- Gnso-review-wg - lists.icann.org

FOR REVIEW: Revised Implementation Charter for Recommendation 22
by Julie Hedlund Jan. 11, 2018

Jan. 11, 2018

Dear GNSO Review Working Group members, Per action 4 below, and as discussed on today’s call, please see the attached revised implementation charter for Recommendation 22 for your review. Please suggest any changes to the redlined text on the list and we also will discuss the text at our meeting on 18 January. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Notes & Action Items GNSO Review Working Group Meeting on Thursday, 11 January 2018 at 13:00 UTC Action Items: 2018 Work Plan: Staff will add to the work plan additional details about potential cost of transcription services, as well as in the charter for recommendations 7 & 12. Implementation Charter for Recommendation 34: Staff will add a sentence clarifying that there is currently no mandate or rule regarding rotation, and that the decision is left to the WG based on the composition of the membership and the utility of rotation. Staff will send this proposed text to the WG and for discussion on the call on 18 January. Once language is finalized, Staff will circulate the Charter for Recommendation 34 for a consensus call. Response to OEC Questions from Avri Doria: Send the response to Avri, but also ask about the significance of the reference to the February 2017 date. Implementation Charter for Recommendation 22: 1) Staff will review the original report from the Independent Examiner to see if there is additional guidance regarding the "competency-based framework”; 2) Staff will investigate technical training opportunities and add these links to these options. January and February 2018 Meetings: The meetings will be on 11 and 18 January, and the 01 February meeting will be canceled to avoid conflicts. The February meetings will occur on 08 and 22 February. Notes: 1. Review agenda/SOIs: No updates. 2. Status of Consensus Calls for implementation charters for recommendation 4, and recommendations 5, 9, and 17: Consensus call ended on 8 January. There were no objections or comments. Charters were approved by consensus. 3. Discussion of the revised Work Plan: -- Staff has updated the work plan to include details about any anticipated budget effects for each of the items in the work plan (see work plan for details). -- Items from 2017 have been removed. The work plan now begins in January 2018. -- Question: Is it realistic to cover five recommendations in January? Answer: The work plan is ambitious. The Working Group is ahead of schedule. It is possible move more slowly to ensure thorough discussion. Recommendations 1, 2, and 3 are closely related. Staff will provide as much detailed information as possible to support discussion of Charters for 7 and 12. -- Comment: Details about costs of transcription services would be helpful to include. 4. Discussion of the revised implementation charter for recommendation 34: -- This charter focuses on rotation of meeting start times. -- Text has been added describe current practices regarding meeting start time rotation, future opportunities for more robust data collection, and indicating that WG members' ability to participate depends not only on time zone but also other factors, such as non-ICANN commitments. -- Final paragraph has been updated to summarize key points in the text. -- Suggestion: it might be helpful to clarify in the text that ultimately it is up to the WG itself to determine the rotation. There is no rule across WGs. 5. Discussion of the draft response to questions on the Implementation Status Report from the OEC: -- Staff provided implementation status report to OEC following ICANN60. -- Questions were received from Avri Doria. Avri had been participating in this WG prior to joining the Board. She now serves on the OEC. -- Staff has drafted suggested responses, but the responses should come from the WG and not from staff. -- We may receive additional questions from the OEC in the future, but it would be helpful to go ahead and respond to Avri's questions and ask about the relevance of the February 2017 date. -- Regarding question on recommendation 18 -- the response indicates that we are following the Operating Procedures and evaluating on an periodic basis and not an ongoing basis. -- Regarding question on Recommendation 27 -- the requested links are provided in the attachment to the Charter. >From the chat: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben: what is Feb 2017 relevant for? Sara Bockey: Agree, why is Feb 2017 relevant. And the PDP would have to go thru IRT before implementing... so where would IRTP-C fall into this? Would it? Marika Konings: This is what the PDP Manual currently says: "A statement on the WG discussion concerning impact of the proposed recommendations, which could consider areas such as economic, competition, operations, privacy and other rights, scalability and feasibility." Marika Konings: not sure if Avri is referring to that? Or is there a separate PIA that I am not aware of? Berry Cobb: The answer to Q1 on #16 is No. PIA has not been used. Likely first use will be the IGO CRPM PDP. Sara Bockey: Also, CL&D was implemented in Aug... does that fall into this? Sara Bockey: Guess maybe I'm not understanding... Berry Cobb: Curative Rights Protection Mechanisim Sara Bockey: Consistant Labeling and Display Sara Bockey: OK Berry Cobb: PIA does not apply to IRT. This is an assessment of policy recommendations. 6. Discussion of the implementation charter for recommendation 22: -- The term "competency-based framework" is unclear. ICANN offers many training options, but it is not always obvious if these are responsive to a "competency-based framework". -- Question: did staff check what the issues behind this recommendation to better understand the rationale? Staff will review the original report from the Independent Examiner to see if there is additional guidance regarding the "competency-based framework." -- Recommendations 26-29 relate to Statements of Interest. GDPR may impact the way personal information is displayed and stored. There may be changes to the Recommendations based on the implementation of GDPR. ICANN Organization is working on guidance in this area. -- Question: Is there information about technical training included in this document? Staff can elaborate on technical training opportunities in the Charter. -- Working Group Guidelines and PDP Manual also have information about expectations for Working Group members. >From the chat: Kris Seeburn: i think it has to be something to do with people with proper knowledge of what is bwing discussed Pascal Bekono: Why EU GDPR is so important to have recommendations 26-29 pending ? >From the chat: Kris Seeburn: i thought i saw a document from EU on for the internet, websites, ecommerce Wolf-Ulrich Knoben: Any kind of data collection is falling - from a European perspective - under the GDPR Kris Seeburn: i am sur there were two legal advise to ICANN on the gdpr Lori Schulman: There were 3 memos of legal advice on GDPR Kris Seeburn: just a question : Are there any guidelines of ethics on mailing and or WG/WT/ccwg? Because at tmes things tends to degenerate ...i would be happy that these are taken care of. Marika Konings: @Kris - the ICANN Standards of Behavior also apply there Marika Konings: @Kris - there is at least 1 example where a WG member was removed due to failure to meet the standards, despite numerous reminders. 7. Next Meetings: -- Next meeting is 18 January at 1300 UTC. This is the last meeting in January. -- February meetings: The meeting on 01 February is canceled due to conflicts with a community intersessional. The meetings in February are on the 8th and the 22nd.

1 0

FOR REVIEW: Revised Implementation Charter for Recommendation 34
by Julie Hedlund Jan. 11, 2018

Jan. 11, 2018

Dear GNSO Review Working Group members, Per action 2 below, and as discussed on today’s call, please see the attached revised implementation charter for Recommendation 34 for your review. Please suggest any changes to the redlined text on the list and we also will discuss the text at our meeting on 18 January with the goal to send out a final version for a consensus call. For ease of reference, here also is the text (additions in red): Staff notes that the review of the effectiveness of meeting times is ongoing and may vary among Working Groups. In addition, there currently are in place processes for Working Groups to assess the effectiveness of meeting time rotations within the limits of the current data collection methods. Staff clarifies that there is currently no mandate or rule regarding meeting rotation, and that the decision is left to the Working Group based on the composition of the membership and the utility of rotation. Finally, a potential tool may be developed that could facilitate the assessment of participation patterns. Thus, staff recommends that the GNSO Working Group consider this recommendation to be implemented via the current Working Group practices and processes. Working Group Determination: The GNSO Review Working Group has reviewed the current Working Group practices and processes for the rotation of meeting times and has determined that they address the recommendation that PDP Working Groups rotate the start time of their meetings in order not to disadvantage people who wish to participate from anywhere in the world. In particular, the Working Group has determined that at this time it does not appear necessary for there to be a mandate or rule regarding meeting rotation. Instead the decision as to whether to rotate meeting times should be left to the Working Group based on the composition of the membership and the utility of rotation. Thus, the Working Group determines that this recommendation is implemented. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Notes & Action Items GNSO Review Working Group Meeting on Thursday, 11 January 2018 at 13:00 UTC Action Items: 2018 Work Plan: Staff will add to the work plan additional details about potential cost of transcription services, as well as in the charter for recommendations 7 & 12. Implementation Charter for Recommendation 34: Staff will add a sentence clarifying that there is currently no mandate or rule regarding rotation, and that the decision is left to the WG based on the composition of the membership and the utility of rotation. Staff will send this proposed text to the WG and for discussion on the call on 18 January. Once language is finalized, Staff will circulate the Charter for Recommendation 34 for a consensus call. Response to OEC Questions from Avri Doria: Send the response to Avri, but also ask about the significance of the reference to the February 2017 date. Implementation Charter for Recommendation 22: 1) Staff will review the original report from the Independent Examiner to see if there is additional guidance regarding the "competency-based framework”; 2) Staff will investigate technical training opportunities and add these links to these options. January and February 2018 Meetings: The meetings will be on 11 and 18 January, and the 01 February meeting will be canceled to avoid conflicts. The February meetings will occur on 08 and 22 February. Notes: 1. Review agenda/SOIs: No updates. 2. Status of Consensus Calls for implementation charters for recommendation 4, and recommendations 5, 9, and 17: Consensus call ended on 8 January. There were no objections or comments. Charters were approved by consensus. 3. Discussion of the revised Work Plan: -- Staff has updated the work plan to include details about any anticipated budget effects for each of the items in the work plan (see work plan for details). -- Items from 2017 have been removed. The work plan now begins in January 2018. -- Question: Is it realistic to cover five recommendations in January? Answer: The work plan is ambitious. The Working Group is ahead of schedule. It is possible move more slowly to ensure thorough discussion. Recommendations 1, 2, and 3 are closely related. Staff will provide as much detailed information as possible to support discussion of Charters for 7 and 12. -- Comment: Details about costs of transcription services would be helpful to include. 4. Discussion of the revised implementation charter for recommendation 34: -- This charter focuses on rotation of meeting start times. -- Text has been added describe current practices regarding meeting start time rotation, future opportunities for more robust data collection, and indicating that WG members' ability to participate depends not only on time zone but also other factors, such as non-ICANN commitments. -- Final paragraph has been updated to summarize key points in the text. -- Suggestion: it might be helpful to clarify in the text that ultimately it is up to the WG itself to determine the rotation. There is no rule across WGs. 5. Discussion of the draft response to questions on the Implementation Status Report from the OEC: -- Staff provided implementation status report to OEC following ICANN60. -- Questions were received from Avri Doria. Avri had been participating in this WG prior to joining the Board. She now serves on the OEC. -- Staff has drafted suggested responses, but the responses should come from the WG and not from staff. -- We may receive additional questions from the OEC in the future, but it would be helpful to go ahead and respond to Avri's questions and ask about the relevance of the February 2017 date. -- Regarding question on recommendation 18 -- the response indicates that we are following the Operating Procedures and evaluating on an periodic basis and not an ongoing basis. -- Regarding question on Recommendation 27 -- the requested links are provided in the attachment to the Charter. >From the chat: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben: what is Feb 2017 relevant for? Sara Bockey: Agree, why is Feb 2017 relevant. And the PDP would have to go thru IRT before implementing... so where would IRTP-C fall into this? Would it? Marika Konings: This is what the PDP Manual currently says: "A statement on the WG discussion concerning impact of the proposed recommendations, which could consider areas such as economic, competition, operations, privacy and other rights, scalability and feasibility." Marika Konings: not sure if Avri is referring to that? Or is there a separate PIA that I am not aware of? Berry Cobb: The answer to Q1 on #16 is No. PIA has not been used. Likely first use will be the IGO CRPM PDP. Sara Bockey: Also, CL&D was implemented in Aug... does that fall into this? Sara Bockey: Guess maybe I'm not understanding... Berry Cobb: Curative Rights Protection Mechanisim Sara Bockey: Consistant Labeling and Display Sara Bockey: OK Berry Cobb: PIA does not apply to IRT. This is an assessment of policy recommendations. 6. Discussion of the implementation charter for recommendation 22: -- The term "competency-based framework" is unclear. ICANN offers many training options, but it is not always obvious if these are responsive to a "competency-based framework". -- Question: did staff check what the issues behind this recommendation to better understand the rationale? Staff will review the original report from the Independent Examiner to see if there is additional guidance regarding the "competency-based framework." -- Recommendations 26-29 relate to Statements of Interest. GDPR may impact the way personal information is displayed and stored. There may be changes to the Recommendations based on the implementation of GDPR. ICANN Organization is working on guidance in this area. -- Question: Is there information about technical training included in this document? Staff can elaborate on technical training opportunities in the Charter. -- Working Group Guidelines and PDP Manual also have information about expectations for Working Group members. >From the chat: Kris Seeburn: i think it has to be something to do with people with proper knowledge of what is bwing discussed Pascal Bekono: Why EU GDPR is so important to have recommendations 26-29 pending ? >From the chat: Kris Seeburn: i thought i saw a document from EU on for the internet, websites, ecommerce Wolf-Ulrich Knoben: Any kind of data collection is falling - from a European perspective - under the GDPR Kris Seeburn: i am sur there were two legal advise to ICANN on the gdpr Lori Schulman: There were 3 memos of legal advice on GDPR Kris Seeburn: just a question : Are there any guidelines of ethics on mailing and or WG/WT/ccwg? Because at tmes things tends to degenerate ...i would be happy that these are taken care of. Marika Konings: @Kris - the ICANN Standards of Behavior also apply there Marika Konings: @Kris - there is at least 1 example where a WG member was removed due to failure to meet the standards, despite numerous reminders. 7. Next Meetings: -- Next meeting is 18 January at 1300 UTC. This is the last meeting in January. -- February meetings: The meeting on 01 February is canceled due to conflicts with a community intersessional. The meetings in February are on the 8th and the 22nd.

1 0

GNSO Review Working Group Response to Avri Doria and the OEC on the Implementation Status Report
by Julie Hedlund Jan. 11, 2018

Jan. 11, 2018

Dear GNSO Review Working Group members, Per action item 3 below, and as discussed during today’s call, please see the attached response that staff will send to Avri Doria and the OEC on behalf of the GNSO Review Working Group. Unless there are any further comments from the Working Group, this response will be sent tomorrow. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Notes & Action Items GNSO Review Working Group Meeting on Thursday, 11 January 2018 at 13:00 UTC Action Items: 2018 Work Plan: Staff will add to the work plan additional details about potential cost of transcription services, as well as in the charter for recommendations 7 & 12. Implementation Charter for Recommendation 34: Staff will add a sentence clarifying that there is currently no mandate or rule regarding rotation, and that the decision is left to the WG based on the composition of the membership and the utility of rotation. Staff will send this proposed text to the WG and for discussion on the call on 18 January. Once language is finalized, Staff will circulate the Charter for Recommendation 34 for a consensus call. Response to OEC Questions from Avri Doria: Send the response to Avri, but also ask about the significance of the reference to the February 2017 date. Implementation Charter for Recommendation 22: 1) Staff will review the original report from the Independent Examiner to see if there is additional guidance regarding the "competency-based framework”; 2) Staff will investigate technical training opportunities and add these links to these options. January and February 2018 Meetings: The meetings will be on 11 and 18 January, and the 01 February meeting will be canceled to avoid conflicts. The February meetings will occur on 08 and 22 February. Notes: 1. Review agenda/SOIs: No updates. 2. Status of Consensus Calls for implementation charters for recommendation 4, and recommendations 5, 9, and 17: Consensus call ended on 8 January. There were no objections or comments. Charters were approved by consensus. 3. Discussion of the revised Work Plan: -- Staff has updated the work plan to include details about any anticipated budget effects for each of the items in the work plan (see work plan for details). -- Items from 2017 have been removed. The work plan now begins in January 2018. -- Question: Is it realistic to cover five recommendations in January? Answer: The work plan is ambitious. The Working Group is ahead of schedule. It is possible move more slowly to ensure thorough discussion. Recommendations 1, 2, and 3 are closely related. Staff will provide as much detailed information as possible to support discussion of Charters for 7 and 12. -- Comment: Details about costs of transcription services would be helpful to include. 4. Discussion of the revised implementation charter for recommendation 34: -- This charter focuses on rotation of meeting start times. -- Text has been added describe current practices regarding meeting start time rotation, future opportunities for more robust data collection, and indicating that WG members' ability to participate depends not only on time zone but also other factors, such as non-ICANN commitments. -- Final paragraph has been updated to summarize key points in the text. -- Suggestion: it might be helpful to clarify in the text that ultimately it is up to the WG itself to determine the rotation. There is no rule across WGs. 5. Discussion of the draft response to questions on the Implementation Status Report from the OEC: -- Staff provided implementation status report to OEC following ICANN60. -- Questions were received from Avri Doria. Avri had been participating in this WG prior to joining the Board. She now serves on the OEC. -- Staff has drafted suggested responses, but the responses should come from the WG and not from staff. -- We may receive additional questions from the OEC in the future, but it would be helpful to go ahead and respond to Avri's questions and ask about the relevance of the February 2017 date. -- Regarding question on recommendation 18 -- the response indicates that we are following the Operating Procedures and evaluating on an periodic basis and not an ongoing basis. -- Regarding question on Recommendation 27 -- the requested links are provided in the attachment to the Charter. >From the chat: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben: what is Feb 2017 relevant for? Sara Bockey: Agree, why is Feb 2017 relevant. And the PDP would have to go thru IRT before implementing... so where would IRTP-C fall into this? Would it? Marika Konings: This is what the PDP Manual currently says: "A statement on the WG discussion concerning impact of the proposed recommendations, which could consider areas such as economic, competition, operations, privacy and other rights, scalability and feasibility." Marika Konings: not sure if Avri is referring to that? Or is there a separate PIA that I am not aware of? Berry Cobb: The answer to Q1 on #16 is No. PIA has not been used. Likely first use will be the IGO CRPM PDP. Sara Bockey: Also, CL&D was implemented in Aug... does that fall into this? Sara Bockey: Guess maybe I'm not understanding... Berry Cobb: Curative Rights Protection Mechanisim Sara Bockey: Consistant Labeling and Display Sara Bockey: OK Berry Cobb: PIA does not apply to IRT. This is an assessment of policy recommendations. 6. Discussion of the implementation charter for recommendation 22: -- The term "competency-based framework" is unclear. ICANN offers many training options, but it is not always obvious if these are responsive to a "competency-based framework". -- Question: did staff check what the issues behind this recommendation to better understand the rationale? Staff will review the original report from the Independent Examiner to see if there is additional guidance regarding the "competency-based framework." -- Recommendations 26-29 relate to Statements of Interest. GDPR may impact the way personal information is displayed and stored. There may be changes to the Recommendations based on the implementation of GDPR. ICANN Organization is working on guidance in this area. -- Question: Is there information about technical training included in this document? Staff can elaborate on technical training opportunities in the Charter. -- Working Group Guidelines and PDP Manual also have information about expectations for Working Group members. >From the chat: Kris Seeburn: i think it has to be something to do with people with proper knowledge of what is bwing discussed Pascal Bekono: Why EU GDPR is so important to have recommendations 26-29 pending ? >From the chat: Kris Seeburn: i thought i saw a document from EU on for the internet, websites, ecommerce Wolf-Ulrich Knoben: Any kind of data collection is falling - from a European perspective - under the GDPR Kris Seeburn: i am sur there were two legal advise to ICANN on the gdpr Lori Schulman: There were 3 memos of legal advice on GDPR Kris Seeburn: just a question : Are there any guidelines of ethics on mailing and or WG/WT/ccwg? Because at tmes things tends to degenerate ...i would be happy that these are taken care of. Marika Konings: @Kris - the ICANN Standards of Behavior also apply there Marika Konings: @Kris - there is at least 1 example where a WG member was removed due to failure to meet the standards, despite numerous reminders. 7. Next Meetings: -- Next meeting is 18 January at 1300 UTC. This is the last meeting in January. -- February meetings: The meeting on 01 February is canceled due to conflicts with a community intersessional. The meetings in February are on the 8th and the 22nd.

1 0

Actions/Discussion Notes for GNSO Review WG Meeting on 11 January 2018
by Julie Hedlund Jan. 11, 2018

Jan. 11, 2018

Dear GNSO Review Working Group members, Please see below the action items and discussion notes captured by staff from the meeting on 11 January 2018. These high-level notes are designed to help WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not meant to be a substitute for the recording or transcript, which are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/GRWG/2017. Please note that the next meeting will occur on 18 January at 1300 UTC. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Notes & Action Items GNSO Review Working Group Meeting on Thursday, 11 January 2018 at 13:00 UTC Action Items: 2018 Work Plan: Staff will add to the work plan additional details about potential cost of transcription services, as well as in the charter for recommendations 7 & 12. Implementation Charter for Recommendation 34: Staff will add a sentence clarifying that there is currently no mandate or rule regarding rotation, and that the decision is left to the WG based on the composition of the membership and the utility of rotation. Staff will send this proposed text to the WG and for discussion on the call on 18 January. Once language is finalized, Staff will circulate the Charter for Recommendation 34 for a consensus call. Response to OEC Questions from Avri Doria: Send the response to Avri, but also ask about the significance of the reference to the February 2017 date. Implementation Charter for Recommendation 22: 1) Staff will review the original report from the Independent Examiner to see if there is additional guidance regarding the "competency-based framework”; 2) Staff will investigate technical training opportunities and add these links to these options. January and February 2018 Meetings: The meetings will be on 11 and 18 January, and the 01 February meeting will be canceled to avoid conflicts. The February meetings will occur on 08 and 22 February. Notes: 1. Review agenda/SOIs: No updates. 2. Status of Consensus Calls for implementation charters for recommendation 4, and recommendations 5, 9, and 17: Consensus call ended on 8 January. There were no objections or comments. Charters were approved by consensus. 3. Discussion of the revised Work Plan: -- Staff has updated the work plan to include details about any anticipated budget effects for each of the items in the work plan (see work plan for details). -- Items from 2017 have been removed. The work plan now begins in January 2018. -- Question: Is it realistic to cover five recommendations in January? Answer: The work plan is ambitious. The Working Group is ahead of schedule. It is possible move more slowly to ensure thorough discussion. Recommendations 1, 2, and 3 are closely related. Staff will provide as much detailed information as possible to support discussion of Charters for 7 and 12. -- Comment: Details about costs of transcription services would be helpful to include. 4. Discussion of the revised implementation charter for recommendation 34: -- This charter focuses on rotation of meeting start times. -- Text has been added describe current practices regarding meeting start time rotation, future opportunities for more robust data collection, and indicating that WG members' ability to participate depends not only on time zone but also other factors, such as non-ICANN commitments. -- Final paragraph has been updated to summarize key points in the text. -- Suggestion: it might be helpful to clarify in the text that ultimately it is up to the WG itself to determine the rotation. There is no rule across WGs. 5. Discussion of the draft response to questions on the Implementation Status Report from the OEC: -- Staff provided implementation status report to OEC following ICANN60. -- Questions were received from Avri Doria. Avri had been participating in this WG prior to joining the Board. She now serves on the OEC. -- Staff has drafted suggested responses, but the responses should come from the WG and not from staff. -- We may receive additional questions from the OEC in the future, but it would be helpful to go ahead and respond to Avri's questions and ask about the relevance of the February 2017 date. -- Regarding question on recommendation 18 -- the response indicates that we are following the Operating Procedures and evaluating on an periodic basis and not an ongoing basis. -- Regarding question on Recommendation 27 -- the requested links are provided in the attachment to the Charter. >From the chat: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben: what is Feb 2017 relevant for? Sara Bockey: Agree, why is Feb 2017 relevant. And the PDP would have to go thru IRT before implementing... so where would IRTP-C fall into this? Would it? Marika Konings: This is what the PDP Manual currently says: "A statement on the WG discussion concerning impact of the proposed recommendations, which could consider areas such as economic, competition, operations, privacy and other rights, scalability and feasibility." Marika Konings: not sure if Avri is referring to that? Or is there a separate PIA that I am not aware of? Berry Cobb: The answer to Q1 on #16 is No. PIA has not been used. Likely first use will be the IGO CRPM PDP. Sara Bockey: Also, CL&D was implemented in Aug... does that fall into this? Sara Bockey: Guess maybe I'm not understanding... Berry Cobb: Curative Rights Protection Mechanisim Sara Bockey: Consistant Labeling and Display Sara Bockey: OK Berry Cobb: PIA does not apply to IRT. This is an assessment of policy recommendations. 6. Discussion of the implementation charter for recommendation 22: -- The term "competency-based framework" is unclear. ICANN offers many training options, but it is not always obvious if these are responsive to a "competency-based framework". -- Question: did staff check what the issues behind this recommendation to better understand the rationale? Staff will review the original report from the Independent Examiner to see if there is additional guidance regarding the "competency-based framework." -- Recommendations 26-29 relate to Statements of Interest. GDPR may impact the way personal information is displayed and stored. There may be changes to the Recommendations based on the implementation of GDPR. ICANN Organization is working on guidance in this area. -- Question: Is there information about technical training included in this document? Staff can elaborate on technical training opportunities in the Charter. -- Working Group Guidelines and PDP Manual also have information about expectations for Working Group members. >From the chat: Kris Seeburn: i think it has to be something to do with people with proper knowledge of what is bwing discussed Pascal Bekono: Why EU GDPR is so important to have recommendations 26-29 pending ? >From the chat: Kris Seeburn: i thought i saw a document from EU on for the internet, websites, ecommerce Wolf-Ulrich Knoben: Any kind of data collection is falling - from a European perspective - under the GDPR Kris Seeburn: i am sur there were two legal advise to ICANN on the gdpr Lori Schulman: There were 3 memos of legal advice on GDPR Kris Seeburn: just a question : Are there any guidelines of ethics on mailing and or WG/WT/ccwg? Because at tmes things tends to degenerate ...i would be happy that these are taken care of. Marika Konings: @Kris - the ICANN Standards of Behavior also apply there Marika Konings: @Kris - there is at least 1 example where a WG member was removed due to failure to meet the standards, despite numerous reminders. 7. Next Meetings: -- Next meeting is 18 January at 1300 UTC. This is the last meeting in January. -- February meetings: The meeting on 01 February is canceled due to conflicts with a community intersessional. The meetings in February are on the 8th and the 22nd.

1 0

Recordings, Attendance & AC Chat from GNSO Review WG call on Thursday, 11 January 2018 at 13:00 UTC
by Nathalie Peregrine Jan. 11, 2018

Jan. 11, 2018

Dear all, Please find the mp3, AC Recording, attendance and AC Chat below for the GNSO Review Working Group held on Thursday, 11 January 2018 at 13:00 UTC. Mp3: https://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-review-11jan18-en.mp3 AC Recording: https://participate.icann.org/p57vbcjudk5/<https://participate.icann.org/p57vbcjudk5/?OWASP_CSRFTOKEN=390c3f629a9e8e92…> 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 agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/dA9yB Attendance Members: Sara Bockey (RrSG Alternate) Rafik Dammak (NCSG Primary) Wolf-Ulrich Knoben (ISPCP Primary) Lawrence Owalale-Roberts (BC Primary) Jen Wolfe (RySG Primary) Lori Schulman (IPC Primary) Participants: Kris Seeburn (NCUC) Pascal Bekono (NCUC) Apologies: Mahendra Limaye ICANN staff: Julie Hedlund Marika Konings Emily Barabas Berry Cobb Nathalie Peregrine ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Thank you. Kind regards, Nathalie ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for 11 January 2018 Nathalie Peregrine: Dear all, welcome to the GNSO Review Working Group Meeting on Thursday, 11 January 2018 at 13:00 UTC Nathalie Peregrine:Wiki agenda page: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_… Kris Seeburn:hi all.... looks like we still to wait Kris Seeburn:thnaks... Kris Seeburn:hope you managed to get some time off and celebrate Nathalie Peregrine:Indeed, and best wishes to all for 2018! Kris Seeburn:thats goood then... +1 Julie Hedlund:Happy New Year Everyone! Wolf-Ulrich Knoben:Happy New Year! Lori Schulman:Hi there Pascal Bekono:Happy New year Wolf-Ulrich Knoben:Thanks Julie Kris Seeburn:The rotation is good but it seems we are still trying to get it right.... Kris Seeburn:We end up with questions that was already addressed but it comes back Kris Seeburn:I'll highly suggest on rotation meetings people get to read and digest the missed meetings we will need that to move on else duplication happens.. But i agree with wolf Kris Seeburn:i think yes Kris Seeburn:sounds good Nathalie Peregrine:We'll mute the line Wolf-Ulrich Knoben:We helped her getting the job :-) Wolf-Ulrich Knoben:what is Feb 2017 relevant for? Sara Bockey:Agree, why is Feb 2017 relevant. And the PDP would have to go thru IRT before implementing... so where would IRTP-C fall into this? Would it? Kris Seeburn:i think there has been no pdp implementations...if i am not wrong Kris Seeburn:most are incomplete at this stage Marika Konings:This is what the PDP Manual currently says: "A statement on the WG discussion concerning impact of the proposed recommendations, which could consider areas such as economic, competition, operations, privacy and other rights, scalability and feasibility." Marika Konings:not sure if Avri is referring to that? Or is there a separate PIA that I am not aware of? Berry Cobb:The answer to Q1 on #16 is No. PIA has not been used. Likely first use will be the IGO CRPM PDP. Sara Bockey:Also, CL&D was implemented in Aug... does that fall into this? Sara Bockey:Guess maybe I'm not understanding... Berry Cobb:Curative Rights Protection Mechanisim Sara Bockey:Consistant Labeling and Display Sara Bockey:OK Berry Cobb:PIA does not apply to IRT. This is an assessment of policy recomendations. Sara Bockey:Ah, OK. Thank you. Got it now Sara Bockey:it's early here ;) Kris Seeburn:i thin avri has put that because she knows no much has been done from PDP Kris Seeburn:i think we need to find the dealocks...and move Lori Schulman:agree Kris Seeburn:i think it has to be something to do with people with proper knowledge of what is bwing discussed Pascal Bekono:Why EU GDPR is so important to have recommendations 26-29 pending ? Kris Seeburn:i thought i saw a document from EU on for the internet, websites, ecommerce Wolf-Ulrich Knoben:Any kind of data collection is falling - from a European perspective - under the GDPR Kris Seeburn:i am sur there were two legal advise to ICANN on the gdpr Lori Schulman:There were 3 memos of legal advice on GDPR Kris Seeburn:just a question : Are there any guidelines of ethics on mailing and or WG/WT/ccwg? Because at tmes things tends to degenerate ...i would be happy that these are taken care of. Marika Konings:@Kris - the ICANN Standards of Behavior also apply there Kris Seeburn:i agree Kris Seeburn:then these to be fully enforced Marika Konings:@Kris - there is at least 1 example where a WG member was removed due to failure to meet the standards, despite numerous reminders. Lori Schulman:Good meeting. Lori Schulman:Thank you to staff for making it so easy for us Lori Schulman:intersessional and board workshops are 1,2 Wolf-Ulrich Knoben:Intersessional Nathalie Peregrine:We will go over all the invites after the call Sara Bockey:Thanks all! Wolf-Ulrich Knoben:Thanks and bye! Lori Schulman:bye Kris Seeburn:cheerio bye Kris Seeburn:tc

1 0

Agenda and Materials for 11 January Meeting 13:00 UTC
by Julie Hedlund Jan. 10, 2018

Jan. 10, 2018

Dear GNSO Review Working Group members, Happy New Year! Please see below the draft agenda for the meeting on Thursday, 11 January at 13:00 UTC. Please also see the attached materials and the action items below from the previous meeting. Draft agenda: Review agenda/SOIs Status of Consensus Calls for implementation charters for recommendation 4, and recommendations 5, 9, and 17 Discussion of the revised Work Plan Discussion of the revised implementation charter for recommendation 34 Discussion of the draft response to questions on the Implementation Status Report from the OEC Discussion of the implementation charter for recommendation 22 Next Meeting: 18 January 1300 UTC. AOB Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Action Items from 14 December 2017: Implementation Charter for Recommendation 4: 1) Staff will accept changes and send out final version for consensus call. Normally consensus calls last 2 weeks. Due to the holidays, staff suggests closing the consensus call on 8 January. 2) Staff will send out a reminder on 02 January. Implementation Charter for Recommendation 34: Staff will revise the charter based on the discussion on the call and send it out for review and for discussion on the call on 11 January. Implementation Charter for Recommendations 5, 9, and 17: 1) Staff will accept changes and send the charter out for a consensus call, closing 08 January. 2) Staff will send out a reminder on 02 January. 2018 Work Plan: Staff will revise the Work Plan to include updated status as well as notes concerning where recommendations may have budget effects. January 2018 Meetings: The meetings will be rescheduled to occur on 11 and 18 January to avoid conflicts.

1 0

CLOSED-CONSENSUS CALL: Recommendations 5, 9, & 17 Implementation Charter
by Julie Hedlund Jan. 9, 2018

Jan. 9, 2018

Dear GNSO Review Working Group members, This Consensus Call below closed on 08 January 2018 and no objections were received. As there were no objections the implementation of Recommendations 5, 9, & 17 2018 is considered agreed by full consensus. See the latest status at: https://community.icann.org/display/GRWG/Status+of+Draft+Documents+and+Cons…. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From: Gnso-review-wg <gnso-review-wg-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org> Date: Tuesday, January 2, 2018 at 9:53 AM To: "gnso-review-wg(a)icann.org" <gnso-review-wg(a)icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-review-wg] REMINDER-CONSENSUS CALL: Recommendations 5, 9, & 17 Implementation Charter Dear GNSO Review Working Group members, This is a Consensus Call for the GNSO Review Implementation Charter for Recommendations 5, 9, & 17. As noted in the attached charter, these are the recommendations for implementation: Recommendation 5: That, during each Working Group self-assessment, new members be asked how their input has been solicited and considered. Recommendation 9: That a formal Working Group leadership assessment program be developed as part of the overall training and development program. Recommendation 17: That the practice of Working Group self-evaluation be incorporated into the PDP; and that these evaluations should be published and used as a basis for continual process improvement in the PDP. The charter reflects the revisions agreed to at the Working Group meeting on 14 December (see notes below). Staff is circulating the revised version of the charter for a three-week Consensus Call to end on Monday, 08 January 2018. If there are no objections the recommendations will be deemed to have been implemented by Full Consensus. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Action Items/Discussion Notes 14 December Action Items: Implementation Charter for Recommendation 4: 1) Staff will accept changes and send out final version for consensus call. Normally consensus calls last 2 weeks. Due to the holidays, staff suggests closing the consensus call on 8 January. 2) Staff will send out a reminder on 02 January. Implementation Charter for Recommendation 34: Staff will revise the charter based on the discussion on the call and send it out for review and for discussion on the call on 11 January. Implementation Charter for Recommendations 5, 9, and 17: 1) Staff will accept changes and send the charter out for a consensus call, closing 08 January. 2) Staff will send out a reminder on 02 January. 2018 Work Plan: Staff will revise the Work Plan to include updated status as well as notes concerning where recommendations may have budget effects. January 2018 Meetings: The meetings will be rescheduled to occur on 11 and 18 January to avoid conflicts. Notes: 1. Review agenda/SOIs: No updates. 2. Discussion of implementation charter for recommendation 4: -- Based on discussions during the last meeting, staff has added text to solution stating that the GNSO Council recognizes Working Group members for their contributions via a resolution thanking them for their work. Staff members are exploring other ways that recognition can provided to Working Group members and other community volunteers throughout out the year. These programs may be in place before the 2018 AGM. -- No additional suggestions. 3. Discussion of implementation charter for recommendation 34: -- Recommendation 34 was also discussed during the last meeting and input on the charter was discussed. -- Staff added text noting that there is an ongoing assessments by WGs and periodic assessments of attendance by leadership and that each WG is unique and has different member needs and composition. As the assessment is ongoing, staff recommends that this recommendation be considered implemented. -- Definition of effectiveness in not included in the text, but this was taken into account in drafting the charter. Staff noted that it may not be appropriate or useful to have a single definition of effectiveness. -- All Working Groups should do what they need to do. But ICANN should look at a holistic level what is happening with these time shifts. Time shifting may not be as robust as intended for a given region. Sometimes there are other barriers to participation, such as language. This may be something that the organization should be tracking and taking into account. -- There are other recommendations that have not yet been discussed that deal with language. That topic will be handled in the future. This recommendation is quite limited. It only discusses the rotation of call start times. -- For WGs staff does an analysis of the composition of the group and the location of members in developing rotation. Attendance records are gathered, posted, and periodically assessed for patterns. -- Communications regularly go out to the WG to see if the rotation needs to change. -- Does this get to the question about whether there is robust measures in place to address rotation to encourage participation. -- There is a project in the pipeline for centralized onboarding and attendance tracking. This is in the pipeline, but there is not yet formal activity taking place. This tool touches on several recommendations addressed in this review. -- Several platforms are currently used for sign-up and SOI completion. Current method for taking attendance is also seperate. With the proposed tool, all three of these elements would be combined and allow for more robust information about participation patterns. -- Want to make sure that in any conclusions or reports that we're also noting that it part of a bigger puzzle. Want to make sure that time shifting is not viewed as a silver bullet. -- Additional information could be added to this charter: 1) limitations to the way that data are now collected. Once the new tool is available, broader patterns in data can be analyzed. 2) Participation is not just an issue of time zones, other lifestyle factors and commitments also factor into a person's ability to participate. -- Staff will revise the charter. If changes are acceptable, this charter will go out for a consensus call after the next meeting. Chat excerpts: Krishna Seeburn - Kris: i'd like to propose that we keep track of a matrix to see effectiveness but it has been workable. Berry Cobb: I'd also note that it is very challenging to get to the data to perform this analysis at a more broad level in that locations of WG members is not connected to attendance records. A centralized WG onboarding and attendance tool would help centralize this data for a more robust analysis on how community members participate. Sara Bockey: Definitely want to look at location but I would also suggest lifestyle/commitments would come into play. You may be in APAC but not able to attend during working hours or late evenings due to family matters. 4. Discussion of implementation charter for recommendations 5, 9, and 17: -- Staff suggested several changes based on feedback from the last call. -- Additional text focuses on confidentiality and clarifies that while the survey requires that respondents provide their name, the survey includes clear guidance about confidentiality and the treatment of personal information. -- The WG Self-Assessment Survey is also included as an attachment to the charter. 5. 2018 Work Plan: -- Review of Work Plan. Recommendations 26-29 are on hold. These related to SOIs and membership in SG/Cs. GDPR is likely to impact data gathering as part of these recommendations, these charters are on hold pending new information about ICANN's approach to responding to GDPR. -- Recommendation 22 charter will be ready for the next call. Staff is looking into the current programs that are available to community members for training and development, such as ICANN Academy and ICANN Learn, as well as other tools and opportunities. Staff is analyzing which resources may be considered part of a competency-based framework. -- Recommendations 1, 2, 3: Staff is analyzing current outreach activities to see how they address recommendations and looking at existing metrics that might be able to provide insight into effectiveness. Staff will try to have this analysis ready for the next call. -- Recommendation 7 and 12 (recommendations addressing language and participation): Staff is gathering data on efforts underway, such as ALAC initiative on real-time transcription. -- Recommendations 20 and 21: Staff has begun analysis of these recommendations to see if there are already efforts underway to review ICANN Strategic Objectives and analysis of New gLTDs. -- Recommendations 6, 33, 35, and 36 related to diversity and are on hold because the CCWG-Accountability Work Stream 2 Sub-Team on Diversity will soon provide final recommendations, which can be analyzed against the GNSO Review recommendations. A public comment period is currently open. Once the public comment closes in early January, staff can begin analysis. The goal is for the final recommendations to be available by ICANN61, but it may take longer in updates are needed to the operating procedures. -- Staff is projecting completion of all charters by June 2018. -- Do we have any idea whether there are some recommendations that will impact or be impacted by budget requirements for the future? -- This would be useful to incorporate into the Work Plan where budget might be an issue. Recommendation 7 and 12 might have budget impacts, and in particular Recommendation 12. Real-time transcription could be quite expensive. Staff is aware that there are already real-time transcription services provided in specific circumstances, for example at certain types of meetings with broad attendance. ALAC is also experimenting with real-time transcription. Staff will collect information about the costs of these services and will attempt to project possible costs for expanding these services. -- We would be looking at whether funds would need to be requested for FY19. That process will begin soon. We will consider this charter in January, which will allow any results to be considered in planning for FY19. 6. January Meeting Schedule: -- Next meeting is currently scheduled for 4 January. Suggestion to hold meetings on 11 and 18 January instead. No opposition expressed. Following the meeting on the 18th, the schedule will begin meeting every other week again.

1 0

CLOSED-CONSENSUS CALL: Recommendation 4 Implementation Charter
by Julie Hedlund Jan. 9, 2018

Jan. 9, 2018

Dear GNSO Review Working Group members, This Consensus Call below closed on 08 January 2018 and no objections were received. As there were no objections the implementation of Recommendation 4 is considered agreed by full consensus. See the latest status at: https://community.icann.org/display/GRWG/Status+of+Draft+Documents+and+Cons…. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From: Gnso-review-wg <gnso-review-wg-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org> Date: Tuesday, January 2, 2018 at 9:51 AM To: "gnso-review-wg(a)icann.org" <gnso-review-wg(a)icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-review-wg] REMINDER-CONSENSUS CALL: Recommendation 4 Implementation Charter Dear GNSO Review Working Group members, This is a Consensus Call for the GNSO Review Implementation Charter for Recommendation 4. As noted in the attached charter, this is the recommendation for implementation: “That the GNSO Council introduce non‐financial rewards and recognition for volunteers.” The charter reflects the revisions agreed to at the Working Group meeting on 14 December (see notes below). Staff is circulating the revised version of the charter for a three-week Consensus Call to end on Monday, 08 January 2018. If there are no objections the recommendation will be deemed to have been implemented by Full Consensus. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Action Items/Discussion Notes 14 December Action Items: Implementation Charter for Recommendation 4: 1) Staff will accept changes and send out final version for consensus call. Normally consensus calls last 2 weeks. Due to the holidays, staff suggests closing the consensus call on 8 January. 2) Staff will send out a reminder on 02 January. Implementation Charter for Recommendation 34: Staff will revise the charter based on the discussion on the call and send it out for review and for discussion on the call on 11 January. Implementation Charter for Recommendations 5, 9, and 17: 1) Staff will accept changes and send the charter out for a consensus call, closing 08 January. 2) Staff will send out a reminder on 02 January. 2018 Work Plan: Staff will revise the Work Plan to include updated status as well as notes concerning where recommendations may have budget effects. January 2018 Meetings: The meetings will be rescheduled to occur on 11 and 18 January to avoid conflicts. Notes: 1. Review agenda/SOIs: No updates. 2. Discussion of implementation charter for recommendation 4: -- Based on discussions during the last meeting, staff has added text to solution stating that the GNSO Council recognizes Working Group members for their contributions via a resolution thanking them for their work. Staff members are exploring other ways that recognition can provided to Working Group members and other community volunteers throughout out the year. These programs may be in place before the 2018 AGM. -- No additional suggestions. 3. Discussion of implementation charter for recommendation 34: -- Recommendation 34 was also discussed during the last meeting and input on the charter was discussed. -- Staff added text noting that there is an ongoing assessments by WGs and periodic assessments of attendance by leadership and that each WG is unique and has different member needs and composition. As the assessment is ongoing, staff recommends that this recommendation be considered implemented. -- Definition of effectiveness in not included in the text, but this was taken into account in drafting the charter. Staff noted that it may not be appropriate or useful to have a single definition of effectiveness. -- All Working Groups should do what they need to do. But ICANN should look at a holistic level what is happening with these time shifts. Time shifting may not be as robust as intended for a given region. Sometimes there are other barriers to participation, such as language. This may be something that the organization should be tracking and taking into account. -- There are other recommendations that have not yet been discussed that deal with language. That topic will be handled in the future. This recommendation is quite limited. It only discusses the rotation of call start times. -- For WGs staff does an analysis of the composition of the group and the location of members in developing rotation. Attendance records are gathered, posted, and periodically assessed for patterns. -- Communications regularly go out to the WG to see if the rotation needs to change. -- Does this get to the question about whether there is robust measures in place to address rotation to encourage participation. -- There is a project in the pipeline for centralized onboarding and attendance tracking. This is in the pipeline, but there is not yet formal activity taking place. This tool touches on several recommendations addressed in this review. -- Several platforms are currently used for sign-up and SOI completion. Current method for taking attendance is also seperate. With the proposed tool, all three of these elements would be combined and allow for more robust information about participation patterns. -- Want to make sure that in any conclusions or reports that we're also noting that it part of a bigger puzzle. Want to make sure that time shifting is not viewed as a silver bullet. -- Additional information could be added to this charter: 1) limitations to the way that data are now collected. Once the new tool is available, broader patterns in data can be analyzed. 2) Participation is not just an issue of time zones, other lifestyle factors and commitments also factor into a person's ability to participate. -- Staff will revise the charter. If changes are acceptable, this charter will go out for a consensus call after the next meeting. Chat excerpts: Krishna Seeburn - Kris: i'd like to propose that we keep track of a matrix to see effectiveness but it has been workable. Berry Cobb: I'd also note that it is very challenging to get to the data to perform this analysis at a more broad level in that locations of WG members is not connected to attendance records. A centralized WG onboarding and attendance tool would help centralize this data for a more robust analysis on how community members participate. Sara Bockey: Definitely want to look at location but I would also suggest lifestyle/commitments would come into play. You may be in APAC but not able to attend during working hours or late evenings due to family matters. 4. Discussion of implementation charter for recommendations 5, 9, and 17: -- Staff suggested several changes based on feedback from the last call. -- Additional text focuses on confidentiality and clarifies that while the survey requires that respondents provide their name, the survey includes clear guidance about confidentiality and the treatment of personal information. -- The WG Self-Assessment Survey is also included as an attachment to the charter. 5. 2018 Work Plan: -- Review of Work Plan. Recommendations 26-29 are on hold. These related to SOIs and membership in SG/Cs. GDPR is likely to impact data gathering as part of these recommendations, these charters are on hold pending new information about ICANN's approach to responding to GDPR. -- Recommendation 22 charter will be ready for the next call. Staff is looking into the current programs that are available to community members for training and development, such as ICANN Academy and ICANN Learn, as well as other tools and opportunities. Staff is analyzing which resources may be considered part of a competency-based framework. -- Recommendations 1, 2, 3: Staff is analyzing current outreach activities to see how they address recommendations and looking at existing metrics that might be able to provide insight into effectiveness. Staff will try to have this analysis ready for the next call. -- Recommendation 7 and 12 (recommendations addressing language and participation): Staff is gathering data on efforts underway, such as ALAC initiative on real-time transcription. -- Recommendations 20 and 21: Staff has begun analysis of these recommendations to see if there are already efforts underway to review ICANN Strategic Objectives and analysis of New gLTDs. -- Recommendations 6, 33, 35, and 36 related to diversity and are on hold because the CCWG-Accountability Work Stream 2 Sub-Team on Diversity will soon provide final recommendations, which can be analyzed against the GNSO Review recommendations. A public comment period is currently open. Once the public comment closes in early January, staff can begin analysis. The goal is for the final recommendations to be available by ICANN61, but it may take longer in updates are needed to the operating procedures. -- Staff is projecting completion of all charters by June 2018. -- Do we have any idea whether there are some recommendations that will impact or be impacted by budget requirements for the future? -- This would be useful to incorporate into the Work Plan where budget might be an issue. Recommendation 7 and 12 might have budget impacts, and in particular Recommendation 12. Real-time transcription could be quite expensive. Staff is aware that there are already real-time transcription services provided in specific circumstances, for example at certain types of meetings with broad attendance. ALAC is also experimenting with real-time transcription. Staff will collect information about the costs of these services and will attempt to project possible costs for expanding these services. -- We would be looking at whether funds would need to be requested for FY19. That process will begin soon. We will consider this charter in January, which will allow any results to be considered in planning for FY19. 6. January Meeting Schedule: -- Next meeting is currently scheduled for 4 January. Suggestion to hold meetings on 11 and 18 January instead. No opposition expressed. Following the meeting on the 18th, the schedule will begin meeting every other week again.

1 0

REMINDER-FOR REVIEW: Revised Implementation Charter for Recommendation 34 & Revised Work Plan
by Julie Hedlund Jan. 2, 2018

Jan. 2, 2018

Dear GNSO Review Working Group members, Happy New Year! Please see below the action items and discussion notes captured by staff from the meeting on 14 December. Per these action items please see the attached documents for your review and for discussion at our next meeting at 1300 UTC on Thursday, 11 January: Revised Implementation Charter for Recommendation 34; and Revised Work Plan. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Action Items/Discussion Notes 14 December Action Items: Implementation Charter for Recommendation 4: 1) Staff will accept changes and send out final version for consensus call. Normally consensus calls last 2 weeks. Due to the holidays, staff suggests closing the consensus call on 8 January. 2) Staff will send out a reminder on 02 January. Implementation Charter for Recommendation 34: Staff will revise the charter based on the discussion on the call and send it out for review and for discussion on the call on 11 January. Implementation Charter for Recommendations 5, 9, and 17: 1) Staff will accept changes and send the charter out for a consensus call, closing 08 January. 2) Staff will send out a reminder on 02 January. 2018 Work Plan: Staff will revise the Work Plan to include updated status as well as notes concerning where recommendations may have budget effects. January 2018 Meetings: The meetings will be rescheduled to occur on 11 and 18 January to avoid conflicts. Notes: 1. Review agenda/SOIs: No updates. 2. Discussion of implementation charter for recommendation 4: -- Based on discussions during the last meeting, staff has added text to solution stating that the GNSO Council recognizes Working Group members for their contributions via a resolution thanking them for their work. Staff members are exploring other ways that recognition can provided to Working Group members and other community volunteers throughout out the year. These programs may be in place before the 2018 AGM. -- No additional suggestions. 3. Discussion of implementation charter for recommendation 34: -- Recommendation 34 was also discussed during the last meeting and input on the charter was discussed. -- Staff added text noting that there is an ongoing assessments by WGs and periodic assessments of attendance by leadership and that each WG is unique and has different member needs and composition. As the assessment is ongoing, staff recommends that this recommendation be considered implemented. -- Definition of effectiveness in not included in the text, but this was taken into account in drafting the charter. Staff noted that it may not be appropriate or useful to have a single definition of effectiveness. -- All Working Groups should do what they need to do. But ICANN should look at a holistic level what is happening with these time shifts. Time shifting may not be as robust as intended for a given region. Sometimes there are other barriers to participation, such as language. This may be something that the organization should be tracking and taking into account. -- There are other recommendations that have not yet been discussed that deal with language. That topic will be handled in the future. This recommendation is quite limited. It only discusses the rotation of call start times. -- For WGs staff does an analysis of the composition of the group and the location of members in developing rotation. Attendance records are gathered, posted, and periodically assessed for patterns. -- Communications regularly go out to the WG to see if the rotation needs to change. -- Does this get to the question about whether there is robust measures in place to address rotation to encourage participation. -- There is a project in the pipeline for centralized onboarding and attendance tracking. This is in the pipeline, but there is not yet formal activity taking place. This tool touches on several recommendations addressed in this review. -- Several platforms are currently used for sign-up and SOI completion. Current method for taking attendance is also seperate. With the proposed tool, all three of these elements would be combined and allow for more robust information about participation patterns. -- Want to make sure that in any conclusions or reports that we're also noting that it part of a bigger puzzle. Want to make sure that time shifting is not viewed as a silver bullet. -- Additional information could be added to this charter: 1) limitations to the way that data are now collected. Once the new tool is available, broader patterns in data can be analyzed. 2) Participation is not just an issue of time zones, other lifestyle factors and commitments also factor into a person's ability to participate. -- Staff will revise the charter. If changes are acceptable, this charter will go out for a consensus call after the next meeting. Chat excerpts: Krishna Seeburn - Kris: i'd like to propose that we keep track of a matrix to see effectiveness but it has been workable. Berry Cobb: I'd also note that it is very challenging to get to the data to perform this analysis at a more broad level in that locations of WG members is not connected to attendance records. A centralized WG onboarding and attendance tool would help centralize this data for a more robust analysis on how community members participate. Sara Bockey: Definitely want to look at location but I would also suggest lifestyle/commitments would come into play. You may be in APAC but not able to attend during working hours or late evenings due to family matters. 4. Discussion of implementation charter for recommendations 5, 9, and 17: -- Staff suggested several changes based on feedback from the last call. -- Additional text focuses on confidentiality and clarifies that while the survey requires that respondents provide their name, the survey includes clear guidance about confidentiality and the treatment of personal information. -- The WG Self-Assessment Survey is also included as an attachment to the charter. 5. 2018 Work Plan: -- Review of Work Plan. Recommendations 26-29 are on hold. These related to SOIs and membership in SG/Cs. GDPR is likely to impact data gathering as part of these recommendations, these charters are on hold pending new information about ICANN's approach to responding to GDPR. -- Recommendation 22 charter will be ready for the next call. Staff is looking into the current programs that are available to community members for training and development, such as ICANN Academy and ICANN Learn, as well as other tools and opportunities. Staff is analyzing which resources may be considered part of a competency-based framework. -- Recommendations 1, 2, 3: Staff is analyzing current outreach activities to see how they address recommendations and looking at existing metrics that might be able to provide insight into effectiveness. Staff will try to have this analysis ready for the next call. -- Recommendation 7 and 12 (recommendations addressing language and participation): Staff is gathering data on efforts underway, such as ALAC initiative on real-time transcription. -- Recommendations 20 and 21: Staff has begun analysis of these recommendations to see if there are already efforts underway to review ICANN Strategic Objectives and analysis of New gLTDs. -- Recommendations 6, 33, 35, and 36 related to diversity and are on hold because the CCWG-Accountability Work Stream 2 Sub-Team on Diversity will soon provide final recommendations, which can be analyzed against the GNSO Review recommendations. A public comment period is currently open. Once the public comment closes in early January, staff can begin analysis. The goal is for the final recommendations to be available by ICANN61, but it may take longer in updates are needed to the operating procedures. -- Staff is projecting completion of all charters by June 2018. -- Do we have any idea whether there are some recommendations that will impact or be impacted by budget requirements for the future? -- This would be useful to incorporate into the Work Plan where budget might be an issue. Recommendation 7 and 12 might have budget impacts, and in particular Recommendation 12. Real-time transcription could be quite expensive. Staff is aware that there are already real-time transcription services provided in specific circumstances, for example at certain types of meetings with broad attendance. ALAC is also experimenting with real-time transcription. Staff will collect information about the costs of these services and will attempt to project possible costs for expanding these services. -- We would be looking at whether funds would need to be requested for FY19. That process will begin soon. We will consider this charter in January, which will allow any results to be considered in planning for FY19. 6. January Meeting Schedule: -- Next meeting is currently scheduled for 4 January. Suggestion to hold meetings on 11 and 18 January instead. No opposition expressed. Following the meeting on the 18th, the schedule will begin meeting every other week again.

1 0

REMINDER-CONSENSUS CALL: Recommendations 5, 9, & 17 Implementation Charter
by Julie Hedlund Jan. 2, 2018

Jan. 2, 2018

Dear GNSO Review Working Group members, This is a Consensus Call for the GNSO Review Implementation Charter for Recommendations 5, 9, & 17. As noted in the attached charter, these are the recommendations for implementation: Recommendation 5: That, during each Working Group self-assessment, new members be asked how their input has been solicited and considered. Recommendation 9: That a formal Working Group leadership assessment program be developed as part of the overall training and development program. Recommendation 17: That the practice of Working Group self-evaluation be incorporated into the PDP; and that these evaluations should be published and used as a basis for continual process improvement in the PDP. The charter reflects the revisions agreed to at the Working Group meeting on 14 December (see notes below). Staff is circulating the revised version of the charter for a three-week Consensus Call to end on Monday, 08 January 2018. If there are no objections the recommendations will be deemed to have been implemented by Full Consensus. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Action Items/Discussion Notes 14 December Action Items: Implementation Charter for Recommendation 4: 1) Staff will accept changes and send out final version for consensus call. Normally consensus calls last 2 weeks. Due to the holidays, staff suggests closing the consensus call on 8 January. 2) Staff will send out a reminder on 02 January. Implementation Charter for Recommendation 34: Staff will revise the charter based on the discussion on the call and send it out for review and for discussion on the call on 11 January. Implementation Charter for Recommendations 5, 9, and 17: 1) Staff will accept changes and send the charter out for a consensus call, closing 08 January. 2) Staff will send out a reminder on 02 January. 2018 Work Plan: Staff will revise the Work Plan to include updated status as well as notes concerning where recommendations may have budget effects. January 2018 Meetings: The meetings will be rescheduled to occur on 11 and 18 January to avoid conflicts. Notes: 1. Review agenda/SOIs: No updates. 2. Discussion of implementation charter for recommendation 4: -- Based on discussions during the last meeting, staff has added text to solution stating that the GNSO Council recognizes Working Group members for their contributions via a resolution thanking them for their work. Staff members are exploring other ways that recognition can provided to Working Group members and other community volunteers throughout out the year. These programs may be in place before the 2018 AGM. -- No additional suggestions. 3. Discussion of implementation charter for recommendation 34: -- Recommendation 34 was also discussed during the last meeting and input on the charter was discussed. -- Staff added text noting that there is an ongoing assessments by WGs and periodic assessments of attendance by leadership and that each WG is unique and has different member needs and composition. As the assessment is ongoing, staff recommends that this recommendation be considered implemented. -- Definition of effectiveness in not included in the text, but this was taken into account in drafting the charter. Staff noted that it may not be appropriate or useful to have a single definition of effectiveness. -- All Working Groups should do what they need to do. But ICANN should look at a holistic level what is happening with these time shifts. Time shifting may not be as robust as intended for a given region. Sometimes there are other barriers to participation, such as language. This may be something that the organization should be tracking and taking into account. -- There are other recommendations that have not yet been discussed that deal with language. That topic will be handled in the future. This recommendation is quite limited. It only discusses the rotation of call start times. -- For WGs staff does an analysis of the composition of the group and the location of members in developing rotation. Attendance records are gathered, posted, and periodically assessed for patterns. -- Communications regularly go out to the WG to see if the rotation needs to change. -- Does this get to the question about whether there is robust measures in place to address rotation to encourage participation. -- There is a project in the pipeline for centralized onboarding and attendance tracking. This is in the pipeline, but there is not yet formal activity taking place. This tool touches on several recommendations addressed in this review. -- Several platforms are currently used for sign-up and SOI completion. Current method for taking attendance is also seperate. With the proposed tool, all three of these elements would be combined and allow for more robust information about participation patterns. -- Want to make sure that in any conclusions or reports that we're also noting that it part of a bigger puzzle. Want to make sure that time shifting is not viewed as a silver bullet. -- Additional information could be added to this charter: 1) limitations to the way that data are now collected. Once the new tool is available, broader patterns in data can be analyzed. 2) Participation is not just an issue of time zones, other lifestyle factors and commitments also factor into a person's ability to participate. -- Staff will revise the charter. If changes are acceptable, this charter will go out for a consensus call after the next meeting. Chat excerpts: Krishna Seeburn - Kris: i'd like to propose that we keep track of a matrix to see effectiveness but it has been workable. Berry Cobb: I'd also note that it is very challenging to get to the data to perform this analysis at a more broad level in that locations of WG members is not connected to attendance records. A centralized WG onboarding and attendance tool would help centralize this data for a more robust analysis on how community members participate. Sara Bockey: Definitely want to look at location but I would also suggest lifestyle/commitments would come into play. You may be in APAC but not able to attend during working hours or late evenings due to family matters. 4. Discussion of implementation charter for recommendations 5, 9, and 17: -- Staff suggested several changes based on feedback from the last call. -- Additional text focuses on confidentiality and clarifies that while the survey requires that respondents provide their name, the survey includes clear guidance about confidentiality and the treatment of personal information. -- The WG Self-Assessment Survey is also included as an attachment to the charter. 5. 2018 Work Plan: -- Review of Work Plan. Recommendations 26-29 are on hold. These related to SOIs and membership in SG/Cs. GDPR is likely to impact data gathering as part of these recommendations, these charters are on hold pending new information about ICANN's approach to responding to GDPR. -- Recommendation 22 charter will be ready for the next call. Staff is looking into the current programs that are available to community members for training and development, such as ICANN Academy and ICANN Learn, as well as other tools and opportunities. Staff is analyzing which resources may be considered part of a competency-based framework. -- Recommendations 1, 2, 3: Staff is analyzing current outreach activities to see how they address recommendations and looking at existing metrics that might be able to provide insight into effectiveness. Staff will try to have this analysis ready for the next call. -- Recommendation 7 and 12 (recommendations addressing language and participation): Staff is gathering data on efforts underway, such as ALAC initiative on real-time transcription. -- Recommendations 20 and 21: Staff has begun analysis of these recommendations to see if there are already efforts underway to review ICANN Strategic Objectives and analysis of New gLTDs. -- Recommendations 6, 33, 35, and 36 related to diversity and are on hold because the CCWG-Accountability Work Stream 2 Sub-Team on Diversity will soon provide final recommendations, which can be analyzed against the GNSO Review recommendations. A public comment period is currently open. Once the public comment closes in early January, staff can begin analysis. The goal is for the final recommendations to be available by ICANN61, but it may take longer in updates are needed to the operating procedures. -- Staff is projecting completion of all charters by June 2018. -- Do we have any idea whether there are some recommendations that will impact or be impacted by budget requirements for the future? -- This would be useful to incorporate into the Work Plan where budget might be an issue. Recommendation 7 and 12 might have budget impacts, and in particular Recommendation 12. Real-time transcription could be quite expensive. Staff is aware that there are already real-time transcription services provided in specific circumstances, for example at certain types of meetings with broad attendance. ALAC is also experimenting with real-time transcription. Staff will collect information about the costs of these services and will attempt to project possible costs for expanding these services. -- We would be looking at whether funds would need to be requested for FY19. That process will begin soon. We will consider this charter in January, which will allow any results to be considered in planning for FY19. 6. January Meeting Schedule: -- Next meeting is currently scheduled for 4 January. Suggestion to hold meetings on 11 and 18 January instead. No opposition expressed. Following the meeting on the 18th, the schedule will begin meeting every other week again.

1 0