ICANN70 - kickoff planning committee and call for plenary topic suggestions

Fri Jan 15 20:52:41 EET 2021

Hello all,

Coming back to this list with the suggestions of topics for the Plenary and
Cross-Community sessions so far. As you can see, I have mentioned @Sam
Lanfranco <lanfran at yorku.ca> suggestion for a plenary topic and if we agree
in pursuing this suggestion, we can still better develop the idea and
submit it through the form until the 22nd.

Also, feel free to comment on the suggestions we have so far as this will
give me a better guidance on what to support or not. I have already
expressed my concerns for the session surrounding the legislative
proposals.

-- 

*For Plenary Sessions:*

·         Registry Voluntary Commitments: Practicality and Enforceability
(from At Large)

·         Applicant Support: What does success look like? (from At Large)

·         Regulatory updates – specifically, the recent actions in the EU
(the proposed NIS2 directive, Digital Services Act, Digital Markets Act and
the Data Governance Act) and the US (Congressional direction to the NTIA
regarding WHOIS access) (from the Business Constituency)

·     *Technical Internet Governance (TIG) and Internet Governance (IG)
- differentiation between the two concepts, challenges and the community
and ICANN Org positions on the matter. *

*For Cross Community Discussion:*

·         New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP (from At Large)

·         A session involving NextGen primarily, but also former Fellowship
and ATLAS participants who currently work in constituencies across ICANN,
to discuss the future of the Internet from an ICANN policy perspective
(from At Large)

Have a nice weekend everyone!

best,
B
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 3:59 PM Bruna Martins dos Santos <
bruna.mrtns at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hey all,
>
> Just getting back to you on the ICANN70 Planning Meeting and sharing some
> points below:
>
> - In light of the concern expressed by GNSO and others, about the meeting
> strategy, ICANN Org will separate making changes applicable to F2F meetings
> versus those made only for the virtual, "covid" special ones.
> - They will define the terms better, for next time. Such as networking,
> plenary, cross community
> - ALAC feedback on Plenary sessions was featured because "more actionable"
> ...
> - The current "block schedule" means that there are no more restraints to
> what can be put in the schedule - *and thats valid for ICANN70 only*.
> That is compared to the previous schedule that was circulated where
> sessions had to be "networking" or "cross community". So the coming meeting
> will be more or less as usual in that sense;
> - Org asked the community if there would be interest in keeping the
> one-on-one board meetings during ICANN70 and I have emphasized our interest
> in doing so.
> - Plenary and Cross-community sessions suggestions will be compiled in a
> list and shared with the SO/AC leadership for us to react.
>
> Deadlines for plenary and cross-community sessions proposals is due next
> friday, jan 22. If we have agreement on Sam's suggestion about a proposal
> on Technical Internet Governance x IG, we can still submit something until
> next friday.
>
> That is all and thank you @Raphaël Beauregard-Lacroix
> <rbeauregardlacroix at gmail.com> for helping me with the notes!
>
> Best Regards,
> Bruna
>
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 1:09 PM Sam Lanfranco <lanfran at yorku.ca> wrote:
>
>> One topic worth reflecting on a bit is *the ICANN org position on
>> Technical Internet Governance (TIG) and Internet Governance (IG)* as a
>> way of putting a ring fence around the governance issues that ICANN sees as
>> within its remit. I am not sure if there are contentious issues there but a
>> bit of time paid to a review of what TIG & IG mean, and some reflection on
>> possible issues to be addressed, might be worthwhile. I am of two minds
>> here. On the one had it looks like a wise and clear distinction. On the
>> other hand there may be complications that I have not uncovered. Not sure
>> where it should reside in the ICANN70 program.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sam L
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* NCSG-Discuss <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU> * On Behalf Of *Stephanie
>> E Perrin
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 12, 2021 10:49 AM
>> *To:* NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>> *Subject:* Re: ICANN70 - kickoff planning committee and call for plenary
>> topic suggestions
>>
>>
>>
>> I would just like to prevent that session on regulatory updates.  There
>> is draft legislation going through the EU that appears to be favorable to
>> BC interests.  We should not waste our collective precious time on draft
>> legislation that may or may not have a chance of passing; we have already
>> wasted quite a bit of Council time on this proposed legislation.
>>
>> I would suggest a discussion of ICANN without face to face
>> meetings....what are the pros and cons, what are the financial facts behind
>> this new situation (it has been a year now) and where are we going in the
>> future?
>>
>> Stephanie Perrin
>>
>> On 2021-01-11 11:04 p.m., Bruna Martins dos Santos wrote:
>>
>> At the opportunity, this upcoming planning session will most likely
>> discuss the outcomes of the community consultation prompted by the end of
>> 2020 about the future of ICANN Meetings, as you might recall a survey that
>> has circulated past ICANN69.
>>
>>
>>
>> Whilst we are still expecting a paper about a possible new strategy to be
>> issued by org in the upcoming days, I am also sharing with you the
>> high-level summary of community feedback for this specific matter.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Bruna
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 10:44 PM Bruna Martins dos Santos <
>> bruna.mrtns at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
>>
>> First of all I would like to wish everyone a happy 2021 and thank our
>> volunteers for all the hard work and commitment in 2020.
>>
>>
>>
>> I apologize for the short notice (we are working with deadlines set by
>> Org): ICANN Org scheduled a kickoff planning meeting for #ICANN70 on
>> Thursday and, for this meeting, they will be looking for suggestions for
>> the two plenaries taking place at Icann 70.
>>
>>
>>
>> ALAC has already proposed "*Registry Voluntary Commitments and Applicant
>> Support, as well as a cross-community policy session on the New gTLD
>> Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process*"  and BC would like to
>> have a "*regulatory updates*" plenary covering various EU and US
>> initiatives at the legislative or executive level and how they could impact
>> the DNS.
>>
>>
>>
>> Feel free to comment on a new plenary or cross-community meeting topic
>> suggestion or if we should support either BC or At-Large's suggestion. I
>> would kindly ask you all to post and discuss your suggestions below by
>> Wednesday 2359 UTC.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> *Bruna Martins dos Santos *
>>
>>
>>
>> Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
>>
>> @boomartins
>>
>>
>
> --
> *Bruna Martins dos Santos *
>
> Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
> @boomartins
>

-- 
*Bruna Martins dos Santos *

Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
@boomartins
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20210115/56c9cf2d/attachment.htm>