[Report] GNSO Council meeting 14 March 2018 & Wrap Up 15 March 2018

Tue Apr 3 07:03:40 EEST 2018

Thanks for this good wrap-up

2018-03-29 7:33 GMT+01:00 Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>:

> Hi all,
>
> like last time, I am trying here to give here a summary of GNSO council
> meeting in Puerto Rico and also adding the wrap-up session as it includes
> several follow-up of ICANN meeting from the council. That can give you a
> snapshot about the ongoing discussions and activities within the GNSO
> council.
>
> You can find all details about the 2 sessions here inclulding agendas,
> recordings, transcripts and material:
>
>    -  Public Council meeting: https://61.schedule.i
>    cann.org/meetings/647702
>    -  Wrap-Up session: https://61.schedule.icann.org/meetings/647707
>
> There were other sessions below but I am not reporting them.
>
>    - Sunday working session https://61.schedule.icann.org/meetings/647692
>    - GNSO-ccNSO councils meeting: https://61.schedule.i
>    cann.org/meetings/647694
>    - GNSO-GAC meeting: https://61.schedule.icann.org/meetings/647652
>
>
> GNSO Public meeting:
>
>
>    - *Discussion with ICANN Finance on the Draft FY19 ICANN Operating
>    Plan and Budget*Xavier Calvez the ICANN CFO made presentation giving
>    update about the FY19 budget ongoing process as the public comments period
>    ended few days ago prior to Puerto Rico meeting. He also presented the
>    proposals about the replenishment of reserve fund (a public comment is
>    ongoing on the matter) and responsed to council questions.
>
>
>    As a follow-up, the council standing committee on budget and
>    operations (SCBO) was tasked to help on facilitating the collection and
>    channelling of any Council questions or comments for ICANN Finance. It will
>    also develop the Council input concerning Reserve Fund replenishment
>    strategy (there was no objection to move forward)
>
>
>
>    - *Discussion on Updated Charter for the Cross Community Engagement
>    Group on Internet Governance (CCWG-IG)*
>
> The discussion regarding the new vehicle (Cross-Community Engagment Group)
> to replace the CCWG-IG continued from the last council call and the floor
> was opened to get questions from councillors. Some asked for clarification
> about the level of resources expected to be allocated to the Cross
> Community Engagement Group on Internet Governance but also about the
> expenditures related to IG activities of ICANN (which is beyond CCWG-IG
> remit).
>
>
> Per resolution <https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201708> voted
> in last August <https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201708>,
> the GNSO is no longer a Chartering Organization of the CCWG-IG and the
> discussion will continue with regard joining the new vehicle  or not. The
> GNSO council  tasked the liaison to ccNSO and CCWG-IG to liaise with ccNSO to
> resolve concerns identified by the ccNSO Council. The withdrawal doesn't
> impact the CCWG-IG activities and the WG is still active.
>
>
>    - *Discussion on the GNSO Council’s input to the consultation on the
>    Fellowship Program*
>
> A consultation on fellowship program was initiated by ICANN seeking  input
> from the different SO/AC. The council tasked  a small group of councilors
> to work on response from GNSO council perspective to add metrics and
> setting realistic expectations from the program. A strawperson/draft
> comment was presented during the meeting to seek feedback from council. The
> group will work and circulate an updated version taking into account the
> comments received from the councillors,
>
>
>    - *Review of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP)*
>
> GDD as responsible of policy implemention sent a letter
> <https://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/irtp-to-gnso-council-28feb18-en.pdf> to
> the GNSO Council, noting that the updated IRTP went into effect on 1
> December 2016 and therefore, the policy was in place for over 12 months and
> so possible review. It suggested that a Post-Implementation IRTP Status
> Report be drafted and published for public comment. The report and a
> summary of public comment would be provided to the GNSO Council by end of
> May.
>
>
> GNSO Council is planning to consider next steps, timing and provide
> guidance to ICANN on if, how, and when the review of the Inter-Registrar
> Transfer Policy (IRTP) should take place, taking into account the ongoing
> discussion on the post-implementation policy review framework as well as
> the transfer issue that is being considered by the Privacy & Proxy Services
> Accreditation Issues Implementation Review Team.
>
>
>
>    - *Any other business / open mic:*
>
> There was a short update  from
>
>
>
> GNSO Review Working Group  regrading the progress to date of the
> implementation work of review recommendations, and clarified the
> dependencies on which further recommendations are linked.
>
> As usual during public meetings, there was open mic for the community.
> There were some comments  about the discusssion on Policy Development
> Process (PDP) improvement aka PDP 3.0  and there was a general welcoming
> for such effort, suggesting some ways to move forward.
>
>
>
> *Wrap-up session*
>
>
>
>
>    - *ICANN62 Meeting Planning*
>
> As usual in the last day of the ICANN meeting, the work already begun for
> the next one, ICANN62 in Panama. Council Leadership attended the ICANN62
> planning meeting, communicated concerns raised by Council during the
> wrap-up session. The leadership also started the preparatory work with
> staff for GNSO schedule. One task to follow-up is to develop plan for
> conducting outreach at ICANN meetings, especially for the Policy Forum.
>
>
>    - *Customer Standing Committee and IANA Functions Reviews*
>
> With regard to IANA functions, there will be soon 2 planned reviews on
> Customer Standing Committee and the IANA Functions . As there is risk of
> overlap, a small team was tasked to make proposals to avoid the overlap and
> coordinate with ccNSO on the matter.
>
>
>    - *Board request regarding Emojis*
>
> Council received a board request regarding  Emojis in domain names (For
> more details,  https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-
> 2017-11-02-en#1.e). As first action, the council will send response to
> acknowledge the receipt. There was discussion about the issue as request
> was not clear for thee council.
> The Staff was tasked  to summarize Board resolution and SSAC Advice for
> small team of councilors to consider. Then that small team will  liaise
> with the SSAC and  ccNSO to  respond to Board resolution.
>
>
>
>    - *Council liaison to new gTLD Subsequent Procedures WG*
>
> The council continued the task to appoint or reappoint new liaisons to PDP
> WGs. It was decided to have 2 councillors serving jointly as liaisons to the
> New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG as it has several working tracks (5)
> and may be difficult for one person to cover all (attending the plenaries
> and WTs calls in weekly basis).
>
>
>    - *Subsequent Procedures PDP /Right Protections Mechanisms
>    Consolidated timeline*
>
> As follow-up of sunday session, the council discussed the New gTLD
> Subsequent Procedures PDP and Rights Protection Mechanisms WG timelines as
> there may be some dependencies between the 2 PDPs and so possible impact
> about the delivery of the recommendations and implementation.
>
>
> The Council liaisons to the respective PDP WGs were tasked to review
> Sunday Working Session and extract notes and action items and then work
> with PDP WG leadership to expand timeline to include potential
> implementation steps/scenarios.
>
>
>    - *GNSO Review of GAC Communique*
>
> As usual for every ICANN meeting, the GNSO council planned to respond to
> GAC communique regarding the points concerning the PDPs. A group of councillors
> volunteered to provide a draft response for council consideration. The
> response should be sent to board prior to Board-GAC call in April in order
> to be used as input and give board guidance about PDPs.
>
>
>    - *PDP 3.0*
>
> As follow-up of the GNSO council strategical meeting in January and
> discussion about PDP improvement, the GNSO leadership took the initiative
> to make changes to the usual Sunday working session agenda and allocated
> the whole morning to discuss the improvement of PDP, inviting WGs
> leaderships  to give their input about issues.   There was brainstorming
> exercise to explore solutions to the different identified issues.
>
>
> In order to keep the momentum, the council tasked staff to consolidate
> input and comments into a Google document and also  to propose next steps
> (e.g., identify goal for ICANN62 and plan backwards). Later on, the council
> will consider whether to form a small team to help in addressing the
> previous actions.
>
>
>
>    - *Timing of ICANN bylaw mandated reviews:*
>
> The issue of reviews in term of resources, budget and timeline was raised
> several times, in particular by ICANN CEO and community.  As the CEO
> indicated there will be paper from ICANN to make some proposals on that
> matter to the community to seek input. The council decided to wait for the
> paper and decide next actions.
>
>
>
>    - *Board Process for GAC Advice*
>
> A concern was raised regarding the description of board process for GAC
> advice in the process documentation project (https://www.icann.org/process
> documentation) as it is not capturing accurately the input from GNSO.
> Council decided that comments can be sent to staff to be shared to those
> managing the relevant documentation and so giving input on those
> documentation as they may be used by community members without refering to
> the original  accurate documents.
>
>
> I hope that gives some insight about the discussion in council. I also
> advice going through the recordings and transcripts for more details
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
>
> Rafik Dammak
>
>
> NCSG Policy Committee Chair
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20180403/36559e68/attachment.htm>