Council call - 27-Feb 2014
+ - Item 1: Administrative matters (10 mins)
+ - Item 2: Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action List (10 mins)
Item 3: Consent agenda (0 mins)
+ - Item 4: UPDATE & DISCUSSION – GNSO Engagement with the work of the ICANN Strategy Panels (15 mins)
+ - Here the Council will receive an update on any relevant interaction with and output from the strategy panels and discuss any appropriate action going forward.
+ - Strat Panels are out for comment
Fadi's recent update to AC/SO chairs -- on role panels and their role in the strategy process -- concern about top-down was discussed
+ - MSI panel --
+ - 16 proposals (here's a link to my little matrix of the proposals -- arrayed by Goal <--> Tool and Participation <--> Policy)
+ - Jonathan has reached out -- got off to a bit of a slow start -- but meetings 2 weeks ago and yesterday
+ - flag waving - we're the Council and the GNSO - your work feels as though it overlaps our remit - so we are very tuned to you work
+ - Yesterday's meeting
working toward a meeting with 1/2 members of the staff (govLab) people in singapore
opportunity to home in on a subset of the recommendations that are more closely related to the policy work of the GNSO
+ - 2 issues
+ - "this is something we need to talk about" reenforces the "executivification" of ICANN -- it's really hard for a part time person to stay above the raging water -- the community is becoming more professional -- this is driving some of our community members mad -- the more we can do to foster discussion at the broadest level in the community, the better
+ - commisioning is very top down -- there is a lot of work going on -- that's where the changes would have to be reviewed
doesn't feel quite as concerned as others are
+ - Jonathan - we have the opportunity to engage -- maybe a written response to the panel from the council
+ - we need to inform them to alert them to overlaps AND we need to inform administration of concerns directly
volunteers -- substantial proportion of cycles going to IG issue
registries -- implementation requirements, additional load of IG work -- overloaded is not just limited to volunteers in non-contracted parties. Ry's and Rr's are struggling to keep up with implementation requirements in addition to policy-making and IG discussion. Very hard, especially for smaller registries.
+ - ICANN is now representing all of our voices -- will people outside of ICANN have a chance to talk with the community directly? Is ICANN trying to represent us, rather than letting that conversation take place directly?
topics are very worthwhile -- also helpful to have an outside voice -- however i think this effort should have come in the ICANN way -- thus they have a bit of a birth defect because of the way they were launched -- we shouldn't be deferential, give advice, should be seen as comparable to the GAC
MSI - remember they were put in place to comment on the *whole* MS model, not just GNSO -- their remit is broader - they were asked to suggest changes - informed process -- they DID suggest changes and we need to embrace/refine their suggestions without appearing defensive
+ - Item 5: UPDATE – PDP Working Group on Translation & Transliteration of Contact Information (10 mins)
The GNSO Council recently initiated a Policy Development Process (PDP) on the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information. As part of its efforts to obtain broad input from the ICANN Community at an early stage of its deliberations, the Working Group has requested input from the Supporting Organizations (including the GNSO) and Advisory Committees on several questions relating to the issues identified in the PDP Final Issue Report.
+ - 5.1 – Update (Ching Chiao)
+ - 5.2 – Discussion
5.3 – Next steps
+ - Item 6: UPDATE & DISCUSSION – International Internet Governance Issues (20 mins)
Discussions and activity relating to international Internet Governance issues are attracting a great deal of attention in ICANN and related groups. This item is on the agenda to provide an opportunity for discussion within the Council about how this impacts the role and work of the Council and mindful of the scope and remit of the Council, what action the Council should or could be taking.
+ - 4.1 – Status update (Sally Costerton)
+ - Buenos Aires - became clear that profile of IG was increasing - triggered by Snowden issue
very full IG calendar in 2014
Fadi's view - sense that there is frustration over how hard IG issues are to resolve
ITU - march toward their meeting late in the year -- debate around whether they're going to change their remit
if we don't participate others will do it for us
discussion forum where debate is taking place in great detail
now has a steering committee
+ - web forum is up and running -- discussion is migrating that direction -- much easier to follow than the overwhelming traffic on the email list
+ - 4.2 – Discussion
+ - ccNSO: categories of participation in NetMudial meetingdon't make room for ccTLD managers -- is this a metaphor for the way that IG discussions aren't leaving room for individual members of ICANN
+ - Snowden revelations provide excellent cover for political intent -- what is Fadi's public position on this?
Maria Farrell: John - the Montevideo statement sets out pretty clearly the concern re. pervasive monitoring and Internet stewardship. Fadi signed it for ICANN so I think it's fair to say he sees a link. Even if some use the Snowden revelations tactically, the fact remains that many have lost faith in the impartiality of the USG.
+ - Costerton: get asked questions about globalization of ICANN and Snowden - we don't have a particular view - realization within the US govt that structures may need to change
+ - Richard Clark transcript -- the two issues are as far apart as one could find
+ - Board resolution on globalization - disquite on lack of consultation, yet more CEO appointed panels, a lot of CEO-led activity going on. concern about Council role in this ad hoc series of actions by administration
+ - Board chair saw a lot of email on this -- perhaps the 1net list?
Costerton; with her engagement hat on -- groups are to facilitate the discussion that you have described Maria -- they will be in Singapore and given a public block - Council needs to know that their role is to act as facilitator
+ - Avri would very much have liked to participate the process of setting this up - post is coming to the list
congratulates Costerton on ASIAPAC engagement -- AsiaPAC members would like to be more engaged with the actual meetings, not just talking to people in the region, bring people to the meeting table and actually contribute
4.3 – Next steps
+ - Item 7: UPDATE & DISCUSSION – GAC Engagement – the work of the Joint GAC / GNSO Consultation Group (15 mins)
+ - Item 8: UPDATE & DISCUSSION – Forthcoming review of the GNSO (10 mins)
As part of a periodic review process that is built into the ICANN model, ICANN board initiated reviews of the GNSO (and the GNSO Council and related functions) are expected. In order to be informed and effectively prepared for this work, we have begun to engage with the body that commissions such reviews (the structural improvements committee) through its chair, Ray Plazk.
The Council will track the planning work of the SIC and, where appropriate; provide relevant input to the process. We will also prepare to undertake a form of self-review in a similar format to that which we expect to arise out of the work of the SIC. A self-review will ensure that we are not only prepared for the board initiated work but also able to flag areas for potential improvement in as timely as possible a manner.
+ - 8.1 – Update (Jennifer Wolfe)
there is no update since the last meeting -- still waiting for an update from Ray
Jonathan: will there be a document prior to Singapore? Marika: nothing expected to be published before Singapore
8.2 – Discussion
8.3 – Next steps
+ - Item 9: UPDATE & DISCUSSION – Planning for Singapore (15 mins)
Making the most out of the face-to-face meeting time available at the ICANN Meeting in Buenos Aires will take planning. GNSO Council Vice Chair, David Cake will lead this and will be working with the Council and staff on this effort.
Here the Council has the opportunity to feed into plans and provide input based on past experience. Included in this item will be the opportunity to shape the approach to and substance of the Council’s proposed meetings with other groups in such as the CCNSO, the GAC and the ICANN board.
+ - 9.1 – Update (David Cake & Jonathan Robinson)
9.2 – Discussion
+ - 9.3 – Next steps
+ - Item 10: Any Other Business (10 mins)
Marika: important to separate the two. final report due London, may be another round of public comment.
There is already an initial report underway -- EWG will feed into that Issue Report, which will proceed to PDP because it's Board initiated