[NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] FW: ODP Liaison Update and Question Set 2

Tue Feb 22 14:55:51 EET 2022

Hi everyone,

Like I promised during our policy call yesterday, below are some additional
clarification questions from Org's SubPro ODP team sent to the council
through the liaison.

The one thing I wanted to flag, and this was also discussed during the
policy call was the proposal from the council liaison to this ODP for the
council to consider using a community group to develop remaining
implementation elements of the Applicant Support Program for SubPro,
contrary to the final recommendation which recommended a dedicated
Implementation Review Team (IRT) to be convened for this. The rationale
being that some of the work that SubPro Recommended be done by an IRT may
involve items that are not strictly implementation.

While this is possible through a GNSO Guidance Process utilizing section 16
of the PDP Manual, which allows for additional work on recommendations
prior to Board adoption, during the call, some members were reluctant to
support such a path. I will therefore like to hear what others think about
this proposal.

Regards
Tomslin
Policy Chair

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: philippe.fouquart--- via council <council at gnso.icann.org>
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2022 at 19:53
Subject: [council] FW: ODP Liaison Update and Question Set 2
To: council at gnso.icann.org <council at gnso.icann.org>
Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org <gnso-secs at icann.org>

Dear Councilors,

Please see Jeff’s update on the SubPro ODP. We will have an AOB on this in
our Council call this week.

Note in particular the response from ICANN on the ODP timeline, and
questions on how the dedicated Applicant Support program IRT is expected to
be convened. Jeff’s suggestion is to start ASAP with a rationale for doing
so before the Board’s vote.

Regards,

Philippe

Orange Restricted

*From:* Jeff Neuman <jeff at jjnsolutions.com>
*Sent:* Friday, February 11, 2022 4:55 PM
*To:* FOUQUART Philippe INNOV/NET <philippe.fouquart at orange.com>; Tomslin
Samme-Nlar (mesumbeslin at gmail.com) <mesumbeslin at gmail.com>;
Sebastien at registry.godaddy
*Cc:* Steve Chan <steve.chan at icann.org>; SubPro ODP Mailman List <
subpro-odp at icann.org>
*Subject:* ODP Liaison Update and Question Set 2

Dear Council Leadership,

Apologies for not meeting the Document Deadline, but I wanted to provide
this update after my call with the ICANN SubPro ODP Team and after
receiving the documents I am now forwarding.

There is a lot to report on since the last update a few weeks ago when the
ICANN ODP team announced the official start to the SubPro ODP.

1.           *Project Timeline*:  Attached is a high level project timeline
provided by the ODP Team that sets forth different milestones including
Community Status Updates, ICANN meeting sessions and some internal ICANN
team deliverables.  We are not certain whether the Community Status Updates
(in March, May and August) will be webinars or reports, but that will be
finalized over the next few weeks.  In addition, ICANN is planning a
session at ICANN73 (more on that below), and several sessions at ICANN74.
And hopefully by ICANN75 in September, the ODA will be near final to
discuss.  This timeline was provided in response to the Council discussion
during its January meeting.

2.           *Question Set 2*:  We have also just received Question Set #2
from the ODP team which I have copied into a Google Doc
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_A5oEnsFQHAvXDtNNRkDGzPoC2GRTxtlnMCwd3rNMOM/edit?usp=sharing>.
As per our process, I will draft a proposed response which everyone is able
to see, revise, comment on, etc.  Although the Question states that it is
related to Applicant Support, it is actually a broader procedural question
as opposed to one related to the substance of Applicant Support.

              In the SubPro Final Report, the recommendations state that a
dedicated Implementation Review Team (separate and apart from the general
SubPro IRT) should be formed to finalize a number of the elements of the
Applicant Support program.  The SubPro Working Group believed that it did
not have the sufficient expertise to develop policy on who should qualify
for Applicant Support, how the funds should be distributed, etc.  Though
there are some recommendations at a high level, the Working Group
envisioned a specific community group with that expertise should be
responsible for the requirements. For those of you that want to read that
section again, it is Topic 17
<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/final-report-newgtld-subsequent-procedures-pdp-20jan21-en.pdf>
(pages 71-83).  The *Implementation Guidance* states:

*“A dedicated Implementation Review Team should be established and charged
with developing implementation elements of the Applicant Support Program.
In conducting its work, the Implementation Review Team should revisit the
2011 Final Report of the Joint Applicant Support Working Group98 as well as
the 2012 implementation of the Applicant Support program.”*

              ICANN has rightly pointed out that this is generally not the
type or work that we think of being associated with an IRT and may in fact
be policy.  That being the case, ICANN wants to know (a) whether the
Council (responsible for managing policy) is nonetheless ok will giving
this work to an IRT or whether the Council wanted to create some other
cross community team (called something other than an IRT) to do this work.

              Incidentally, I believe this question provides us with an
opening, should we choose to take it, where the Council can actually
commission a group to start working on these issues NOW as opposed to
waiting for Board approval in 2023.  In other words, the Council can always
modify its policy recommendations at any time prior to the Board approving
the policy recommendations.  So although we technically cannot commission
an IRT until the Board approves the policies, we can commission a group to
work on Applicant Support issues now.  If this group can complete its work
prior to the Board approving the SubPro Policies, the PDP Manual would
allow us to update the SubPro policies to include the group’s
recommendations (if we wanted to).  If, however, it does not complete the
work by that time, then they would be new recommendations to the Board for
approval. This is no different really at the end of the day than the
outcome of an IRT.

              *Therefore, I would like to propose to the Council that it
consider creating a group to work on these applicant support issues and
solicit volunteers from the GAC and ALAC (who are VERY interested in this
subject) to start work on this as soon as possible.  And if this is a good
model, perhaps there are other recommendations in the SubPro Report where
those were referred to IRTs, but really may involve some policy aspects
that we can start work on now.  *

             I would like to use the update time during the Council meeting
to discuss this point if possible.

3.           *ICANN73*:  When the schedule comes out shortly, you will
likely see (unless anything changes) a session on Wednesday of ICANN week
for the ODP team to give an update.  At that meeting they will likely be
presenting on the work they have done to date and on the next set of key
assumptions for the program.  You may recall back in 2019 I believe ICANN
released its first set of assumptions which was prior to SubPro completing
its work.  Some of the assumptions at that time were discussed, but others
could not be discussed due to the policies at the time not being final.  My
understanding is that this second set will be more comprehensive and much
further developed.

Finally,  I just want to acknowledge the hard work of Karen Lentz and her
team including Lars Hoffmann,  Chris Bare, Samantha Mancia and Michael
Karakash as well as of course our very own Steve Chan and Emily Barabas.

Please let me know if you have any comments or questions.

Sincerely,

Jeff

Jeffrey J. Neuman

Founder & CEO

JJN Solutions, LLC

p: +1.202.549.5079

E: jeff at jjnsolutions.com

http://jjnsolutions.com

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez
recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les
messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere,
deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or
privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and
delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have
been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.

_______________________________________________
council mailing list
council at gnso.icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council

_______________________________________________
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-pc/attachments/20220222/9f245b49/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 14421 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20220222/9f245b49/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Sub Pro ODP High-Level Timeline.pptx.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 162016 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20220222/9f245b49/attachment.pdf>