[NCSG-PC] Fwd: Re: [SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning] Topic Proposals for ICANN65 Marrakech
Stephanie Perrin
stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
Mon May 13 16:40:57 EEST 2019
Can we get some feedback on this tomorrow folks? I have not weighed in on this (sorry) and I guess we still can.
cheers Steph
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: [SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning] Topic Proposals for ICANN65 Marrakech
Date: Sat, 11 May 2019 17:27:25 -1000
From: Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com><mailto:maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>
To: Tanzanica S. King <tanzanica.king at icann.org><mailto:tanzanica.king at icann.org>
CC: SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning <soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org><mailto:soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org>
Sorry Im late, Tanzanica
The 4 options chosen by At-Large at their meeting on Thursday were:
1. DOH
2. Future of Multistakeholder Model of Governance
3. UA
4. Combined EPDP2, GDPR, Who is accuracy and Unified Access Model
With 5. Effectiveness of Specific Review recommendations as its spare option.
Maureen
On Sat, May 11, 2019 at 4:57 PM Tanzanica S. King <tanzanica.king at icann.org<mailto:tanzanica.king at icann.org>> wrote:
Hi All:
While the recommendations from At-large are still forthcoming, we do need to finalize the topics for Marrakech ASAP.
I want to share an update on the proposed topics based on your submissions to the voting form and discussions on the list. Review forms were submitted by ccNSO, GAC, and three from the GNSO for a total of five. The reviews were helpful, but not entirely conclusive due to consolidated session proposals made after the form went out. When it comes to the number of topics that should be selected to run at the meeting, the submissions are 50/50 between four and five topics with one group (GAC) having no preference. For the question on which topics should be unconflicted, the ccNSO selected none, but others indicated that all of their preferred topics should be scheduled in sessions with no conflicts.
Please see the details below and proposed times for scheduling. This is done purely in an attempt to help move things along. I look forward to your comments and any suggested changes.
Best regards,
Tanzanica
Future of the Multistakeholder Model of Governance (HIT)
Support: ccNSO, GAC, GNSO 2/3
Propose Monday, Block 4
DNS over HTTPS (DoH) (HIT)
Support: ALAC, ccNSO, GAC, GNSO 1/3
Propose Tuesday, Block 4
Impact of GDPR and EPDP Phase 1 recommendations on existing policies and procedures (CCT)
Consolidated session (proposed by GNSO) : Across Field Address Validation - WHOIS Accuracy (RAA); ICANN - Combating domain abuse with GDPR; Privacy and Proxy Implementation
Consolidates topics with multiple votes
Propose Tuesday, Block 5
EPDP Phase 2 (HIT); Unified Access Model: complying with GDPR while meeting the needs of those with legitimate interests (CCT)
Consolidated session proposed by GAC
EPDP/UAM noted as untimely - defer to Montreal by GNSO
UAM supported by ccNSO, GAC, IPC
Policy around Universal Acceptance and steps to be taken by TLD operators/registrars, software developers and hosting companies (CCT)
Support: ccNSO, GNSO 2/3
Propose Thursday, Block 4
Enhance effectiveness of Specific Review recommendations and their implementation (HIT)
Support: ccNSO, GNSO 2/3
Propose Thursday, Block 5
Abuse Mitigation
Consolidated Session (proposed by GAC): DNS over HTTPS (DoH) (HIT); ICANN - Combatting Domain Abuse with GDPR
DoH to be scheduled separately
Combatting Domain Abuse w/ GDPR included in consolidated session above (Impact of GDPR . . )
Community Engagement Session with the Second Security, Stability, & Resiliency Review Team (SSR2)
Pre-Meeting Webinar
Community Engagement Session with the Third Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3)
Pre-Meeting Webinar
NomCom Review Implementation Working Group
Pre-Meeting Webinar
_______________________________________________
Tanzanica S. King
Sr. Manager, Meeting Strategy and Design
ICANN
Office +1 310 301 5800
Mobile +1 310 995 3038
www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org>
From: SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning <soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning-bounces at icann.org<mailto:soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson at afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson at afilias.info>>
Organization: Afilias
Reply-To: "jrobinson at afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson at afilias.info>" <jrobinson at afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson at afilias.info>>
Date: Thursday , 9 May 2019 at 02:09
To: 'Maureen Hilyard' <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com<mailto:maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>>
Cc: SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning <soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org<mailto:soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning] Topic Proposals for ICANN65 Marrakech
Thank-you for clarifying Maureen,
Apologies, I misread your email below to imply that there was a “Meeting Planning” meeting for this group in a few hours.
Jonathan
From: Maureen Hilyard [mailto:maureen.hilyard at gmail.com<mailto:maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>]
Sent: Thursday, May 9, 2019 10:05 AM
To: jrobinson at afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson at afilias.info>
Cc: Katrina Sataki <katrina at nic.lv<mailto:katrina at nic.lv>>; SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning <soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org<mailto:soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning] Topic Proposals for ICANN65 Marrakech
Hi Jonathan
Are you referring to our CPWG? this is our Consolidated Policy Working group where our At-Large members discuss policy issues, and the HIT topics are on the agenda for discussionat their meeting in a few hours. Unfortunately it will be 3 am for me and I started my day with a 4am meeting with Auction Proceeds and had a busy day from then on, so I am giving my apologies to the policy team but they will send me their decision after their meeting. Hope this clarifies things in relation to At-Large.
Maureen
On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 10:41 PM Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson at afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson at afilias.info>> wrote:
All,
Thanks to Katrina & Rod for thoughtful and detailed input. That certainly gives me better insight as to the balancing that needs to be undertaken here.
Please could someone confirm the meeting mentioned by Maureen below. I have no details at this stage.
Thank-you.
Jonathan
From: Maureen Hilyard [mailto:maureen.hilyard at gmail.com<mailto:maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>]
Sent: Thursday, May 9, 2019 9:24 AM
To: Katrina Sataki <katrina at nic.lv<mailto:katrina at nic.lv>>
Cc: SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning <soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org<mailto:soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning] Topic Proposals for ICANN65 Marrakech
Hi Katrina and all
Just a quick note. Although At-Large proposes to formalise a list for recommending to this group after their meeting in a few hours time, I have to add here that the topic that has gained the most interest from CPWG participants has been DoH. The team also liked the consolidated approach for some of the items Keith suggested and they will get back to me about the final list to submit to this group after their meeting. But as part of this discussion, I just wanted to add At-Large support for DoH being a separate HIT topic.
Maureen
On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 8:27 PM Katrina Sataki <katrina at nic.lv<mailto:katrina at nic.lv>> wrote:
Dear All,
I would like to start by thanking Manal, Keith and Jonathan for taking the discussion on the CC/HIT sessions further. I’ll start by addressing some of the points raised in their emails and then I would like to talk about the way forward.
1. Combining similar topics is a wise thing to do; therefore, I would support such attempts. However, I would not combine DoH with Combatting Domain Abuse with GDPR. More on DoH below.
2. I fully trust Keith’s considerations regarding the EPDP Phase 2. If Keith believes it is better to defer the session to Montreal, I support the suggestion.
3. I understand Jonathan’s worries about different groups meeting with different constituencies presenting more or less the same thing. I also understand why there might be a wish to have one session inviting all constituencies together – it would clearly save time and efforts. However, I have to note that those people who ask questions when we have meetings in the ccNSO room most likely will never ask questions in a bigger hall. As far as I can tell, discussions in bigger halls are dominated by native English speakers. At the ccNSO, native English speakers are in overwhelming minority :) ; therefore, people are less shy to speak up in such environment. That’s the main reason why I would not support one session for all. These sessions may seem duplicative but they help people to get involved. I am sure we can identify many other duplicative efforts at ICANN and I promise to be the first in line to reduce them. Therefore, I also support the need to continue discussions on the future of Multistakeholder governance model.
4. We received the proposal to have another session on UA when we asked our community to suggest interesting topics. However, if there are other topics that seem more interesting to a broader community, we are open.
Now a little bit about the future… It might seem unbelievable, but to date we still have not come up with a clear process that we would follow, with dates and milestones that we all would adhere to.
We, as a group, are collectively responsible to the broader community. We expect people to travel to Marrakesh or any other place, to attend ICANN meetings in person, to participate and contribute. The least we can do is to ensure solid, interesting agenda for the meeting, and let them know the agenda well in advance to ensure they can make informed decision about their travel arrangements. We should spend a lot of time and efforts to prepare the sessions of common interest to make sure they are engaging and valuable. With ICANN65 starting in a little over 6 weeks, we need all the time we have to organise solid and interesting sessions.
As some of you may remember from previous discussions, the ccNSO has always supported the view that topics need to be of high interest to as broad a group as possible, including – but not limited to - the ccTLD community. However, we are also of the view that if the majority of SO/ACs decides on a topic for a session, those of us with no particular interest in that topic, should be able to organise a session in parallel as long as they do not target the same audience. As an example: since 2009, the ccNSO Tech WG organizes Tech Day usually on the Monday of an ICANN meeting. The focus of the Tech Day session is on technical, operational and security issues TLD operators are facing. It attracts well over 120 people at every ICANN meeting and the audience is steadily growing. Organizing a HIT/CC session with a similar focus (it has happened in the past) in parallel with Tech Day is probably not the most optimal thing to do. At the same time organizing a session focused on, for instance, EPDP phase 2/Uniform Access Model or future of MS model would reduce conflicts.
In light of the above, and to break the deadlock we find ourselves in, the ccNSO and SSAC intend to move forward with the session on DoH. We are now planning to organise it on Tuesday afternoon either as a HIT/CC session or, if there is no interest from other communities, as a joint ccNSO-SSAC session in the ccNSO meeting room, which is open to everyone anyway.
Kind regards,
]{atrina
From: SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning [mailto:soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning-bounces at icann.org<mailto:soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning-bounces at icann.org>] On Behalf Of Manal Ismail
Sent: Saturday, May 04, 2019 10:35 AM
To: Joan Kerr <joankerr at fbsc.org<mailto:joankerr at fbsc.org>>; Bruna Martins dos Santos <bruna.mrtns at gmail.com<mailto:bruna.mrtns at gmail.com>>
Cc: soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org<mailto:soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning] Topic Proposals for ICANN65 Marrakech
Thanks everyone for this useful exchange and apologies for my delayed response (got distracted by the Board meetings) and for missing the last call ..
Allow me to share the GAC’s thinking on this .. We have worked on prioritizing the whole list of topics and have submitted it as such for 2 reasons .. First, I was not sure how to reflect mergers in our choices on the form, and second, for GAC leadership to be guided by the full list of priorities during our discussions .. Yet, we agree that SSR2, ATRT3 and NomCom could be dealt with through webinars and we fully support mergers .. We have particularly thought of the following mergers:
* Topics 6 (EPDP Phase 2, by IPC) and Topic 12 (UAM compliance with GDPR, by GAC)
* Topics 4 (DNS over HTTPS) and Topic 8 (Combatting Domain Abuse with GDPR) under the theme of Abuse Mitigation
Finally, I would like to note that so far we have availed all afternoons for HIT/CC sessions except for the Wed., being allocated to GAC communique drafting .. So we hope that topics of interest to the GAC are not scheduled against the communique drafting (ideally before to allow reflecting on them in the communique, if at all possible) ..
Hope you find this useful ..
Kind Regards
--Manal
From: SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning [mailto:soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Joan Kerr
Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2019 4:48 PM
To: Bruna Martins dos Santos
Cc: soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org<mailto:soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning] Topic Proposals for ICANN65 Marrakech
Hi All,
I definitely agree that we need to stop the fragmentation and siloed approaches and start to share community resources.
Regards,
On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 10:18 AM Bruna Martins dos Santos <bruna.mrtns at gmail.com<mailto:bruna.mrtns at gmail.com>> wrote:
+1 to Stephanie's point on improved spaces for MS approaches/interactions with regards to CC subjects.
Le mer. 17 avr. 2019 à 17:24, Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com<mailto:maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>> a écrit :
I agree with you Stephanie about our encouraging more efficient MS approaches when addressing cross-community issues. As you say, a more collective approach would help the wider ICANN community to understand and appreciate each others views and perspectives - a governance proposal for Brian perhaps.
On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 4:00 AM Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca<mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>> wrote:
I agree, we were rather plagued by duplication at Kobe. I am guilty as I did not act fast enough to prevent it in our SG among the constituencies, but it seemed to be a common phenomenon. The same thing happened with the TSG group, they briefed every group and their dogs, and it would have been more sensible to have one common session. Makes for much better MS appreciation of one another's views, which ought to be a policy goal rather than supporting a fragmented, siloed approach.
Hard to do this, but we should keep trying for these logical solutions.
Stephanie Perrin
On 2019-04-17 04:58, Jonathan Robinson wrote:
All,
One point on meeting organisation that I was particularly aware of in Kobe was duplication.
I was interested in and tracking the ICANN Budget process and so attended the relevant ccNSO session, GNSO session and cross-community session.
Not only was there significant or total duplication of the content across the sessions but the Cross-C session was very poorly attended. So much so that it was effectively the ICANN finance team and (IIRC) myself and one other individual actively engaged with them.
There was clearly inefficiency in this as well as the creation of parallel sessions (a commonly voiced community concern); more than otherwise may have been required.
With this background, I understand that there is a proposal from the ATRT3 chairs to meet with various groups in Marrakech.
Moreover, that my group (the RySG) is not meeting together as a group for any length of time (in order to enable RySG members to participate elsewhere) and so will not be able to meet with ATRT3.
Given the goals of the ATRT3 group in Marrakech are as follows:
- Socialize our terms of reference and scope;
- Conduct investigation of identified objectives
- Seek input from the community to help us shape our findings and draft recommendations.
My proposal here and to this group is that ATRT3 hold a community-wide engagement and feedback session within a 90 minute slot.
I trust that you will find this logical and sensible use of community resources.
Thank-you,
Jonathan
From: Tanzanica S. King [mailto:tanzanica.king at icann.org]
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2019 8:53 PM
To: SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning <soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org><mailto:soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org>
Subject: [SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning] Topic Proposals for ICANN65 Marrakech
Dear Community Leaders:
Several important issues were raised during the ICANN65 Kickoff in Kobe, and it’s been good to see discussions continue on the mailing list after the meeting.
So far, the suggested topics for cross-community or high-interest sessions in Marrakech are as follows:
1. Policy around Universal Acceptance and steps to be taken by TLD operators/registrars, software developers and hosting companies
2. DNS over HTTPS (DoH) – hot subject for many stakeholders: TLDs, users, governments, lawyers, ISPs, etc.
3. Nominating Committee Review
4. Evolution of ICANN Multi-stakeholder model of Governance
5. Hijacking / Account Take-Over / Attacks
To move us forward in the selection of topics, the ICANN65 Topic Proposal Form [icann.wufoo.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__icann.wufoo.com_forms_icannn65-2Dtopic-2Dproposal-2Dform_&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=0W8YSESVjWggJ4j27M95-21yOYr3n8cfMpfbwaJ4yUs&m=8VWQVgNO-Zu8ksfJo5K2hsKzdTeW0ufQghfgYDsReWw&s=C1sY7vDfOTVJvnS31BoTYWgC7KE5OluDyss1A0k4k-8&e=> is now open for submissions. Before completing a form, please continue to share all proposed topics with the group to avoid duplicate submissions.
ICANN65 Topic Proposal Form [icann.wufoo.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__icann.wufoo.com_forms_icannn65-2Dtopic-2Dproposal-2Dform_&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=0W8YSESVjWggJ4j27M95-21yOYr3n8cfMpfbwaJ4yUs&m=8VWQVgNO-Zu8ksfJo5K2hsKzdTeW0ufQghfgYDsReWw&s=C1sY7vDfOTVJvnS31BoTYWgC7KE5OluDyss1A0k4k-8&e=>
Submission Deadline: 19 April 2019
The group also suggested that we reduce the number of CC/HIT slots to allow more time for progressing policy work, with an understanding that the final slots will be based on necessity and prioritization of topics. This approach aligns perfectly with the intentions of the block schedule. However, for schedule development, it may be helpful to know which of the seven slots is most likely to be freed up. Given the CC/HIT slots on Monday and Wednesday conflict with Tech Day and the GAC Communiqué, can we assume these would be the first to drop off? Again, even if not final, this guidance will help support schedule planning for your groups.
Best,
Tanzanica
_______________________________________________
Tanzanica S. King
Sr. Manager, Meeting Strategy and Design
ICANN
Office +1 310 301 5800
Mobile +1 310 995 3038
www.icann.org [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.icann.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=0W8YSESVjWggJ4j27M95-21yOYr3n8cfMpfbwaJ4yUs&m=8VWQVgNO-Zu8ksfJo5K2hsKzdTeW0ufQghfgYDsReWw&s=C-igU48GbdBcMwf9DU5d7h7eqpI5ya4TF968gJL7M5A&e=>
_______________________________________________
SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning mailing list
SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning at icann.org<mailto:SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning
_______________________________________________
SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning mailing list
SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning at icann.org<mailto:SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning
_______________________________________________
SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning mailing list
SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning at icann.org<mailto:SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning
--
Bruna Martins dos Santos
Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
@boomartins
_______________________________________________
SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning mailing list
SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning at icann.org<mailto:SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning
--
Joan Kerr, Entrepreneur, Artist, Humanitarian
_____________________________________
Chair, Climate Smart Victory Garden Team
Chair, ICANN, Not for Profit Operations Constituency
Chair, IEEE Sustainable Agriculture Working Group
Chair, Science for Peace, Climate Smart Victory Gardens
Advisor, IEEE Humanitarian Initiatives Committee
Advisor, Climate Smart Agriculture Youth Network, (CSAYN) Canada
UN WSIS Award Recipient, for Content & Creativity
Durham Region Recipient, Community Partnership Award
Founder, Foundation for Building Sustainable Communities
www.joankerr.ca [joankerr.ca]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.joankerr.ca_&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=0W8YSESVjWggJ4j27M95-21yOYr3n8cfMpfbwaJ4yUs&m=8VWQVgNO-Zu8ksfJo5K2hsKzdTeW0ufQghfgYDsReWw&s=x5ArKhGGOPMhYSQmBp_-PbLLXC11xt7GC2GY7VEV0wg&e=>, www.fbsc.org [fbsc.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.fbsc.org_&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=0W8YSESVjWggJ4j27M95-21yOYr3n8cfMpfbwaJ4yUs&m=8VWQVgNO-Zu8ksfJo5K2hsKzdTeW0ufQghfgYDsReWw&s=zSr-C3n-sOpPhjqbkGfiXPaA5fP2EnCVec700BAPPdI&e=>
Skype: joankerr_fbsc
1-416-907-0783
_______________________________________________
SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning mailing list
SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning at icann.org<mailto:SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning
_______________________________________________
SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning mailing list
SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning at icann.org<mailto:SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20190513/a50268df/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: Attached Message Part
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20190513/a50268df/attachment.ksh>
More information about the NCSG-PC
mailing list