[Ccpdp-rm] NOTES & ACTION ITEMS | ccPDP-RM Working Group | 8 April 2020 at 18:00 UTC.

Wed Apr 8 19:09:49 UTC 2020

Thank you

Bart

From: Ccpdp-rm <ccpdp-rm-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Joke Braeken <joke.braeken at icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, 8 April 2020 at 21:09
To: "ccpdp-rm at icann.org" <ccpdp-rm at icann.org>
Subject: [Ccpdp-rm] NOTES & ACTION ITEMS | ccPDP-RM Working Group | 8 April 2020 at 18:00 UTC.

hello everyone,

Please find included some high-level notes of today’s ccPDP3-rm WG meeting.

Wiki space: https://community.icann.org/x/piyJBw (recording, agenda and background material will be posted here as it becomes available)

Best regards,

Joke Braeken

ACTION ITEMS

Action item #1:

Members of the ccPDP3-ret WG are invited to complete the survey

Action item #2:

Secretariat to revise the draft Rules of Engagement, based on today’s discussion, ahead of the second reading during the next meeting

NOTES

Welcome and roll-call

Roll call will be taken from the zoom attendance. Recording will be posted on public wiki.

2.                   Administrative announcements

a.                   Questionnaire members PDP-RET WG

Questionnaire was circulated with the PDP-ret WG. it is targeted at members of the previous WG, the ccPDP3-retirement WG. Link to survey:  https://www.surveymonkey.de/r/6ZHHTLW [surveymonkey.de]

Action item #1:

Members of the ccPDP3-ret are invited to complete the survey

Closure Chair and vice Chair election procedure

i.Final call

Stephen Deerhake (Chair) and Eberhard Lisse (Vice Chair) were nominated and accepted their nomination. They are also the Chair and Vice-Chair of the ccPDP3-ret WG.

Next steps
Formal appointment by the Council is on their draft agenda. Next Council meeting will be held on 16 April.  Congratulations by Bart to Stephen and Eberhard.

3.                   Rules of Engagement first discussion (attached)

Adjusted version from RoE used by ccPDP3-ret WG. Good starting point for this WG. 

Line numbers and page numbers are included.

This is the first reading of the RoE. The second (and final) reading will be done during the next meeting, when the Chair and Vice Chair start their roles as part of the leadership team.

The Charter is paramount, in case of conflict. It structures the working method, and is a fall back method, in case there is unclarity in the proceedings of the WG.

Review on a page-by-page basis. If you wish to comment, kindly refer to the line number.

Line 18. Paragraph added by Eberhard. If we have less than 5 members, the question should be raised whether the meeting is happening or not. Not fair, to count the meeting as a first reading for instance.  Most people are in agreement to include this in the text. 
Line 17. Meeting scheduled to close after 90 minutes at the latest. We try to end the meeting after 60 minutes.
Line 25-28: any questions/comments? None
Line 30-34. Comment by Eberhard. Language is difficult to understand. Stephen agrees. To be rephrased. The point is: 2 readings. No decisions made, unless it was discussed at least twice.

Members and other participants: all participate on equal footing. Only when it comes to a voting, there is a clear distinction between members and participants, observers, experts. Only members can vote.
Line 30-34: Suggestion by Peter Koch. replace negative phrasing by positive, definition style. “there will always be a first and a second reading, …
Chapter 2: rules of order. Eberhard mentioned this was added, just in case. No surprised during the process
Line 62. Anna: what does “in advance” mean? Response: If meetings get consistently out of order, the leadership team will send a notification to the mailing list. E.g. everyone only allowed 1 contribution. To protect everyone that wants to speak, and prevent that somebody dominates the discussion. In advance, since the rules of the game will not be changed in the middle of a call. 
Line 70-72: Peter commented. Minority statements are mentioned in the footnote? Answer: included in the Charter. The footnote is just a clarification.
Line 74-76: Background clarification by Eberhard. if the group decides to change the rules, 2 readings are needed.
Line 79-81. Comments by Eberhard. Replace the “chair” by the “Working Group”. Rephrase also “paramount” with “prevails”. Peter supports the second suggestion. Nick as well. Everything deferred to the Chair, in line with chapter 5 of the document.
Bart: reason for including this, is to avoid a stalemate. The Chair can only do something with support of the WG itself. 

Action item #2:

Secretariat to revise the draft Rules of Engagement, based on today’s discussion, ahead of the second reading during the next meeting

4.                   Current procedures, which may be relevant and/or are related. 

a.                   PTI escalation process

Presentation by Naela. PTI Customer complaint process, and how it escalates throughout the organisation. Complaint form from a customer about an IANA service. Who can use the form? A party PTI worked with, or someone impacted by the activities. Form is included on the IANA.org website, and in the How Did We Do survey (HDWD).

Explanation about the “swimming lane” of the escalation process.

ICANN ombudsman process is outside of the IANA team.

Question by Peter Koch: multi-tier appeals chain. Upper parts only look at procedural issues. Substance in the lower part. Confirmed by Naela that this is the case.

Question by Nick: how many people use this? Do we have numbers? Naela confirmed it is rarely used. 4 times in the last 3 years. Each escalation is reported to the Customer Standing Committee (CSC). cases went up to the PTI President. No examples regarding specific cases.

Questions by Angela. Do all complaints have to start with the specialist? Are their complaints that go directly to management? How do you prioritise complaints? Naela confirmed that complaints also come in via other channels. People approaching Kim Davies directly for instance. Those that receive the complaint, insert it in the ticketing system. No prioritisation, since the number of complaints is so low.

Remedial Action Procedure, by the CSC

Deferred to the next meeting

Other ICANN related potential relevant procedures:  
i.Reconsideration 

ii.IRP

iii.Ombudsman,

iv.Other procedures:  Arbitrage through some of the Accountability Frameworks & exchange of letters (ICC Rules of Arbitration)

6.                   AOB

none

6.                   Next meetings

In 2 weeks time. 22 April 2020 (00:00 UTC - midnight)

7.                   Closure

Joke Braeken

ccNSO Policy Advisor 

joke.braeken at icann.org

Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccNSO [twitter.com]

Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/ [facebook.com]

http://ccnso.icann.org [ccnso.icann.org] 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccpdp-rm/attachments/20200408/a95fa006/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4583 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccpdp-rm/attachments/20200408/a95fa006/smime-0001.p7s>