Fwd: [council] Proposed Agenda | GNSO Council Meeting | Thursday, 19 December 2024
Tomslin Samme-Nlar
mesumbeslin at GMAIL.COM
Mon Dec 9 18:45:16 EET 2024
Dear members,
FYI
Warmly,
Tomslin
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Devan Reed via council <council at icann.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 at 08:31
Subject: [council] Proposed Agenda | GNSO Council Meeting | Thursday, 19
December 2024
To: council at gnso.icann.org <council at gnso.icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs at icann.org>
Dear all,
Please find below the agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting on 19 December
2024 at 21:00 UTC. This is posted on the agenda wiki page
<https://community.icann.org/x/E4DyEg>.
Thank you!
Kind regards,
Devan
Policy Team Supporting the GNSO
*GNSO Council Agenda 19 December 2024*
Please note that all documents referenced in the agenda have been gathered
on a Wiki page for convenience and easier access:
https://community.icann.org/x/CICeFw.
This agenda was established according to the GNSO Operating Procedures
<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/op-procedures-15mar23-en.pdf>
v3.5, updated on 15 March 2023.
For convenience:
- An excerpt of the ICANN Bylaws defining the voting thresholds is
provided in Appendix 1 at the end of this agenda.
- An excerpt from the Council Operating Procedures defining the absentee
voting procedures is provided in Appendix 2 at the end of this agenda.
GNSO Council meeting on Thursday, 19 December 2024 at 21:00 UTC:
https://tinyurl.com/ybse6rda
13:00 Los Angeles; 16:00 Washington DC; 21:00 London; 22:00 Paris; 00:00
Moscow (Friday); 08:00 Melbourne (Friday)
*GNSO Council Meeting Remote Participation: *
*https://icann.zoom.us/j/92283565389?pwd=QnlHK1JSbzdiSFFZSjRjamxMTkNGdz09*
<https://icann.zoom.us/j/92283565389?pwd=QnlHK1JSbzdiSFFZSjRjamxMTkNGdz09>
Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if they will not
be able to attend and/or need a dial out call.
___________________________________
*Item 1: Administrative Matters (5 minutes)*
1.1 - Roll Call
1.2 - Updates to Statements of Interest
1.3 - Review / Amend Agenda
1.4 - Note the status of minutes for the previous Council meetings per the
GNSO Operating Procedures:
Minutes
<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2024/minutes/minutes-gnso-council-17oct24-en.pdf>
of the GNSO Council Meeting on 17 October 2024 were posted on 01 November
2024.
Minutes
<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2024/minutes/minutes-gnso-council-part1-13nov24-en.pdf>(Part
1) Minutes
<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2024/minutes/minutes-gnso-council-part2-13nov24-en.pdf>
(Part 2) of the GNSO Council Meeting on 13 November 2024 were posted on 02
December 2024.
*Item 2: Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action List (0 minutes)*
2.1 - Review focus areas and provide updates on specific key themes /
topics, to include review of Projects List
<https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/project> and Action Item List.
<https://community.icann.org/x/RgZlAg>
*Item 3: Consent Agenda (5 minutes)*
- GNSO Review of the GAC Communiqué
- Recommendations Report for the Expedited Policy Development Process
(EPDP) on Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) Phase 2
- Confirmation of GNSO Empowered Community Representative (Tomslin
Samme-NIar)
*Item 4: COUNCIL VOTE - Empowered Community Approval Action on Fundamental
Bylaws Amendments to Article 4 Accountability and Review, 4.2
Reconsideration (10 minutes)*
Pursuant to Section 25.2(e) of the ICANN Bylaws, the ICANN Board
approved Fundamental
Bylaws Amendments to Article 4, Sections 4.2 and 4.3
<https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/governance/uppdates-to-article-4-icann-grant-program-07-08-2024-en.pdf>
of the ICANN Bylaws. The ICANN Board took a series of actions and
communications to move forward with the ICANN Grant Program while in some
cases, trying to address issues presented by the original language of
Recommendation 7, including:
- 26 October 2023 resolutions
<https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-resolutions-regular-meeting-of-the-icann-board-26-10-2023-en>
revisiting the Board's prior approval of Recommendation 7 and directing the
development of a more general process for the ICANN community to indicate
when ICANN's Accountability Mechanisms should not be available;
- 21 January 2024 initiation
<https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-resolutions-regular-meeting-of-the-icann-board-21-01-2024-en#section2.d>
of
a Fundamental Bylaws amendment process setting forth the general process
for the ICANN community to limit access to ICANN's Accountability
Mechanisms; and,
- 2 March 2024 letter
<https://www.icann.org/files/correspondence/sinha-to-clemente-et-al-02mar24-en.pdf>
to the CCWG-AP’s Chartering Organizations specifying a proposed change to
Recommendation 7 to remove a reference to the “Independent Application
Assessment Panel” so that Recommendation 7 could better achieve its goal of
preserving auction proceeds for grants instead of funding challenges to
decisions on grant applications; and the
On 7 August 2024, ICANN opened a Public Comment Forum
<https://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/proceeding/proposed-fundamental-bylaws-amendments-related-to-grant-program-07-08-2024>
on
the updated Fundamental Bylaws Proposal, with the proposed amendments being
limited and in line with Recommendation 7. Nine submissions were received,
and all commenters were supportive of the proposal as posted for Public
Comment. Commenters noted that the updated proposal was better aligned to
the intention of Recommendation 7 and was a more appropriate means of
implementation than the prior proposal.
Concurrently, ICANN finalized confirmation with the Chartering
Organizations of the CCWG-AP their support or non-objection to the proposal
to update Recommendation 7, including confirmation with the GAC that it too
is in a position to support or not object to the updating of Recommendation
7, in light of the Board's acceptance of this alternate path. The Board has
formally confirmed its adoption of the updated Recommendation 7 and the
respective Fundamental Bylaws Amendments.
At ICANN81, ICANN Org held an Empowered Community Approval Action
<https://www.icann.org/en/ec/fundamental-bylaws-amendment-to-accountability-mechanisms>
on Fundamental Bylaws Amendments to Article 4 Accountability and Review,
4.2 Reconsideration.
<https://www.icann.org/en/ec/fundamental-bylaws-amendment-to-accountability-mechanisms>
The Fundamental Bylaws Amendments will only become effective if approved by
the Empowered Community using the process set forth at Section 25.2(f)
<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#article25>
and Annex
D <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#annexD>,
Article 1 of the ICANN Bylaws. The convening of the Approval Action
Community Forum is part of this process.
Following the Approval Action Community Forum, the GNSO Stakeholder Groups
and Constituencies are asked to provide feedback, opinions or comments on
their support for, objection to, or abstention from the Approval Action
under consideration. The GNSO Council must decide and inform the EC
Administration of its decision within twenty-one (21) days after the
expiration of the Community Forum whether to support, object to, or abstain
from the Approval Action by affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
A discussion and vote on the Approval Action is scheduled for this GNSO
Council meeting. If more time is needed, a placeholder for an email vote
will be scheduled to initiate on Monday, 23 December.
Here, the Council will vote on the Fundamental Bylaw amendments.
4.1 - Presentation of Motion
<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+2024-12-19>
(Tomslin Samme-NIar, GNSO Council Vice Chair)
4.2 - Council Discussion
4.3 - Council Vote (voting threshold: Supermajority)
*Item 5: COUNCIL VOTE - Charter for Policy Development Process on Latin
Script Diacritics (15 minutes)*
On 13 November 2024, the GNSO Council passed a motion
<https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions/2020-current#202405> to
initiate a Policy Development Process (PDP) on requesting Latin Script
Diacritics. The objective of the Preliminary Issue Report
<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2024/draft/preliminary-issue-report-latin-script-diacritics-17jul24-en.pdf>
was for ICANN org to assess all relevant issues related to the GNSO Council
request, and, following Community Input during the Public Comment
<https://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/proceeding/preliminary-issue-report-on-latin-script-diacritics-18-07-2024>
phase, to recommend a course of action to the GNSO Council.
The PDP will be focused on the circumstance when an ASCII gTLD and the
Latin script diacritic version of the gTLD are not variants of each other
AND may be found to be visually similar to each other. The issue is
theoretically possible for any existing ASCII or Latin script IDN gTLD
pairs, and is essentially infinite for future applied-for ASCII or Latin
script IDN gTLDs, where diacritics are involved. The Final Issue Report
<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2024/draft/final-issue-report-pdp-latin-diacritics-12sep24-en.pdf>
includes a draft charter prepared by ICANN org supporting the GNSO Council.
Having discussed the draft charter, the Council determined that edits were
needed with respect to, but not limited to, the membership structure.
Here, the Council will vote on the updated charter.
5.1 - Presentation of Motion
<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+2024-12-19>
(Jennifer Chung)
5.2 - Council Discussion
5.3 - Council Vote (voting threshold: affirmative vote of more than
one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House)
*Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP Temporary Specification Phase 1,
Recommendation 18 - Urgent Requests (15 minutes) *
ICANN org convened an Implementation Review Team to assist ICANN in
implementing the EPDP on the Temporary Specification Phase 1 Final Report
<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-final-20feb19-en.pdf>,
which began meeting in May 2019. ICANN org published the draft Registration
Data Policy for public comment
<https://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/proceeding/registration-data-consensus-policy-for-gtlds-24-08-2022>
on
24 August 2022. Several commenters expressed dissatisfaction with the
implementation of Recommendation 18, specifically around the issue of the
response timeline for urgent requests. The relevant portion of
Recommendation 18 reads, “A separate timeline of [less than X business
days] will considered for the response to ‘Urgent’ Reasonable Disclosure
Requests, those Requests for which evidence is supplied to show an
immediate need for disclosure [time frame to be finalized and criteria set
for Urgent requests during implementation].”
On 3 June 2024
<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2024/correspondence/tsinha-to-dibiase-03june24-en.pdf>,
the Board wrote to the GNSO Council, noting concerns with the proposed
urgent request timeline of business days as not fit for purpose, as truly
urgent requests should be responded to within minutes or hours rather than
business days. Recognizing this, the Board also noted there is no universal
mechanism for registrars to authenticate law enforcement entities. The GNSO
Council responded on 29 August 2024
<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2024/correspondence/dibiase-to-sinha-29aug24-en.pdf>,
agreeing with the Board’s concerns and suggesting a trilateral meeting
between the Board, GNSO Council, and GAC to discuss a potential path
forward in light of the concerns.
On 15 October 2024
<https://gac.icann.org/contentMigrated/gac-follow-up-on-urgent-requests-gac-response-to-board-clarifying-question-and-additional-considerations>,
the GAC wrote to the Board, recommending, “[f]or the work on
authentication, we would support the establishment of a joint PSWG/CPH task
force. For the work on the response time for authenticated requests, we
invite the Board and the GNSO Council to identify an expedited procedure
for addressing this workstream. We strongly suggest resuming the work of
the IRT, which was halted last summer.”
A trilateral meeting was held on 4 November 2024
<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Dialogue+with+GAC%2C+GNSO+Council%2C+and+Board+on+EPDP+Phase+1+Recommendation+18+%28Urgent+Requests%292024-11-04>
and the Board, GAC, and GNSO Council discussed next steps, including
potentially resuming discussions with the IRT.
Here, the Council will discuss the GAC’s proposal and determine next steps.
6.1 - Introduction of Topic (Greg DiBiase, GNSO Chair)
6.2 - Council Discussion
6.3 - Next Steps
*Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Request for Guidance from the New gTLD
Subsequent Procedures / IDNs EPDP Phase 1 IRT (10 minutes)*
The New gTLD Subsequent Procedures (SubPro) PDP provided a recommendation
to allow single character gTLDs in the next round, which was expanded upon
by the IDNs EPDP Phase 1 Final Report. The IDNs EPDP Phase 1 Final Report
put forth important detail and limitations on the SubPro recommendation,
prescribing that the single character gTLDs be limited to the Han script
and that relevant guidelines must be developed and put in place by the
Chinese, Japanese, and Korean (CJK) Generation Panels (GPs).
In a public comment
<https://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/proceeding/seeking-input-on-han-script-single-character-idn-generic-top-level-domains-27-06-2024>
proceeding, the CJK GPs noted their opposition to moving forward with
single character Han script gTLDs. And in a subsequent public comment
<https://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/proceeding/second-proceeding-for-proposed-language-for-draft-sections-of-the-next-round-applicant-guidebook-10-09-2024>
proceeding on relevant Applicant Guidebook (AGB) sections, a number of
commenters also expressed their opposition.
This opposition was discussed with the IDN Sub-Track, a sub-track to the
SubPro IRT, where it was agreed to not move forward with single character
Han script gTLDs. That decision was then discussed with the main SubPro
IRT, where it was determined that this decision should be shared with the
GNSO Council. A write-up was shared with the Council on [date].
Here, the Council will be briefed on the tentative decision from the SubPro
IRT and to discuss the appropriate next steps, if any.
7.1 - Introduction of Topic (Anne Aikman-Scalese & Susan Payne, Council
co-liaisons to the SubPro IRT)
7.2 - Council Discussion
7.3 - Next Steps
*Item 8: COUNCIL UPDATE: EPDP Temporary Specification Phase 1 - Billing
Contact (20 minutes) *
During the ICANN81 GNSO Council Wrap-Up
<https://icann81.sched.com/event/1p2Gu/gnso-council-wrap-up>, Thomas
Rickert provided an update regarding the implementation of EPDP Temp Spec
Phase 1 recommendations. Thomas is the current GNSO Council Liaison to the
EPDP Temp Spec Phase 1 Implementation Review Team (IRT). Thomas noted that
the IRT expressed the view that the absence of a reference to billing
contact data was a drafting error, and the EPDP Team intended for the
collection of billing contact data to be optional and not mandatory.
The Registration Data Policy
<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/registration-data-policy-2024-02-21-en>
was published on 21 February 2024, and the policy has an effective date of
21 August 2025. The EPDP Phase 1 policy recommendations
<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-final-2-20feb19-en.pdf>
do not reference billing contact data, and the Registration Data Policy
<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/registration-data-policy-2024-02-21-en>
also makes no reference to billing contact data.
In the interest of transparency, Thomas requested that all Councilors
consult with their respective groups to ensure that others are properly
informed and agree with the interpretation raised by the registrars within
the IRT. Accordingly, Councilors were asked to consult with their groups on
the following questions:
1. Does your group believe that billing contact data was in scope for
the EPDP Temp Spec policy development?
2. If yes, does your group believe there was a drafting error in the
EPDP Phase 1 Final Report because the intention of the recommendations, by
not including a recommendation concerning the collection, escrow, etc of
billing contact data was that the collection and retention of billing
contact data should be optional and not mandatory? Note: If, as a matter of
ICANN Consensus Policy this was the intended outcome, this interpretation
would change current contractual requirements for registrars.
Here, the Council will discuss the above questions and determine next steps.
8.1 - Introduction of Topic (Greg DiBiase, GNSO Chair)
8.2 - Council Discussion
8.3 - Next Steps
*Item 9: COUNCIL UPDATE - 2025 Council Strategic Planning Session (SPS) (10
minutes)*
The GNSO Council will hold its annual Strategic Planning Session (SPS) in
Washington, DC on 14-15 January 2025.
The SPS is a dedicated meeting during which the Council will discuss and
identify its priorities and goals for the upcoming year. Council Leadership
has been developing the agenda, and has identified, et.al., the following
themes for discussion:
Overview of the Council’s Role and Remit and the Role of Councilors
- Evolution of the Council’s role in managing PDPs, including
improvements derived from previous SPS
- Review of work for the upcoming year (including targeted review of
project management tools)
- Consideration of recent projects that did not follow the typical path
after Council adoption (e.g., delayed implementation, challenges in
implementing recommendations)
- Continuous improvement of the GNSO (board readiness, GNSO Standing
Committee on Continuous Improvement (SCCI), Five Year Strategic Plan)
Here, the Council will receive an update from Leadership and Support Staff
on SPS planning and important information to know ahead of the SPS.
9.1 - Introduction of Topic (Greg DiBiase, GNSO Chair)
9.2 - Council Discussion
9.3 - Next Steps
*Item 10: DISCUSSION ITEM - Request for Guidance from the Rights
Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) PDP IRT on the Scope of Uniform Rapid
Suspension (URS) Recommendation 1 (15 minutes)*
There are currently diverging views within the Implementation Review Team
(IRT) concerning the implementation of the Uniform Rapid Suspension System
(URS) Final Recommendation 1 in the RPM PDP Phase 1 Final Report.
Specifically, there is disagreement regarding the scope of amendments to a
complaint filed under the URS after the complainant receives the contact
information from the URS Provider. As stated in URS Recommendation 1:
*The Working Group recommends that URS Rule 3(b), and, where necessary, a
URS Provider’s Supplemental Rules be amended to clarify that a Complainant
must only be required to insert the publicly-available WHOIS/Registration
Data Directory Service (RDDS) data for the domain name(s) at issue in its
initial Complaint. *
*Furthermore, the Working Group recommends that URS Procedure paragraph 3.3
be amended to allow the Complainant to update the Complaint within 2-3
calendar days after the URS Provider provides updated registration data
related to the disputed domain name(s). *
The draft language currently proposed by some IRT members to URS Rule 3(b)
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dC3BIYxnIb2zZks1AOnrUNEkQJCzi8EKaCAbGMP1MKo/edit>,
which has sparked disagreement within the IRT, pertains to the text in red
below:
*“Pursuant to URS Procedure Section 3.3, Complainant shall have the
opportunity to file an amended Complaint limited to adding additional
contact details about the Registrant following disclosure of the relevant
contact details of the Respondent.”*
According to some members of the IRT, the scope of amendments to a
complaint should be “limited to adding additional contact details about the
Registrant” as this is what was intended by URS Recommendation 1, and as
such, this should be stated in the proposed amendment to URS Rule
3(b)(iii). Accordingly, these IRT members believe that the amended filing
should be limited to including redacted data about the Registrant in the
complaint, as this aligns with the expedited nature of the proceeding. No
additional changes or amendments to the complaint should be allowed.
However, other IRT members raised concerns about the current text in red,
noting that URS Recommendation 1 does not impose a limit on the scope of
possible amendments to the complaint. These IRT members pointed out that if
new information providing greater clarity to a claim becomes available
after the party's identity is revealed, the complainant should be permitted
to amend the Complaint to include this information. These IRT members
believe that there doesn't seem to be any substantial harm in allowing the
complainant to amend the Complaint beyond just putting in the contact
details of the registrant.
A staff review of meeting transcripts suggests that the PDP Working Group
did not discuss either expanding or limiting the scope of URS
Recommendation 1. For further details on the PDP IRT and original Working
Group discussions, see the background document at
https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2024/draft/staff-summary-rpm-urs-rec1-en.pdf
.
The IRT has not come to agreement and the next step, per the IRT Principles
and Guidelines
<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/irt-principles-guidelines-23aug16-en.pdf>,
is to raise the issue with the GNSO Council liaison.
Here, the Council will receive an introduction to the topic from the GNSO
Council Liaison to the IRT.
10.1 - Introduction of Topic (Susan Payne, GNSO Council Liaison to the IRT)
10.2 - Council Discussion
10.3 - Next Steps
*Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - GNSO Council PR Officer Update (10 minutes)*
During the GNSO Council Strategic Planning Session (SPS) that was held from
14-16 December 2022, the GNSO Council identified the need to enhance its
communication efforts to promote its work and outcomes to a broader
audience, as well as to counterbalance negative stories and misinformation
about GNSO policy work that seemed to have gained prominence on social
media and industry blogs.
A GNSO Council small team
<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Communications+Small+Team>
was formed in April 2023 to develop a strategic communications plan
<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2024/draft/gnso-council-communications-small-team-final-report-26feb24-en.pdf>
for the GNSO Council. Within its report, the small team put forward two
substantive recommendations for new mechanisms to enhance GNSO Council’s
communications practice: 1) appoint a member in the GNSO Council to serve
as the “PR officer” to guide / support policy staff in implementing the
communications strategy and proposed improvements; and 2) establish a
LinkedIn page for the GNSO Council.
Following the first recommendation, Lawrence Olawale-Roberts agreed to
assume the role of PR Officer.
Here, the Council will hear an update from Lawrence Olawale-Roberts on his
work in this role.
11.1 - Introduction of Topic (Lawrence Olawale-Roberts, GNSO Council PR
Officer)
11.2 - Council Discussion
11.3 - Next Steps
*Item 12: Any Other Business (5 minutes)*
12.1 - GNSO Liaison to the GAC update
12.2 - ICANN82 - funded travel emails were sent out, please action as past
deadline
_______________________________
Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article 11,
Section 11.3(i))
See https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#article11.
Appendix 2: GNSO Council Absentee Voting Procedures (GNSO Operating
Procedures, Section 4.4)
See
https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/op-procedures-15mar23-en.pdf
*References for Coordinated Universal Time of 21:00 UTC*
Local time between March and November in the NORTHERN hemisphere
See https://www.timeanddate.com/time/change/ for Dates for Daylight Saving
Time and Clock Changes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
California, USA (PDT) UTC-8 13:00
San José, Costa Rica (CST) UTC-6 15:00
New York/Washington DC, USA (EDT) UTC-5 16:00
Buenos Aires, Argentina (ART) UTC-3 18:00
Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo (WAT) UTC+1 22:00
Paris, France (CEST) UTC+1 22:00
Moscow, Russia (MSK) UTC+3 00:00 (Friday)
Singapore (SGT) UTC+8 05:00 (Friday)
Melbourne, Australia (AEST) UTC+11 08:00 (Friday)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com and
https://tinyurl.com/ybse6rda.
_______________________________________________
council mailing list -- council at icann.org
To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave at icann.org
_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20241209/58db9962/attachment.htm>
More information about the Ncsg-discuss
mailing list