[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes: New gTLD Auction Proceeds Cross Community Working Group call, 13 April @14UTC

Thu Apr 13 15:54:27 UTC 2017

Dear All,

Please find below the notes and action items from today’s meeting. Note that the next meeting has been scheduled for Thursday 27 April 2017 at 14:00 UTC for 90 minutes.

As per action item #6:

CCWG Charter Question 1 - Template - 6 April 2017<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/64079622/CCWG%20Charter%20Question%201%20-%20Template%20-%206%20April%202017.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1491915638000&api=v2>
CCWG Charter Question 3 - Template - 11 April 2017<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/64079622/CCWG%20Charter%20Question%203%20-%20Template%20-%2011%20April%202017.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1491915781000&api=v2>
CCWG input on charter questions: see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QN7zarCr2c2BVv3pfa6Z5O10pDcgHSIQ5Q3CBdX2WE[docs.google.com]<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QN7zarCr2c2BVv3pfa6Z5O10pDcgHSIQ5Q3CBdX2WE%5Bdocs.google.com%5D>

Best regards,

Joke Braeken

Notes - new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG - 13 April 2017

1. Roll Call
Please state your name for transcript purposes.

2. Welcome - DOI updates
Welcome by co-chair Ching Chiao. Aplogies noted in the AdobeConnect room.
Please notify any updates to your DOI to staff. We keep track of the DOI via the Group's wiki space.
The wiki page has now been updated per our discussion on the previous meeting: https://community.icann.org/x/FpjDAw[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_FpjDAw&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=HyTT2ymvadmiQcmo6B088sWOukGjEbibHJ64u5rMiME&m=D5_er56w2j_G_hMSiThA5S3TN1oBi4s0evOhl3NOdz8&s=P2qSPMp01D9-Ep_F_Cmn93XnYeZWbTEDZtgxQ8CQLIc&e=>

Co-chair Erika Mann takes over. Separate column added for the comments received for Q6.
The many comments are appreciated. The chair hopes the additional clarification sent after the previous call was helpful.

3. Review CCWG Response to ICANN Board
Timetable has not been set yet. The letter needs to be sent out asap.
This letter is an acknowledgement of the Board's input. The comments will factor in on the deliberations on the charter questions.

--> bullet point 1

--> bullet point 2

CCWG's budget: staff travel, should be mentioned explicitly that this is not covered by the CCWG budget.  The CCWG-AP staff support is indeed provided. CCWG principles also apply here.

#action 1: budget - to be rephrased and clarified in the draft letter by staff.

Which line items: only the one for "staff travel"? To be clarified, before it will be addressed in the letter back to the Board.

Which areas do we need support on? What areas of support is needed, and draft a budget accordingly.
In terms of checking costs, sugest checking language of charter as starting point and then take the forecasting approach suggested by Asha, if required.

#action 2: staff to consult with Xavier Calvez on the budget. Proposal then to be discussed in this group.

First step is to start with the budget for the first round. If needed, come up with second set of figures.

--> bullet point 3

Keep the 5%: there is a common understanding on this.

--> bullet point 4

"wide net"
The most import issue is for the group is to understand what the purpose for spending this money is. What is that we want to do with this funding?  That is the first question to be answered. Secondly, how far do you cast the net, with respect to applicants? Once the first question has been answered, some follow-up questions need to be answered.

The Board's concerns:
a) broad participation is needed and
b) figure out the goals & objectives of the funds

Wide net = broader audience than usual. Steve Crocker was being clear that he wanted as broad as possible participation in CCWG, including from outside "normal" ICANN circles.

#action 3: staff to review the current language, and if needed clarify along the following lines. To be clarified:
- defining of the process
- who can access the funds?

--> bullet point 5

Concern of the board: be mindful of the potential conflicts of interest. The DOI is available, and needs to be kept updated. What do we want to accomplish with this fund? Once this question has been answered, it will be easier to understand which potential conflicts are there, and how to address them.  What we are concerned about is clear transparency about where individual members/observers are coming from.

#action 4: staff will make updates to the letter as suggested. The group will be given one week time to review the revised version and comment. The updated version will then be put again on the agenda for the next call, in 2 weeks time.

4. Recap proposed approach and next steps work plan

Approach proposed for dealing with the charter questions. This will help to shape the work plan.  We start an initial run-through of the charter questions. e.g. Are there any gating questions? do we have an understanding of what is being asked here? Other questions that are linked?
The assumption is that a limited amount of options is available.
This will feed into the work plan. Once we look into the 1st charter question, we have a better prediction of how the overall work plan will look, and how much time we need.

5. charter question 1

Staff developed a template to help guide the conversation:
- summary of the initial responses
- order in which the questions should be dealt with
- sub-questions or clarifications needed?
- (external) expertise needed?

A conversation on this would be helpful, in order to be able to move to the next chartering question.
Next step: this needs to be done for all of the chartering questions.

The question was raised on how do we reach consensus? When do we  move to the next step?
The importance of the DOI is critical, just like the goals and objectives for these funds.  Once the goals and objectives are clear, it will help us in clarifying the mechanisms. This is something for the group to keep in mind, in terms of the order of the chartering questions.

The questions were grouped: legal-related, and scope-related. (E.g. Q2 - limitations of fund allocations. Extension for this: what is the overall objective?)
Shall we proceed first with the legal questions? Is there something that we need to dive into, before we move on to the next step?

Suggested is to continue with question number 3 after this one.  We need to have an understanding of what the gating questions will be, but at the same time do not need to worry about the order at this point in time.  Charter question number 2 is goals-objective related.

#action 5: The 2 templates will be re-sent by staff to the group, including the link to the google doc used as a basis for this document.   The group is invited to continue updating the google doc.

6. charter question 3

clear. to be reviewed in 2 weeks time.

a. planning ICANN59

The need for a face-to-face meeting. Duration : preferably 2h.
Doodle poll was sent out, asking whether people :
- participate in person
- participate remotely
- do not participate

Request to meet still needs to be presented to the GNSO Council. The policy forum is a 4-day meeting, focussed on SO/AC policy development.  If the meeting will happen, it will be a 90-min meeting, based on the availability in the block schedule.

b. confirm next meeting

Thu 27 April at 14.00 UTC

Best regards,

Joke Braeken
ccNSO Policy Advisor
joke.braeken at icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken at icann.org>

Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccNSO
Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/
http://ccnso.icann.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-auctionproceeds/attachments/20170413/84394ea7/attachment-0001.html>