[council] RE: UPDATE re Item 2: For your review - GNSO Review of GAC Communique Hyderabad

["Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Paul, I’m sorry I couldn’t get this out sooner.

From: policy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:policy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2016 4:49 PM
To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Marika Konings 
<marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: UPDATE re Item 2: For your review - GNSO Review of GAC Communique 
Hyderabad

Thanks Donna.  I have taken the proposed new language to the IPC list and hope 
to have feedback quickly.

Best,
Paul


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: UPDATE re Item 2: For your review - GNSO Review of GAC
Communique Hyderabad
From: "Austin, Donna" 
<Donna.Austin@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Donna.Austin@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Wed, December 14, 2016 3:19 pm
To: "policy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:policy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>" 
<policy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:policy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>, Marika
Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>>, 
"council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>"
<council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Paul, all

Please accept the language below for consideration as potential replacement 
language provided below by Paul. This language supersedes an earlier email I 
sent to the list. I apologise for any confusion.

Just to be clear, this language is relevant to Item 2 of the Council response 
to the GAC communique.

Proposed language from the RySG:
The GNSO Council observes that ICANN is only one party to its contracts; the 
others are registries or registrars. It is inappropriate for one party to a 
contract to unilaterally define standards for reporting enforcement.  
Contracted parties voluntarily have developed, and continue to develop, various 
operational practices that proactively address abuse in various forms.

To replace the following language suggested by Paul:
Some contracted parties to ICANN have or are in the process of developing a 
number of “best practices” initiatives related to registry and registrar 
operations. ICANN is responsible for setting standards for abuse reporting and 
performance when determining compliance with contractual obligations.

If the RySG language is acceptable, Paul’s response would read:
The GNSO Council would like to express concern that the list of questions set 
out in Annex 1 has been categorised as “advice”.  In this context, the term 
“advice” ought to be given its ordinary dictionary meaning, and a request to 
the Board to provide various data and information does not constitute “GAC 
Advice”, as this term is used in the ICANN Bylaws.  Since GAC Advice has a 
specific status and treatment under the under the ICANN Bylaws, precision of 
terminology is crucial to avoid any perception that there is an attempt to 
direct the Board, rather than making a request for information and attempting 
to impose a reasonable deadline for its provision.  That said, the GNSO Council 
looks forward to reviewing ICANN’s responses to the questions listed in Annex 1 
to the Communiqué.  The GNSO Council observes that ICANN is only one party to 
its contracts; the others are registries or registrars. It is inappropriate for 
one party to a contract to unilaterally define standards for reporting 
enforcement.  Contracted parties voluntarily have developed, and continue to 
develop, various operational practices that proactively address abuse in 
various forms. The issue of DNS Abuse Mitigation raised by the GAC may also be 
dealt with by the GNSO in GNSO PDP Working Groups, producing relevant Consensus 
Policy recommendations then duly adopted by the Board.  Further, the issue of 
DNS Abuse Mitigation raised by the GAC is dealt with by the GNSO as the issue 
arises, whether it be various active and/or open projects on the Projects 
List<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_meetings_projects-2Dlist-2D28nov16-2Den.pdf&d=DgMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=b_o3-i0H2nKfE3BqYDYucWO1-3N1E4XVLXqlYXkqZ4Y&s=OnENUeYwFCPLqmH6BhL_VfSwze9IjfPBwZtjrj6smAM&e=>,
 or as part of GNSO Policy 
Activities<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_council_policy&d=DgMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=b_o3-i0H2nKfE3BqYDYucWO1-3N1E4XVLXqlYXkqZ4Y&s=DAh8dGjoP-HlunMGgxErthrt2L98OaFx7eNjhl28kT4&e=>.

I do want to reiterate a previous suggestion I had made in that I do believe it 
would be worthwhile to elevate the comments about the definition of GAC Advice 
to the letter of transmittal.

Thanks

Donna

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
policy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:policy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2016 12:11 PM
To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>>; 
council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [council] For your review - GNSO Review of GAC Communique Hyderabad

Hi All,

The IPC has had a chance to consider the draft language for Section 2 and 
propose the following (heavily) edited draft response:

___________________________
The GNSO Council would like to express concern that the list of questions set 
out in Annex 1 has been categorised as “advice”.  In this context, the term 
“advice” ought to be given its ordinary dictionary meaning, and a request to 
the Board to provide various data and information does not constitute “GAC 
Advice”, as this term is used in the ICANN Bylaws.  Since GAC Advice has a 
specific status and treatment under the under the ICANN Bylaws, precision of 
terminology is crucial to avoid any perception that there is an attempt to 
direct the Board, rather than making a request for information and attempting 
to impose a reasonable deadline for its provision.  That said, the GNSO Council 
looks forward to reviewing ICANN’s responses to the questions listed in Annex 1 
to the Communiqué.    The issue of DNS Abuse Mitigation raised by the GAC may 
also be dealt with by the GNSO in GNSO PDP Working Groups, producing relevant 
Consensus Policy recommendations then duly adopted by the Board.  Further, the 
issue of DNS Abuse Mitigation raised by the GAC is dealt with by the GNSO as 
the issue arises, whether it be various active and/or open projects on the 
Projects 
List<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_meetings_projects-2Dlist-2D28nov16-2Den.pdf&d=DgMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=b_o3-i0H2nKfE3BqYDYucWO1-3N1E4XVLXqlYXkqZ4Y&s=OnENUeYwFCPLqmH6BhL_VfSwze9IjfPBwZtjrj6smAM&e=>,
 or as part of GNSO Policy 
Activities<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_council_policy&d=DgMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=b_o3-i0H2nKfE3BqYDYucWO1-3N1E4XVLXqlYXkqZ4Y&s=DAh8dGjoP-HlunMGgxErthrt2L98OaFx7eNjhl28kT4&e=>.
___________________________

I'm very happy to discuss the rationale for these proposed changes.

Best,
Paul


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [council] For your review - GNSO Review of GAC Communique
Hyderabad
From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Thu, December 08, 2016 11:48 am
To: "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>" 
<council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Dear All,

Please find attached for your review the proposed GNSO Review of the GAC 
Communique. This draft has been developed by the small drafting team that was 
formed at ICANN57 consisting of Donna Austin, James Bladel, Heather Forrest, 
Phil Corwin, Michele Neylon, Paul McGrady and Carlos Guttierez. Please share 
any comments and/or input you may have with the mailing list. Consideration of 
this document is also on the agenda for the GNSO Council meeting on 15 December.

Best regards,

Marika

Marika Konings
Senior Policy Director & Team Leader for the GNSO, Internet Corporation for 
Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Email: marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>

Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO
Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive 
courses<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses_gnso&d=DgMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=b_o3-i0H2nKfE3BqYDYucWO1-3N1E4XVLXqlYXkqZ4Y&s=dNjsiuWO3xdzLW4v1BH88xcBii9uiGCBDGesqG9gB7I&e=>
 and visiting the GNSO Newcomer 
pages<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gnso.icann.org_files_gnso_presentations_policy-2Defforts.htm-23newcomers&d=DgMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=b_o3-i0H2nKfE3BqYDYucWO1-3N1E4XVLXqlYXkqZ4Y&s=gtfl9Z6dWYQL3zTtk15ezDF16TnJlbluKDGvMZg5xaE&e=>.