<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [council] DRAFT GNSO Council teleconference agenda 14 April 2016 at 21:00 UTC
Thanks Glen.
James, as you heard on the call today, the GNSO Review recommendations
raised a lot of unanswered questions. Not to raise memories of Marrakech,
but will the Council?s vote on Thursday be an up or down on all the
recommendations or will each recommendation have its own vote? Or, is it
also possible that Council could send these back to the Working Party and
ask them to refine them a bit more to address certain questions, like the
privacy issues raised? Thanks in advance for your thoughts.
Best,
Paul
Paul McGrady
policy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
+1-312-882-5020
GNSO Councilor for the IPC
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Glen de Saint Géry
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 08:53 AM
To: GNSO Council List (council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Subject: [council] DRAFT GNSO Council teleconference agenda 14 April 2016 at
21:00 UTC
Dear All,
Please find the proposed draft agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting on 14
April 2016 at 21:00 UTC.
http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/agenda-council-14apr16-en.htm
https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Agenda+14+April+2016
This agenda was established according to the
<http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-24jun15-en.pdf> GNSO Council
Operating Procedures, approved and updated on 24 June 2015.
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.
Coordinated Universal Time: 21:00 UTC: http://tinyurl.com/gn4sy7u
14:00 Los Angeles; 17:00 Washington; 22:00 London; 00:00 Istanbul; 07:00
Hobart
Please be aware that the clocks will have changed in some parts of the
world, so refer to the other times below to ensure you join the meeting at
the correct time. UTC time remains the same for Council meetings, local time
changes.
GNSO Council Meeting Audio Cast
To join the event click on the link:
<http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u>
http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u
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 of the meeting of the GNSO Council Meeting Minutes, 29 February and
9 March 2016 will be posted as approved on xxxx 2016.
Item 2: Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action List (5 minutes)
2.1 ? Review focus areas and provide updates on specific key themes /
topics, to include review of
<http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/projects-list.pdf> Projects List and
<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Items>
Action List
Item 3: Consent agenda (0 minutes)
Item 4: PRESENTATION & DISCUSSION ? Possible Next Steps in Resolving the
Issue of Permanent Protection of Certain Red Cross Identifiers (20 minutes)
In November 2013, the GNSO Council approved
<http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#20131120-2> the final
recommendations from its Policy Development Process (PDP) Working Group on
the Protection of IGO-INGO Identifiers in All gTLDs. Subsequently, in April
2014, the ICANN Board approved
<https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2014-04-30-en#2.
a> those of the GNSO?s PDP recommendations that are not inconsistent with
GAC advice
<https://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-annex-a-30apr14
-en.pdf> received on the topic. For the Red Cross movement, the protections
adopted were for the full names Red Cross, Red Crescent, Red Crystal, Red
Lion & Sun at the top and second levels, in the 6 official languages of the
United Nations, with an Exception Procedure to be designed during the
implementation phase for the affected organizations. However, with respect
to the names and acronyms of the 189 national Red Cross societies and the
names of the International Red Cross Movement (as noted by the GAC in its
Singapore Communique
<https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/34373692/Final%20Communique%2
0-%20Singapore%202014.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1396971674000&api=v2)>
), the Board requested more time to consider the GNSO?s recommendations as
these are inconsistent with GAC advice
<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/resolutions-annex-b-30apr14-en.
pdf> received on the topic. In the interim period, the Board adopted
<https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-new-gtld-2014-10
-12-en#2.d> temporary protections for the Red Cross national society and
international movement names noted in the GAC?s Singapore Communique.
At ICANN55, representatives of the Red Cross met with the GNSO Council
leadership to discuss possible next steps. Here the Red Cross
representatives will brief the Council on the scope of the Red Cross?
continuing request for permanent protections for those of its national
society and international movement identifiers that are not currently
covered by the policy recommendations that have been adopted by the GNSO
Council and the ICANN Board.
4.1 ? Introduction (James Bladel)
4.2 ? Presentation by representatives of the Red Cross (by invitation)
4.3 ? Q&A / next steps
Item 5: VOTE ? Approval of Proposed Approach for Implementing
Recommendations from the GNSO Review (10 minutes)
As part of ICANN's Bylaws-mandated periodic review of its structures, the
ICANN Board's Structural Improvements Committee (now known as the
Organizational Effectiveness Committee) appointed Westlake Governance as the
independent examiner to conduct the current review of the performance and
operations of the GNSO. A GNSO Working Party, chaired by former Councillor
Jennifer Wolfe and comprising representatives of all the GNSO's Stakeholder
Groups and Constituencies, was formed to consult with Westlake over the
design and conduct of the review. Westlake's Draft Report was published
<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/gnso-review-draft-2015-06-01-en> for
public comment on 1 June 2015. Following feedback received, including from
the GNSO Working Party, Westlake published its Final Report
<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/gnso-review-final-15sep15-en.pd
f> on 15 September. The Working Party reviewed all the recommendations to
develop guidance for the GNSO Council and ICANN Board in relation to the
implementability and prioritization of the recommendations. The Council
received a written update
<http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/presentation-gnso-council-update-21
jan16-en.pdf> from the Working Party chair on 29 January, and the Working
Party?s proposed Implementation and Feasibility Analysis
<http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/review-feasibility-prioritization-25feb16-e
n.pdf> was sent to the Council on 28 February.
Here the Council will review the Working Party?s Implementation and
Feasibility Analysis, and vote on its adoption as well as agree on next
steps in the process.
5.1 ? Presentation of the motion
<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+9+March+201
6> (Wolf-Ulrich Knoben)
5.2 ? Discussion
5.3 ? Council vote (voting threshold: simple majority)
Item 6: COUNCIL VOTE ? Approval of Procedures Governing the Selection of the
GNSO Liaison to the Governmental Advisory Committee (10 minutes)
As part of a two-year pilot program initiated in June 2014, the GNSO Council
and the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) agreed, through its joint
GAC-GNSO Consultation Group <https://community.icann.org/x/phPRAg> , to
appoint a GNSO Liaison to the GAC. The purpose of the Liaison role was to
facilitate more effective early engagement by the GAC in GNSO policy
activities and to contribute toward better information flow between the two
bodies. Following Consultation Group review
<http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/review-liaison-gac-pilot-29feb16-en.pdf>
of the pilot program, the Consultation Group recommended that the Liaison
role be made a permanent one in March 2016. Here the Council will review and
approve the scope of such a permanent Liaison role as well as the
application, selection and confirmation process.
6.1 ? Presentation of the motion
<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+14+April+20
16>
6.2 ? Discussion
6.3 ? Council vote (voting threshold: simple majority)
Item 7: COUNCIL VOTE ? Approval of GNSO Input to the ICANN Board on the
GAC?s Marrakech Communique (20 minutes)
Beginning in mid-2015 with the GAC?s Buenos Aires Communique, the GNSO
Council developed a mechanism for reviewing and commenting on aspects of
that Communique that are relevant to gTLD policy. The resulting GNSO input
on both the GAC?s Buenos Aires and Dublin Communiques were approved by the
GNSO Council and sent to the ICANN Board and the GAC Chair (see
https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/robinson-to-icann-board
-gac-chair-29jul15-en.pdf and
http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/gnso-gac-review-31dec15-en.pdf).
Here the Council will review the draft response to the GAC?s Marrakech
Communique, drafted by a volunteer group of Councillors, and, if
appropriate, approve its being forwarded to the ICANN Board and GAC Chair.
7.1 ? Presentation of the motion
<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+14+April+20
16> (Proposer name: Susan Kawaguchi /Jennifer Gore / Rubens Kuhl)
7.2 ? Discussion
7.3 ? Council vote (voting threshold: simple majority)
Item 8: COUNCIL APPROVAL ? Public Comment on ICANN?s FY17 Proposed Budget
(15 minutes)
On 5 March 2016, the draft ICANN FY17 Operating Plan and Budget was
published
<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/op-budget-fy17-five-year-2016-03-04-e
n> for public comment (closing on 30 April). The GNSO Council had
previously provided public comments
<https://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-op-budget-fy16-18mar15/pdfWW7Sy3WTwV
.pdf> to the FY16 Operating Plan and Budget. At ICANN55, a small group of
Councillors had volunteered to work on possible Council comments to the
draft FY17 budget. Here the Council will review and, if appropriate, agree
to send in the proposed comments.
8.1 ? Update and summary of comments (Keith Drazek / Edward Morris / Carlos
Raul Gutierrez)
8.2 ? Discussion
8.3 ? Next steps
Item 9: DISCUSSION ? Implementation of the IANA Stewardship Transition Plan
(10 minutes)
At ICANN55, community discussions were held concerning the upcoming
implementation of the IANA Stewardship Transition Plan, including at a
session on 7 March
<https://meetings.icann.org/en/marrakech55/schedule/mon-iana-stewardship-imp
lementation/transcript-iana-stewardship-implementation-07mar16-en> . Several
GNSO community members voiced concerns about whether the proposed
implementation plan would meet the requirements of the Cross Community
Working Group to Develop an IANA Stewardship Proposal on Naming-Related
Functions (CWG-Stewardship <https://community.icann.org/x/37fhAg> ). On 25
March a Call for Volunteers
<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-03-25-en> was issued for
additional CCWG participation, including for implementation of the adopted
Work Stream 1 recommendations.
Here the Council will discuss the community concerns that have been raised,
and review possible next steps in relation to the CWG-Stewardship and ICANN
staff that have been charged with developing the implementation plan.
9.1 ? Summary & update (James Bladel)
9.2 ? Discussion
9.3 ? Next steps
Item 10: DISCUSSION ? Planning for ?Meeting B? (ICANN Policy Forum) (10
Minutes)
At ICANN55, the GNSO held several discussions, including with the ICANN
Board, concerning the focus, duration and meeting schedule for the first
designated ICANN Policy Forum, to take place in Helsinki as ICANN56 (i.e.
the initial so-called ?Meeting B?). Specific concerns were raised about the
apparent lack of time for actual policy work in the overall Meeting B
schedule when all the current draft SO/AC/Board proposals were put together,
and about the lack of opportunity for different SO/AC/Board groups to
interact with one another. A small group of SO/AC volunteers has been formed
to address these concerns.
Here the Council will hear from its representatives to this group, and
discuss further plans for finalizing the GNSO?s schedule for ICANN56 so as
to maximize the policy focus for Meeting B. This includes confirmation of
the PDP Working Group(s) to be invited to consider conducting a face-to-face
working meeting in Helsinki, on a day either precedent or subsequent to the
ICANN56 schedule.
10.1 ? Update (Donna Austin / Volker Greimann)
10.2 ? Discussion
10.3 ? Next steps
Item 11: DISCUSSION ? Status of Cross Community Working Group on Internet
Governance (10 minutes)
The Charter
<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/52888213/Charter%20ccWG%20
IG%202014%20v05.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1423208903000&api=v2> for
this Cross Community Working Group was ratified
<https://community.icann.org/x/oQInAw> by the ccNSO Council (September
2014), the GNSO Council (October 2014), and the ALAC (April 2015). The CCWG
Charter states its scope as doing ?whatever it deems relevant and necessary
to facilitate and ensure engagement and participation of the ICANN community
in the global Internet governance scene and multi-stakeholder
decision-making processes?, with regular updates to be provided to its
Chartering Organizations and a periodic Progress Paper where appropriate.
The Charter also provides that the Chartering Organizations should review
the Charter and CCWG deliverables in order to determine whether the group
should continue or be dissolved, with the proviso that the CCWG will
continue if at least two of its Chartering Organizations extend the Charter
and notify the other Chartering Organizations accordingly.
During the CCWG co-chairs? update to the ccNSO and GNSO Councils at ICANN55,
there was some discussion over whether a CCWG format or other arrangement
might be the most appropriate form for SO/AC interaction on Internet
governance matters, especially given the expected forthcoming finalization
<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ccwg-framework-principles-draft-2016-
02-22-en> of a Uniform Framework of Principles for Future CCWGs by the
CCWG-Principles. Here the GNSO Council will continue that discussion, with a
view toward agreeing on the appropriate next steps for the CCWG on Internet
Governance.
11.1 ? Introduction and summary (Carlos Raul Gutierrez)
11.2 ? Discussion
11.3 ? Next steps
Item 12: Any Other Business (5 minutes)
12.1 ? Proposed approach to Expert Working Group on Internationalized
Registration Data (IRD) Final Report
_________________________________
Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article X, Section
3)
9. Except as otherwise specified in these Bylaws, Annex A hereto, or the
GNSO Operating Procedures, the default threshold to pass a GNSO Council
motion or other voting action requires a simple majority vote of each House.
The voting thresholds described below shall apply to the following GNSO
actions:
a. Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more than
one-fourth (1/4) vote of each House or majority of one House.
b. Initiate a Policy Development Process ("PDP") Within Scope (as described
in <http://www.icann.org/en/about/governance/bylaws#AnnexA> Annex A):
requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or
more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House.
c. Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of GNSO
Supermajority.
d. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Within Scope: requires an
affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than
two-thirds (2/3) of one House.
e. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an
affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
f. Changes to an Approved PDP Team Charter: For any PDP Team Charter
approved under d. or e. above, the GNSO Council may approve an amendment to
the Charter through a simple majority vote of each House.
g. Terminate a PDP: Once initiated, and prior to the publication of a Final
Report, the GNSO Council may terminate a PDP only for significant cause,
upon a motion that passes with a GNSO Supermajority Vote in favor of
termination.
h. Approve a PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority: requires an
affirmative vote of a majority of each House and further requires that one
GNSO Council member representative of at least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups
supports the Recommendation.
i. Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an
affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority,
j. Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain
Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that "a
two-thirds vote of the council" demonstrates the presence of a consensus,
the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded.
k. Modification of Approved PDP Recommendation: Prior to Final Approval by
the ICANN Board, an Approved PDP Recommendation may be modified or amended
by the GNSO Council with a GNSO Supermajority vote.
l. A "GNSO Supermajority" shall mean: (a) two-thirds (2/3) of the Council
members of each House, or (b) three-fourths (3/4) of one House and a
majority of the other House."
Appendix 2: Absentee Voting Procedures (
<http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-operating-procedures-22sep11-en.pdf>
GNSO Operating Procedures 4.4)
4.4.1 Applicability
Absentee voting is permitted for the following limited number of Council
motions or measures.
a. Initiate a Policy Development Process (PDP);
b. Approve a PDP recommendation;
c. Recommend amendments to the GNSO Operating Procedures (GOP) or ICANN
Bylaws;
d. Fill a Council position open for election.
4.4.2 Absentee ballots, when permitted, must be submitted within the
announced time limit, which shall be 72 hours from the meeting's
adjournment. In exceptional circumstances, announced at the time of the
vote, the Chair may reduce this time to 24 hours or extend the time to 7
calendar days, provided such amendment is verbally confirmed by all
Vice-Chairs present.
4.4.3 The GNSO Secretariat will administer, record, and tabulate absentee
votes according to these procedures and will provide reasonable means for
transmitting and authenticating absentee ballots, which could include voting
by telephone, e- mail, web-based interface, or other technologies as may
become available.
4.4.4 Absentee balloting does not affect quorum requirements. (There must be
a quorum for the meeting in which the vote is initiated.)
Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 21:00
Local time between March and October Summer in the NORTHERN hemisphere
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
California, USA (
<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/na/pst.html>
PDT) UTC-7+0DST 14:00
San José, Costa Rica UTC-5+0DST 16:00
Iowa City, USA ( <http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/UTC%E2%88%9206:00> CDT)
UTC-5+0DST 16:00
New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-4+0DST 17:00
Buenos Aires, Argentina (
<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/art.html>
ART) UTC-3+0DST 18:00
Rio de Janiero, Brazil (BRST) UTC-3+0DST 18:00
London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 22:00
Bonn, Germany (CET) UTC+1+0DST 23:00
Cairo, Egypt, (EET) UTC+2+0DST 23:00
Istanbul, Turkey (EEST) UTC+3+0DST 00:00 next day
Perth, Australia (
<http://timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/au/wst.html> WST)
UTC+8+0DST 07:00 next day
Singapore (SGT) UTC +8 05:00 next day
Sydney/Hobart, Australia (AEDT) UTC+11+0DST 07:00 next day
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
DST starts/ends on last Sunday of October 2016, 2:00 or 3:00 local time
(with exceptions)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For other places see <http://www.timeanddate.com/>
http://www.timeanddate.com
http://tinyurl.com/gn4sy7u
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thank you.
Kind regards,
Glen
Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat
<mailto:gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<http://gnso.icann.org/> http://gnso.icann.org
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|