding the whole thread is better to ensure everyone is on the same page .. --Manal Sent from my iPhone On Nov 18, 2014, at 12:01 AM, "Suzanne Radell" <SRadell(a)ntia.doc.gov> wrote: Thanks again, Manal, for coming back to me prior to tomorrow's call. Shall I just forward this entire chain to the whole group? Or just my email to you and Jonathan? Just let me know and I can get it out later this evening. Cheers, Suz From: Manal Ismail [mailto:manal@tra.gov.eg] Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2014 1:48 AM To: Suzanne Radell Cc: Mason Cole; jonathan.robinson(a)ipracon.com Subject: RE: [Ntfy-gac-gnso-cg] REMINDER: Meeting Invitation: GAC GNSO Consultation Meeting, Tuesday 18 November 2014 at 14:00 UTC Dear Suzanne .. Thanks again for sharing your thoughts and sorry you won't be able to join the coming call .. I fully agree with you that GAC colleagues, and even the whole ICANN community, are fully utilized by the IANA transition and ICANN accountability processes and that we have to be very specific in what we ask for in order to expect responses .. To me, triggering the discussion and encouraging GAC responses, I believe, should be through sharing a concrete proposal (well-thought through by the group, including GAC members with GNSO experience like yourself and Mark) with specific questions that we may have, or may suggest, to brainstorm on the proposal .. I also believe that, optimally, this should be shared well in advance of the Singapore meeting .. Such discussion may end by adopting the proposal as is, agreeing to the proposal with certain amendments, or proposing a completely different approach or mechanism .. but to trigger the discussion we have to have something on the table .. Having said that, I'm flexible and willing to follow any approach we agree upon .. I fully agree with your proposal that "we could consider providing more concrete information and/or context by using a straw man as a means of testing some of the concepts we're discussing" .. but I thought a pre-requisite to this testing would be agreeing on the details of what we intend to test .. So allow me to seek further clarification on how can we demonstrate this quick-look Triage committee mechanism in practice .. Let me also share with you what Marika shared (off-list for the time being), the attached 'GNSO Issue Report Request Form' and the 'ccNSO Triage Committee process' with further information at: http://ccnso.icann.org/about/council/decisions.htm .. I believe both documents, in addition to the GAC one-pagers available at: https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/GAC+Early+Engagement+Policy+Docu ments, may help in coming up with the information the GAC needs to decide whether a certain issue, to be discussed by the GNSO, is of interest .. I do see your point on triggers at the GNSO side, and look forward to hearing their view on this .. Meanwhile I don't think this would override the need for a quick-look mechanism, as the GAC may still receive multiple requests from the GNSO side that need to be prioritized, or have I missed something? Finally, please feel free to share on the list for the sake of time and for the sake of making sure we are all on the same page before the call, particularly that you won't be on this call and I'm keen to have your views considered, as early as possible, to make sure we're progressing .. Kind Regards --Manal From: Suzanne Radell [mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov] Sent: Friday, November 14, 2014 1:36 AM To: Manal Ismail Cc: Mason Cole Subject: RE: [Ntfy-gac-gnso-cg] REMINDER: Meeting Invitation: GAC GNSO Consultation Meeting, Tuesday 18 November 2014 at 14:00 UTC I should have thought of that myself, Manal, so thank you and I'm now cc'ing Mason on this message. Cheers, Suz Suzanne Murray Radell Senior Policy Advisor NTIA/Office of International Affairs PH: 202-482-3167 FX: 202-482-1865 ________________________________ From: Manal Ismail [manal(a)tra.gov.eg] Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2014 5:02 PM To: Suzanne Radell Subject: Re: [Ntfy-gac-gnso-cg] REMINDER: Meeting Invitation: GAC GNSO Consultation Meeting, Tuesday 18 November 2014 at 14:00 UTC Hi Suzanne .. Many thanks for sharing your thoughts .. It's a bit late for me to provide an equally thorough response to your email, but I'm wondering whether it would be ok with you if we cc Mason on this .. I think Jonathan is quite busy and has been away for some time .. I believe Mason may be in a position to provide a GNSO view on this, as I'm worried we might not hear from Jonathan in due time before the call .. Please let me know what you think .. Kind Regards --Manal Sent from my iPhone On Nov 13, 2014, at 9:35 PM, "Suzanne Radell" <SRadell(a)ntia.doc.gov> wrote: Hi Jonathan and Manal, before going out to the whole group, I wanted to send along a heads up that I will not be able to join next Tuesday's call as I'll be on a panel that morning. As I was called away to an unexpected meeting for the last call, I'm mindful of becoming woefully behind. I did want to share an impression from the notes or recap of the most recent call, which is that we may either be at or nearing a point in our group deliberations where we are further ahead of our respective communities than we might like to be. I'm fairly confident that the near silence we're hearing on the GAC side is not at all due to disinterest; rather, I think a majority of our colleagues don't know what it is we want from them. Not to mention the fact that the two highest priorities on everyone's plate right now are the IANA transition and ICANN accountability processes. So I'm wondering if we could consider providing more concrete information and/or context by using a straw man as a means of testing some of the concepts we're discussing. For example, wouldn't the concept of a triage committee for the GAC have more resonance is we could demonstrate how it would actually work (e.g. vice theoretically) in practice? And I remain very keen to know whether, on the GNSO side, we could reach agreement on some triggers that would be used at the outset (e.g. at the time of a request for an Issues Report) to determine whether to engage the GAC at that moment in time? My proposals for near term testing in terms of triggers would be anything related to international treaties that governments sign and national laws. If whatever the GNSO determined might require a PDP did touch on treaties or national laws, would it make sense to have an exchange between the GNSO and the GAC from the beginning? This isn't happening now, and the assumption seems to be that it's up to the GAC to provide comments when the Issues Report is actually posted. We have previous examples where this should have happened, but did not (e.g. IGO-INGO protections). The counter argument could be made that the GNSO could have easily engaged the GAC on its own initiative, since this particular PDP was initiated after the GAC had provided advice. We are arguably/hopefully trying to avoid these situations in the future, which suggests some change in our respective work cultures/habits. I look forward to your thoughts on this, as well as on any other work I could/should be taking on at the moment. In terms of preparing for Singapore, I also think we should consider a slightly different approach to updating the GAC and the GNSO. Quite candidly, I don't know how the GNSO updates are structured, but the GAC exchanges aren't triggering exchanges per se; it's the Consultation Group providing an update. So I'd like to explore some alternatives with you before proposing ideas to the rest of the group. Thanks in advance, and best regards, Suz Suzanne Murray Radell Senior Policy Advisor, NTIA/OIA sradell(a)ntia.doc.gov 202-482-3167

2 2

Agenda for Tues. Nov. 18th cc ..
by Manal Ismail Nov. 18, 2014

Nov. 18, 2014

Dear All .. Please find attached a suggested agenda for today's call .. 1. Adoption of suggested agenda 2. Continue quick-look / Triage mechanism discussion 3. Preparation for Singapore 4. AoB I'm also attaching: * GNSO Issue Report Request Form, brought to our attention by Marika * ccNSO Prioritisation Process, brought to our attention by Marika (more details available at: http://ccnso.icann.org/about/council/decisions.htm) * A sample of the monthly one-pagers circulated to the GAC by Olof (also available at: https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/GAC+Early+Engagement+Policy+Docu ments+-+November+2014) I believe the 3 documents may guide our discussion on information needed / process followed for a quick-look mechanism .. Looking forward to our call later today .. Kind Regards --Manal

1 0

FW: For your review - notes from today's meeting
by Marika Konings Nov. 10, 2014

Nov. 10, 2014

Resending as I don¹t think my message went through yesterday. Best regards, Marika From: Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org> Date: Tuesday 4 November 2014 16:19 To: "gac-gnso-cg(a)icann.org" <gac-gnso-cg-bounces(a)icann.org> Subject: For your review - notes from today's meeting GNSO Operating Rules and Procedures Dear All, Please find below the notes from today¹s meeting. For those that were able to join, please review and let me know if I¹ve missed anything. For those that were not able to join, please review and share with the list if you have any additional views or comments. The next meeting will be scheduled for Tuesday 18 November at 15.00 UTC. >From there, we¹ll continue with our meetings every two weeks please let us know ahead of time if there are any meetings that you cannot make so we can plan accordingly should there be more members unavailable for certain dates. Best regards, Marika Notes 4 November 2014: Taking stock of LA meeting: * Session with full committee was very timely - opening of dialogue between GAC-GNSO very useful * Hope for more GAC engagement over coming months as modalities are defined * New GAC Chair also recognises the importance of this initiative * Hopefully this will result in additional participants in this effort Update on Work Tracks * Reminder on deliverables of charter which have resulted in the two work tracks (1) A documented process (table, flow chart, etc.) for ongoing smooth and timely information exchange between the GAC and the GNSO organizations (GNSO Liaison to the GAC , permanent liaison/consultative group, etc.) 2) An agreed documented process (table, flow chart, etc.) for ongoing smooth early engagement of GAC in GNSO PDP projects; along with an agreed documented procedure to be followed where GAC early input is in conflict with a GNSO proposal and a mutual agreement could not be reached * PDP Work Track: little progress has been made, but also noting the link between the other track. Some work has been done on possible early engagement opportunities in the PDP, but further discussions / input are needed. Commitment would be needed from both sides to make possible changes work, but would ideally be light touches to the process. May be time to put to the GAC the quick look mechanism approach - the earlier the GAC has an opportunity to express its view or indicate its interest to be engaged, the better. Suggestion for GAC members to consider putting together proposal for Quick Look Mechanism for GAC consideration - timing will be crucial as information would need to be provided prior to GAC meetings so that quick look mechanism could be employed and feedback could possibly be provided via GNSO liaison. Outcome of quick look mechanism could also be recorded as part of the GAC communique. What happens if PDP work advances to next stage before GAC is able to provide input - is that an issue or can it be taken into account as part of a next phase? Initial idea of quick look mechanism is to provide an indication during the Issue Report phase of whether there are public policy implications, not necessarily substantive input which will be more important when the GNSO PDP WG commences its deliberations and as such may not take as much time as the preparation of substantive input which ideally would contain detail as well as rationale. Alternatively, if more time is needed, GAC could already be informed immediately following the request for an Issue Report, instead of once the Preliminary Issue Report is posted for public comment. Quick look mechanism could potentially be developed intersessional but without being binding but providing important guidance to both the GNSO and the GAC. Decision on outcome of a quick look mechanism check probably will need to be made during an ICANN meeting, may not be possible intersessionally. If the decision is that there are likely public policy implications, this could trigger the formation of a GAC committee to develop substantive input to provide input by the time the PDP WG is formed. Preliminary Issue Report may not be necessary for trigger quick look mechanism, possibly a short description (1-2 pages) of the issue could be sufficient for the GAC to consider the issue (noted that GAC could always revise its view based on additional information coming available). Counterpart inside the GAC for day-to-day contact * Would be helpful to have a day-to-day co-ordination point for Mason - peer to peer relationship with GAC member(s) * If this relates to forwarding / sharing information, this could be done via Olof * One of the five vice-chairs could be awarded this responsibility? Consider suggesting this to Thomas. Day-to-day Co-ordination * See latest version of day-to-day co-ordination document as well as suggestion during F2F meeting for a possible joint WG. * Continue discussion on the list Agree on call schedule * Proposal to continue with meetings every two weeks - next meeting to be scheduled for 18 November at 14.00 UTC. * All encouraged to indicate ahead of meetings if not available

2 1

MP3 recording GAC / GNSO Consultation Group teleconference Tuesday 04 November 2014 1400 UTC
by Nathalie Peregrine Nov. 4, 2014

Nov. 4, 2014

Dear All, Please find the MP3 recording of the GAC / GNSO Consultation Group teleconference held on Tuesday 04 November 2014 at 1400 UTC at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-gac-20141104-en.mp3 On page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#nov The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ Attendees: Government Advisory Committee Mark Carvell, UK GNSO Council Amr Elsadr, Councilor David Cake, Councilor, Brian Winterfeldt, Councilor GNSO Liaison to the GAC: Mason Cole Apology: Volker Greimann, Vice Chair Avri Doria - Councillor - NCSG Jonathan Robinson, Chair Manal Ismail - co-chair - Egypt Ana Neves, Portugal ICANN Staff: Marika Konings Olof Nordling Julia Charvolen Karine Perset Nathalie Peregrine ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Public archives of the mailing list can be found at: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gac-gnso-cg/ Thank you. Kind regards, Nathalie Adobe Chat transcript: Marika Konings:Welcome to GAC-GNSO Consultation Group Meeting of 4 November 2014 Mason Cole:Good morning, good afternoon all Nathalie Peregrine:Hello Mason! Brian Winterfeldt:Good morning! Nathalie Peregrine:Hello Brian! Mark Carvell:Hello from London! Brian Winterfeldt:Hi Nathalie. Brian Winterfeldt:Thanks for all your reminders about the call! Nathalie Peregrine:David Cake has joined the AC room David Cake:Good morning (well evening here), sorry I'm late had technical issues with AC loading Nathalie Peregrine:Amr Elsadr has also joined Mason Cole:Hello Amr! Amr Elsadr:Hi. Apologies for being so late. On the AC audio now. Amr Elsadr:@Mark: I appreciate the timing issue, which is why I wouldn't mind a little accomodation to that challenge from the GNSO side. However, assurances need to be provided that the GAC is also committed to trying to make this work. Nathalie Peregrine:Suzanne Radell has just sent in her apologies for this call Amr Elsadr:If it is agreed that GAC input will be provided at the PDP working group stage, the need for intersessional decision-making will not be necessary. I mean at least for a first step. Marika Konings:Maybe we could think of a template of what information would need to be provided to the GAC in order to be able to trigger the quick look mechanism? This is something that then could be prepared at the same time as the request for an Issue Report is being considered by the GNSO Council and submitted immediately following approval by the GNSO Council of a request for an Issue Report? Brian Winterfeldt:I support Mason having a colleague on the GAC who can serve as a direct connection for communication between Mason and the GAC. David Cake:Not even just GAC members busy this week. Some GNSO people in Busan too. David Cake:OK by me. Brian Winterfeldt:Thank you Mason and Marika! Amr Elsadr:Thanks all. Bye. Brian Winterfeldt:Thank you all. Mark Carvell:Just checked my diary - I'm travelling to Strasbourg on the 18th.

1 0

Tomorrow's meeting
by Mason Cole Nov. 4, 2014

Nov. 4, 2014

Good afternoon / evening all -- Manal let me know neither she nor Jonathan are available for tomorrow's call, and asked if I could chair in their stead. I'm happy to do so, and suggest the draft agenda that follows. Please let me know if there are additions or edits anyone would like to make. Thanks, and looking forward to the meeting tomorrow. Regards, Mason 1. Taking stock of LA 2. Update on work tracks (intro by Marika) a. PDP work track (Amr, Suzanne) i. Triage group for the GAC ii. Mason counterpart inside the GAC for day-to-day contact iii. Quick look mechanism b. Day-to-day coordination (intro from Marika) i. Creation of GAC-GNSO working group 3. Agree on call schedule 4. AOB Mason Cole VP Communications & Industry Relations Donuts Inc. ………………………………………… mason(a)donuts.co Ofc +1 503 908 7623 Cell +1 503 407 2555

2 1

REMINDER Next meeting - please participate in doodle poll
by Marika Konings Oct. 20, 2014

Oct. 20, 2014

Reminder, please participate in the doodle poll if you have not done so yet. Thanks, Marika From: Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org> Date: Friday 17 October 2014 23:49 To: "gac-gnso-cg(a)icann.org" <gac-gnso-cg(a)icann.org> Subject: [Gac-gnso-cg] Next meeting - please participate in doodle poll Dear All, Following our meeting this week in Los Angeles, please complete the following doodle poll to determine the date for the next GAC GNSO Consultation Group meeting: http://doodle.com/3pkztep58edvti3x. Thanks, Marika

1 0

No meeting this week & Daylight Saving time
by Nathalie Peregrine Oct. 20, 2014

Oct. 20, 2014

Dear all, This is just a reminder that there will be no Working Group meetings this week, as this is the week after ICANN51. Notifications will go out for the next meeting date shortly. A quick heads up also regarding Daylight Saving times. We will be keeping the same UTC meeting time until all clock changes have taken place. UTC time will be adjusted (+1 hour) from the 3rd November onwards. This will be made very clear in the email invitations. Please let me know if you have any questions. Kind regards Nathalie

1 0

Next meeting - please participate in doodle poll
by Marika Konings Oct. 17, 2014

Oct. 17, 2014

Dear All, Following our meeting this week in Los Angeles, please complete the following doodle poll to determine the date for the next GAC GNSO Consultation Group meeting: http://doodle.com/3pkztep58edvti3x. Thanks, Marika

1 0

Wooow !!!
by Manal Ismail Oct. 13, 2014

Oct. 13, 2014

Congratulations Jonathan !! A well-deserved award J!! Kind Regards --Manal

4 3