October 2016 - Gnso-review-wg

FOR REVIEW: Revised Draft Strawman Implementation Plan
by Julie Hedlund Oct. 31, 2016

Oct. 31, 2016

Dear GNSO Review WG members, Please note the action item from the last GNSO Review WG call concerning the Draft Strawman Implementation Plan: “Staff will incorporate revisions from the call, arrange the recommendations in batches, and fill in additional dependencies including between recommendations, resource requirements, and budget. Staff also will add a row for suggested actions by the WG for each recommendation.” Per this action item staff have extensively revised the strawman draft implementation plan as follows: 1. Incorporated all of the changes based on the discussion on the last call. 2. Arranged the recommendations in phases: 1) Work Already Underway; 2) High Priority Recommendations; 3) Medium and Low Priority Recommendations. 3. Arranged the recommendations by category within each phase. 4. Provided suggestions for additional dependencies as noted in the action item. 5. Added a row for suggested actions for each recommendation. 6. Combined related/dependent recommendations. The revised document is attached in Word and PDF for your review and for discussion during our face-to-face meeting at ICANN57 in Hyderabad from 13:45-1500 IST on 08 November at ICANN57. See: https://icann572016.sched.org/event/8cw4/gnso-review-working-group. Please feel free to send any questions or suggested edits to the list prior to the next meeting. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director

1 0

Actions/Discussion Notes: GNSO Review WG Meeting 24 October
by Julie Hedlund Oct. 26, 2016

Oct. 26, 2016

Dear GNSO Review WG Members, Please see below the discussion notes captured by staff from the meeting on 24 October. These high-level notes are designed to help WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the recording or the transcript. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately and are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/GRWG/2016-10-06+GNSO+Review+Working+Gro…. In addition, please see the wiki home page for your reference at: https://community.icann.org/display/GRWG/GNSO+Review+Working+Group+Home. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director GNSO Review WG Meeting, 24 October 2016: Actions/Discussion Notes 1. Vice Chair Lawrence proposes Wolf-Ulrich Knoben; Donna Austin seconds. 2. Discussion of Strawman Draft of GNSO Review Recommendations Implementation Plan No new comments 3. Discussion of Batching Approaches Action Item: Staff will incorporate revisions from the call, arrange the recommendations in batches, and fill in additional dependencies including between recommendations, resource requirements, and budget. Staff also will add a row for suggested actions by the WG for each recommendation. Discussion Notes: Batching: · First batch: Look first at work that is already being done. Identify some mechanism to have some accountability for that work. For example, on recommendation 8, the work of the Policy & Implementation Working Group already completed a while back so it may just require the WG to confirm that the implementation of those recommendations met the objective of that GNSO review recommendation. · Second batch: Look at the recommendations that were prioritized as high. · Third batch: Recommendations that were medium or low. Timeline: First batch Jan-Dec 2017, Second batch Jun-May 2018, Third batch Oct-Sep 2018. Note: The timeline will be refined once the WG looks at the batches and dependencies. Likely to be much more overlap between first batch and second batches. Timine will be more specific and deadlines for deliverables should be incorporated. Discussion of Recommendations in Work Already Underway: Recommendation 8: Implementation of the recommendations of the Policy & Implementation WG. Required to form an implementation review team to address implementation related issues. · Action: GNSO Review WG should decide if this meets the requirements of recommendation 8. · Does the WG need to review to make sure that what has been done is fully implemented? Could be a sub-working group for each batch. Recommendation 15: This is a project that was recently considered complete. Share the project status that was given to the Council noting some items are being finalized. · Action: WG review whether the work meets the recommendation or whether further work needs to be undertaken. Staff could put together all the efforts that relate to this recommendation, such as new procedures. Recommendation 16: PIA should be included as a standard part of any policy process. · See DMPM Final Report in process of being implemented. · PIA is part of the PDP Manual. · Guidance for measuring impact -- look to DMPM. Recommendation 18: Relates to Recommendation 16 and the DMPM Final Report. · Add recent experience to review some policies that have been implemented. · Look at whether there can be a standard approach and timeline for review. May not be possible to have one size fits all. · The DMPM part provided a strawman to assist the community in identifying metrics that can be used to test policy effectiveness. However, it is at a high level, b/c each PDP is fairly unique and difficult to identify metrics. Agree that it ties into Rec. 16 framework action item. Recommendation 10: Pilot already underway. · Action: Look at the outcome of the pilot. Pilot was a combination of face-to-face time with our without a facilitator. Very successful for the PDP WGs. This is now a standard feature to recommend for PDP WGs to meet before or after ICANN meetings and a moderator could be involved. Staff should come up with a list of guidelines or rules for these sessions. This is work in progress and will go back to the Council for approval, but could pass through this WG. · Add dependency: Budget for moderator, but may not always be helpful -- case-by-case basis. Develop criteria for when it would be helpful. It is up to the WG to decide whether they need a moderator. · Add examples of where moderator may be helpful. Include the evaluation document sent to the GNSO Council. Example: ICANN had a professional facilitator (external to ICANN) for one F2F WG meeting and one ICANN facilitator (not a member of the WG but very familiar with ICANN and the subject matter) - the second experience received better reviews than the former. But again, it may very much depend on the specific circumstances of a WG - in certain cases, disagreement evolves around substance while in others it may be the result of process matters. Different experience / expertise may be needed, depending on the circumstances. Recommendation 33: · Are we tracking diversity? It is captured in Statements of Interest, but not tallied. · SGs and Cs have specific requirements in their charters re: geographic diversity for Council members, but allows exceptions (such as contracted parties). Look at what SGs and Cs are doing. · CCWG Accountability looking at diversity and what this means -- WG could look at that work in addition to the GNSO work. · Depends on how we define diversity. Need to be careful how we approach this. · Look at time zone management, outreach -- dependencies with other recommendations. Extract and combine with related recommendations. Recommendation 11: Relates to recommendation 10. Combine the two recommendations. Recommendation 14: WG can determine if this is continuing to happen. Note that nothing prevents PDP WG from doing this and PDP WG are already doing this (give examples). 3. Next steps/Meetings: · Next meeting is a face-to-face meeting at ICANN57 in Hyderabad on 07 November at ICANN57. The next call is 15 November. · Staff will incorporate changes and also arrange recommendations by batches and fill in dependencies and additional information.

2 2

Mp3 and attendance GNSO Review Working Group 25 October 2016
by Terri Agnew Oct. 25, 2016

Oct. 25, 2016

Dear all, Please find the MP3 recording for the GNSO Review Working Group held on 25 October 2016 at 13:00 UTC: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-review-wg-25oct16-en.mp3 On page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#<http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar> The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group…> Mailing list archives: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-review-wg/ Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/ZhmsAw Attendees: Members: Heath Dixon (RrSG Primary) Sara Bockey (RrSG Alternate) Jennifer Wolfe (RySG Primary) Donna Austin (RySG Alternate) Rafik Dammak (NCSG Primary) Wolf-Ulrich Knoben (ISPCP) Participants: Pascal Bekono Lawrence Olawale-Roberts Apologies: ICANN staff: Marika Konings Julie Hedlund Lars Hoffman Berry Cobb Terri Agnew ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Thank you. Kind regards, Terri ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for 25 October 2016 Terri Agnew:Welcome to the GNSO Review Working Group call on Tuesday, 25 October 2016 at 13:00 UTC Terri Agnew:agenda wiki page: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_… Rafik:this call is scheduled in the same with the CCWG plenary call Pascal Bekono:Good morning dear all Donna Austin, RySG:Support the nomination of Wolf Ulrich Julie Hedlund:@All: The document is unsynced so you may move through it. Julie Hedlund:@All: Synced again. Marika Konings:For example, on recommendation 8, the work of the Policy & Implementation Working Group already completed a while back so it may just require the WG to confirm that the implementation of those recommendations met the objective of that GNSO review recommendation. Julie Hedlund:@Donna: This timeline is somewhat arbitrary - just a suggestion at this point. Donna Austin, RySG:Thanks Julie, makes sense. Donna Austin, RySG:I can see it Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:I can see it Sara Bockey:I see it Jen Wolfe 2:Got it back now. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:great Pascal Bekono:Is it possible to have a bacth at the end where we revise all the three priorities ? to analyse dependencies ? Marika Konings:It may be sufficient to point out how this recommendation was implemented through other work that has already completed? Marika Konings:and indeed, in certain cases work may still be underway and should be monitored as such. Terri Agnew:Wolf-Ulrich Knoben has joined on the telephone Berry Cobb:not dialed in. Berry Cobb:I will say, that we have a place holder for "Impact" as part of the Key Performance Indicators dashboard. Berry Cobb:And can use assistance to develop what the analytiical framework should look like. Community input would be most helpful here. Berry Cobb:The DMPM part provided a strawman to assist the community in identifiying metrics that can be used to test policy effectiveness. However, it is at a high level, b/c each PDP is fairly unique and difficult to identify metrics. Agree that it ties into Rec.16 framework action item. Pascal Bekono:Recommandations 10: Can we have in bracket examples of "certain situations" ? Marika Konings:there is an evaluation document that was shared with the Council - we can include it with the information related to this recommendation. I will also check on the status of the development of guidelines. Marika Konings:If I recall well, we had a professional facilitator (external to ICANN) for one F2F WG meeting and one ICANN facilitator (not a member of the WG but very familiar with ICANN and the subject matter) - I believe that the second experience received better reviews than the former. But again, it may very much depend on the specific circumstances of a WG - in certain cases, disagreement evolves around substance while in others it may be the result of process matters. Different experience / expertise may be needed, depending on the circumstances. Pascal Bekono:thanks for this Marika Marika Konings:SG/C reps may know whether this is something that is tracked at a SG/C level and how diversity is defined? Pascal Bekono:I think that we can also add as comment an activity such as Outreach amongst under represented group for selection. Is it fair ? Marika Konings:I think all the current PDP WG have some kind of rotation in place (for example, the RDS PDP rotates 1 out of 3 meetings to an Asia Pacific time), but it still remains a challenge as Donna notes Marika Konings:sorry that should be 1 out of 4 meetings Lawrence Olawale-Roberts: I guess we may propose models that S and constituency's may adopt Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:SG's Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:As what works for 1 may not work for another Terri Agnew:GNSO Review Working Group is scheduled for Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 14:00 UTC for 60 minutes. Julie Hedlund:Thanks everyone for joining! Donna Austin, RySG:thanks Jen, Julie Sara Bockey:thanks all Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:bye all Pascal Bekono:thanks

1 0

Actions/Discussion Notes: GNSO Review WG Meeting 18 October
by Julie Hedlund Oct. 24, 2016

Oct. 24, 2016

Dear GNSO Review WG Members, Please see below the discussion notes captured by staff from the meeting on 18 October. These high-level notes are designed to help WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the recording or the transcript. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately and are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/GRWG/2016-10-06+GNSO+Review+Working+Gro…. In addition, please see the wiki home page for your reference at: https://community.icann.org/display/GRWG/GNSO+Review+Working+Group+Home. Also, the Strawman Draft GNSO Review Recommendation Implementation Plan is attached in Word and PDF, and on the wiki, for your review per the action item below. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director GNSO Review WG Meeting, 18 October 2016: Actions/Discussion Notes Action Items: 1. WG members will consider volunteering for the Vice-Chair role (see attached criteria) with a decision to be made at the next meeting. 2. WG members will review the attached Strawman Draft GNSO Review Recommendation Implementation and provide comments for further discussion at the next meeting. 1. Vice Chair volunteers: Still seeking volunteers. Staff will recirculate document outlining skills and requirements of Chair(s) document (see attached). 2. Review of Strawman Draft of GNSO Review Recommendations Implementation Plan Staff walked through the overview of the document and then focused on Section 3. Prioritization and Dependencies. Staff noted that the strawman draft plan is just a suggested approach based on the outline discussion on the last call. The suggestions in the strawman are to assist the WG in its discussions. The prioritization is taken from that provided by the GNSO Review Working Party. The categories are suggested based on the content of the recommendations, but WG members can suggested other approaches. Once the prioritization and categories are agreed to by the WG staff can assist in suggesting the order of the work, such as perhaps proceeding first or maybe simultaneously with work already underway. Also, staff can assist with suggestions of how to group recommendations in projects by category and priority for the recommendation charters (see Annex I). WG responses: · I think the groups appear to make sense. It is a balance between what are the priorities -- how to prioritize the work. We have some that are high priority. How do we work through them? Do some have absolute timelines that have to be agreed to? · I think I am also in support of the way it has been broken into categories. Is it possible to look at the ones everyone agreed to? So we know where the action is supposed to sit? 3. Next Steps WG members should review the document and provide comments for further discussion at the next meeting. 4. Next meetings/Deadlines: Tuesday, 25 October at 1300 UTC for 60 minutes Monday, 07 November at 1730 UTC/1100 IST for 75 minutes. For remote access see: https://icann572016.sched.org/event/8cw4/gnso-review-working-group and Adobe Connect at: https://participate.icann.org/hyd57-MR104. Tuesday, 15 November at 1300 UTC (note time change in US to 1 hour earlier) for 60 minutes Implementation Plan is due to the GNSO Council for consideration in December: · Document and motion deadline for 01 December GNSO Council meeting is 21 November · Document and motion deadline for 15 December GNSO Council meeting is 05 December The GNSO Council must send the Implementation Plan to the ICANN Board of Directors by 31 December 2016.

2 2

Re: [Gnso-review-wg] REMINDER: Actions/Discussion Notes: GNSO Review WG Meeting 18 October
by Julie Hedlund Oct. 24, 2016

Oct. 24, 2016

Hi Jen, Thanks so much for reviewing the document and suggesting an approach for the batches. With respect to the deadline, it is my sense that the WG must present an implementation plan for all recommendations. However, as I think this can be a high-level plan it may be that some details can be worked out during the implementation of the various phases. Staff can help to develop as much detail as possible for the implementation plan for each phase of the recommendations. My thought was that staff could work over the next two weeks and present a more detailed plan for all recommendations/phases for the WG to consider and discuss at its meeting in Hyderabad. Staff could then finalize the plan based on the input from the WG for a final discussion at a meeting on Tuesday, 15 November. There could be a consensus call following that meeting with the goal to have the final plan sent to the GNSO Council by the document and motion deadline of 21 November for the GNSO Council meeting on 01 December. This is, of course, a very tight schedule, but staff are committed to trying to help the WG meet the deadline. Note also that while the GNSO Council has a second meeting in December on 15 December, it is still probably best if possible to submit the plan for consideration on 01 December in case the Council decides to defer the motion of approval until the following meeting. I hope that this is helpful and I know other staff may have suggestions. In any case, we can discuss the next steps during the call tomorrow morning. Thanks again, Julie From: Jen Wolfe <jwolfe(a)dotbrand360.agency> Date: Monday, October 24, 2016 at 10:46 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org>, "gnso-review-wg(a)icann.org" <gnso-review-wg(a)icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gnso-review-wg] REMINDER: Actions/Discussion Notes: GNSO Review WG Meeting 18 October Thank, Julie, for recirculating this information and the reminder for the call tomorrow. I look forward to continuing our discussion to move the implementation plan forward. I had the opportunity to review the straw man draft in more detail and provide below a few of my comments, particularly related to how we “batch” the recommendations into a three phased approach. I will look forward to hearing from all members of the working group. I encourage you to respond on the email list if you are unable to attend the meeting tomorrow so that we can incorporate your comments into the discussion as we strive to complete this plan in the next month. After reviewing the structure to the document, I suggest that we work on batching the recommendations as follows: · Phase One: Work Already Underway. We could then create sub-groups as recommended (i.e. PDP Improvements color coded Blue, Membership color coded Brown and Working Groups color coded magenta. o This would allow us to address the “low hanging fruit” because much of this work is already underway. · Phase Two: Recommendations Noted as High Priority. Again, we could create sub-groups as above. o This would allow us to secondarily address those priorities the Working Party, Council and the OEC have all recognized as priority work. · Phase Three: Recommendations Noted as Medium/Low Priority, using the same sub group categories as above. o This would allow us to place as the final phase those recommendations that were deemed a medium or lower priority. Once we have this batching completed, we can then move into completing dependencies and implementation plans by batch as organized and structured in the strawman draft. Given our short time frame, I have a question to staff. If we were able to complete the batching of the recommendations and complete the Phase One specific implementation recommendations by our target deadline, would we be able to then tackle Phase Two and Three batches as part of our ongoing work? I will look forward to the call tomorrow so that we can discuss the batching of the recommendations and overall structure to the document and, ideally, move into the implementation plans for recommendations. With kind regards, Jen jennifer c. WOLFE, esq., apr, SSBB Dot Brand 360 – DotBrand360.Agency Founder & CEO O: 513.746.2800 x 1 or C: 513.238.4348 IAM 300 - TOp 300 global ip strategists From: gnso-review-wg-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:gnso-review-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2016 11:13 AM To: gnso-review-wg(a)icann.org Subject: [Gnso-review-wg] REMINDER: Actions/Discussion Notes: GNSO Review WG Meeting 18 October Dear GNSO Review WG Members, This is a reminder of the following action items from the last meeting in preparation for our meeting on Tuesday, 25 October at 1300 UTC. Action Items: WG members will consider volunteering for the Vice-Chair role (see attached criteria) with a decision to be made at the next meeting. WG members will review the attached Strawman Draft GNSO Review Recommendation Implementation and provide comments for further discussion at the next meeting. The referenced documents are attached. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From: <gnso-review-wg-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org> Date: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 at 2:38 PM To: "gnso-review-wg(a)icann.org" <gnso-review-wg(a)icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-review-wg] Actions/Discussion Notes: GNSO Review WG Meeting 18 October Dear GNSO Review WG Members, Please see below the discussion notes captured by staff from the meeting on 18 October. These high-level notes are designed to help WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the recording or the transcript. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately and are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/GRWG/2016-10-06+GNSO+Review+Working+Gro…. In addition, please see the wiki home page for your reference at: https://community.icann.org/display/GRWG/GNSO+Review+Working+Group+Home[com…. Also, the Strawman Draft GNSO Review Recommendation Implementation Plan is attached in Word and PDF, and on the wiki, for your review per the action item below. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director GNSO Review WG Meeting, 18 October 2016: Actions/Discussion Notes Action Items: 1. WG members will consider volunteering for the Vice-Chair role (see attached criteria) with a decision to be made at the next meeting. 2. WG members will review the attached Strawman Draft GNSO Review Recommendation Implementation and provide comments for further discussion at the next meeting. 1. Vice Chair volunteers: Still seeking volunteers. Staff will recirculate document outlining skills and requirements of Chair(s) document (see attached). 2. Review of Strawman Draft of GNSO Review Recommendations Implementation Plan Staff walked through the overview of the document and then focused on Section 3. Prioritization and Dependencies. Staff noted that the strawman draft plan is just a suggested approach based on the outline discussion on the last call. The suggestions in the strawman are to assist the WG in its discussions. The prioritization is taken from that provided by the GNSO Review Working Party. The categories are suggested based on the content of the recommendations, but WG members can suggested other approaches. Once the prioritization and categories are agreed to by the WG staff can assist in suggesting the order of the work, such as perhaps proceeding first or maybe simultaneously with work already underway. Also, staff can assist with suggestions of how to group recommendations in projects by category and priority for the recommendation charters (see Annex I). WG responses: · I think the groups appear to make sense. It is a balance between what are the priorities -- how to prioritize the work. We have some that are high priority. How do we work through them? Do some have absolute timelines that have to be agreed to? · I think I am also in support of the way it has been broken into categories. Is it possible to look at the ones everyone agreed to? So we know where the action is supposed to sit? 3. Next Steps WG members should review the document and provide comments for further discussion at the next meeting. 4. Next meetings/Deadlines: Tuesday, 25 October at 1300 UTC for 60 minutes Monday, 07 November at 1730 UTC/1100 IST for 75 minutes. For remote access see: https://icann572016.sched.org/event/8cw4/gnso-review-working-group[icann572… and Adobe Connect at: https://participate.icann.org/hyd57-MR104. Tuesday, 15 November at 1300 UTC (note time change in US to 1 hour earlier) for 60 minutes Implementation Plan is due to the GNSO Council for consideration in December: · Document and motion deadline for 01 December GNSO Council meeting is 21 November · Document and motion deadline for 15 December GNSO Council meeting is 05 December The GNSO Council must send the Implementation Plan to the ICANN Board of Directors by 31 December 2016.

1 0

REMINDER: Actions/Discussion Notes: GNSO Review WG Meeting 18 October
by Julie Hedlund Oct. 23, 2016

Oct. 23, 2016

Dear GNSO Review WG Members, This is a reminder of the following action items from the last meeting in preparation for our meeting on Tuesday, 25 October at 1300 UTC. Action Items: WG members will consider volunteering for the Vice-Chair role (see attached criteria) with a decision to be made at the next meeting. WG members will review the attached Strawman Draft GNSO Review Recommendation Implementation and provide comments for further discussion at the next meeting. The referenced documents are attached. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From: <gnso-review-wg-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org> Date: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 at 2:38 PM To: "gnso-review-wg(a)icann.org" <gnso-review-wg(a)icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-review-wg] Actions/Discussion Notes: GNSO Review WG Meeting 18 October Dear GNSO Review WG Members, Please see below the discussion notes captured by staff from the meeting on 18 October. These high-level notes are designed to help WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the recording or the transcript. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately and are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/GRWG/2016-10-06+GNSO+Review+Working+Gro…. In addition, please see the wiki home page for your reference at: https://community.icann.org/display/GRWG/GNSO+Review+Working+Group+Home. Also, the Strawman Draft GNSO Review Recommendation Implementation Plan is attached in Word and PDF, and on the wiki, for your review per the action item below. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director GNSO Review WG Meeting, 18 October 2016: Actions/Discussion Notes Action Items: 1. WG members will consider volunteering for the Vice-Chair role (see attached criteria) with a decision to be made at the next meeting. 2. WG members will review the attached Strawman Draft GNSO Review Recommendation Implementation and provide comments for further discussion at the next meeting. 1. Vice Chair volunteers: Still seeking volunteers. Staff will recirculate document outlining skills and requirements of Chair(s) document (see attached). 2. Review of Strawman Draft of GNSO Review Recommendations Implementation Plan Staff walked through the overview of the document and then focused on Section 3. Prioritization and Dependencies. Staff noted that the strawman draft plan is just a suggested approach based on the outline discussion on the last call. The suggestions in the strawman are to assist the WG in its discussions. The prioritization is taken from that provided by the GNSO Review Working Party. The categories are suggested based on the content of the recommendations, but WG members can suggested other approaches. Once the prioritization and categories are agreed to by the WG staff can assist in suggesting the order of the work, such as perhaps proceeding first or maybe simultaneously with work already underway. Also, staff can assist with suggestions of how to group recommendations in projects by category and priority for the recommendation charters (see Annex I). WG responses: · I think the groups appear to make sense. It is a balance between what are the priorities -- how to prioritize the work. We have some that are high priority. How do we work through them? Do some have absolute timelines that have to be agreed to? · I think I am also in support of the way it has been broken into categories. Is it possible to look at the ones everyone agreed to? So we know where the action is supposed to sit? 3. Next Steps WG members should review the document and provide comments for further discussion at the next meeting. 4. Next meetings/Deadlines: Tuesday, 25 October at 1300 UTC for 60 minutes Monday, 07 November at 1730 UTC/1100 IST for 75 minutes. For remote access see: https://icann572016.sched.org/event/8cw4/gnso-review-working-group and Adobe Connect at: https://participate.icann.org/hyd57-MR104. Tuesday, 15 November at 1300 UTC (note time change in US to 1 hour earlier) for 60 minutes Implementation Plan is due to the GNSO Council for consideration in December: · Document and motion deadline for 01 December GNSO Council meeting is 21 November · Document and motion deadline for 15 December GNSO Council meeting is 05 December The GNSO Council must send the Implementation Plan to the ICANN Board of Directors by 31 December 2016.

1 0

Mp3 and attendance GNSO Review Working Group 18 October 2016
by Terri Agnew Oct. 18, 2016

Oct. 18, 2016

Dear all, Please find the MP3 recording for the GNSO Review Working Group held on 18 October 2016 at 13:00 UTC: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-review-wg-18oct16-en.mp3 On page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#<http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar> The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar Mailing list archives: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-review-wg/ Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/ZhmsAw Attendees: Members: Heath Dixon (RrSG Primary) Sara Bockey (RrSG Alternate) Jennifer Wolfe (RySG Primary) Donna Austin (RySG Alternate) Participants: Advocate Mahendra Limaye Pascal Bekono Lawrence Olawale-Roberts Apologies: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben (ISPCP) ICANN staff: Marika Konings Julie Hedlund Larisa Gurnick Charla Shambley Lars Hoffman Glen de Saint Gery Terri Agnew ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Thank you. Kind regards, Terri ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for 18 October 2016 Terri Agnew:Dear all, Welcome to the GNSO Review Working Group call on 18 October 2016 1200 UTC Terri Agnew:agenda wiki page: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_… Julie Hedlund:Mahendra Limaye is speaking Terri Agnew:Lawrence Olawale-Roberts has joined on telephone only Pascal Bekono:Is it possible to add an Annex in this documen with those recommendations ? Marika Konings:in certain cases it may make more sense to link to the wiki where additional documents are listed as otherwise the document will become very long Pascal Bekono:Thanks, I understand that aspect. even It can fit on two pages Donna Austin, RySG:The groupings appear to make sense. Larisa Gurnick:Just a reminder - over a year has already gone by since the time that these recommendations were formulated, so it makes sense that some of the work that was underway would be completed by now. Pascal Bekono:The document is well done. It's a good job. I don't have many comments; Maybe comments will be made around the implementation, methodology Pascal Bekono:The document is well done. It's a good job. I don't have many comments; Maybe comments will be made around the implementation, methodology Pascal Bekono:I would like to know if can be apply to GNSO working groups ?with translation of all documents... Pascal Bekono:recommendation 7 please Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:yes, Julie thanks it does Heath Dixon:I agree with that idea. I only had a few minutes to review but can dive deep and send comments to the list. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:has staff considered the possibility of breaking the task into bits where workgroups could be formed to deal with them Marika Konings:@Pascal - recommendation #7 reads 'That Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies engage more deeply with community members whose first language is other than English, as a means to overcoming language barriers.' The implementation plan may look at the different options that would meet the intent of this recommendations, factoring in feasibility as well as budget implications. Donna Austin, RySG:That works for me. When is the meeting in Hyderabad? Pascal Bekono:Thank you Marika, Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:Great Donna Austin, RySG:Dropping off adobe, but will still be on the phone. Thanks Jen, Julie Larisa Gurnick:thank you everybody! Heath Dixon:Yes, really appreciate this draft to get us a great start. Sara Bockey:thanks all Pascal Bekono:thanks Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:Thanks for the good work. Bye

1 0

Re: [Gnso-review-wg] For Review/Discussion: Strawman Draft Implementation Plan
by Julie Hedlund Oct. 18, 2016

Oct. 18, 2016

Hi Chuck, Thank you very much for the compliments! Thanks also for the point about the numbering. That is easily remedied and we can take care of it in the next draft. Kind regards, Julie From: Chuck Gomes <cgomes(a)verisign.com> Date: Monday, October 17, 2016 at 7:25 PM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org>, "gnso-review-wg(a)icann.org" <gnso-review-wg(a)icann.org> Subject: RE: [Gnso-review-wg] For Review/Discussion: Strawman Draft Implementation Plan As an observer I want to express my compliments to staff on a nice job. Note that the section numbering probably needs some work. There are two sections numbered 5.2 in Section 3; should the three sections in Section 3 be numbered 3.1, 3.2 & 3.3? Chuck From: gnso-review-wg-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:gnso-review-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 6:09 PM To: gnso-review-wg(a)icann.org Subject: [Gnso-review-wg] For Review/Discussion: Strawman Draft Implementation Plan Importance: High Dear GNSO Review WG Members, Please note the following action item from the WG meeting on 06 October: “Staff will produce a first draft of the implementation plan, including dependencies between recommendations, prioritization, resource requirements, and possible budget effects, for consideration at the next meeting.” Per this action staff have provided for your review the attached first iteration of the strawman draft GNSO Review Recommendation Implementation Plan. As noted, this is a strawman document to assist in the WG’s discussions. In several places staff have noted where text will need to be added later as guided by WG discussion and agreement. We want to particularly draw your attention to Section 3. Prioritization and Dependencies. In this section staff have suggested, for review and discussion, a prioritization of the recommendations, possible categories to group the recommendations, and possible dependencies. We look forward to working through this section in detail and capturing WG thoughts on the staff suggestions and other approaches. Please also see below draft agenda for tomorrow’s meeting. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Draft Agenda: GNSO Review WG Meeting 18 October 2016 1. Roll Call/Statements of Interest 2. Review Agenda 3. Vice Chair volunteers 4. Review of Strawman Draft of GNSO Review Recommendations Implementation Plan a. Overview of the document b. Begin discussion of the Sections, particularly Section 3 -- categorization, prioritization, and dependencies for the recommendations 5. Next Steps 6. Next Meeting

1 0

For Review/Discussion: Strawman Draft Implementation Plan
by Julie Hedlund Oct. 17, 2016

Oct. 17, 2016

Dear GNSO Review WG Members, Please note the following action item from the WG meeting on 06 October: “Staff will produce a first draft of the implementation plan, including dependencies between recommendations, prioritization, resource requirements, and possible budget effects, for consideration at the next meeting.” Per this action staff have provided for your review the attached first iteration of the strawman draft GNSO Review Recommendation Implementation Plan. As noted, this is a strawman document to assist in the WG’s discussions. In several places staff have noted where text will need to be added later as guided by WG discussion and agreement. We want to particularly draw your attention to Section 3. Prioritization and Dependencies. In this section staff have suggested, for review and discussion, a prioritization of the recommendations, possible categories to group the recommendations, and possible dependencies. We look forward to working through this section in detail and capturing WG thoughts on the staff suggestions and other approaches. Please also see below draft agenda for tomorrow’s meeting. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Draft Agenda: GNSO Review WG Meeting 18 October 2016 1. Roll Call/Statements of Interest 2. Review Agenda 3. Vice Chair volunteers 4. Review of Strawman Draft of GNSO Review Recommendations Implementation Plan a. Overview of the document b. Begin discussion of the Sections, particularly Section 3 -- categorization, prioritization, and dependencies for the recommendations 5. Next Steps 6. Next Meeting

1 0

REMINDER: Please RSVP: Pre-ICANN 57 Policy Update Webinar Announcement
by Terri Agnew Oct. 13, 2016

Oct. 13, 2016

https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-10-05-en<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-10-05-en%5d> Please RSVP via this form<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__goo.gl_forms_LTVbnZ8zX…> by 14 October 2016. Remote participation details will be sent the week of 17 October 2016. The ICANN Policy Development Support Team will provide a Policy Update Webinar on Thursday, 20 October 2016 at 10:00 UTC and 19:00 UTC, in preparation for the upcoming ICANN Annual General Meeting in Hyderabad. The purpose of the webinar is to summarize policy activities across the ICANN policy development community and briefing the community on the Cross-Community sessions taking place in Hyderabad. Cross-Community Sessions Briefings: * New generic Top Level Domain Auction Proceeds Drafting Team * Cross-Community Working Group for Framework of Cross-Community Working Group Principles * Cross-Community Working Group on Use of Country/Territory Names as Top Level Domains Community Engagement Team Update: * Community Recognition at ICANN57 and Multistakeholder Ethos Award 2017 Process Launch * Supporting Organizations/Advisory Committees Work Effort Inventory/Snapshot Update * Policy Staff Support in Community Charter Amendment Processes Supporting Organizations & Advisory Committee Updates: * Address Supporting Organization (ASO) and Regional Internet Registries (RIR) Policy Development * Country Code Names Supporting Organization (ccNSO) Update * Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) * New generic Top Level Domain (gTLD) Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process (PDP) * Review of all Rights Protection Mechanisms in all Generic Top Level Domains (gTLDs) Policy Development Process (PDP) * Next-Generation Generic Top Level Domain (gTLD) Registration Directory Services to Replace WHOIS Policy Development Process (PDP) * IGO/INGO Access to Curative Rights Mechanisms Policy Development Process (PDP) * At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) and At-Large Community Update * Government Advisory Committee (GAC) * Adaptation of Government Advisory Committee (GAC) Processes to the new ICANN Bylaws * Government Advisory Committee Vice-Chairs Elections taking place in Hyderabad * Capacity Building Session for the Asia Pacific Region organized by the Government Advisory Committee (GAC) Working Group for Underserved Regions * The Government Advisory Committee developing further input for ongoing Policy Development Processes on Registration Directory Services and Future new generic Top Level Domains (gTLDs) * Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC) Update * Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) Update The two sessions are duplicates, scheduled to accommodate different time zones. Each session runs for 90 minutes and will be run in English. The webinar will be conducted in Adobe Connect along with a dial-in conference bridge for audio. Participants will have the opportunity to ask questions at the end of each session. During the course of the webinar, questions may be submitted using the chat function in Adobe Connect. Recordings of the webinars will be made available here<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resource…>. The Policy Development Support Team is always available to answer any questions via email at policyinfo(a)icann.org<mailto:policyinfo@icann.org>. Please RSVP via this form<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__goo.gl_forms_LTVbnZ8zX…> by 14 October 2016. Remote participation details will be sent the week of 17 October 2016.

1 0