[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes and action items from today's CCWG Auction Proceeds meeting

Thu May 25 15:57:28 UTC 2017

Dear All,

Please find below the notes and action items from today’s CCWG Auction Proceeds meeting.

Best regards,

Marika

Notes CCWG Auction Proceeds Meeting – 25 May 2017

These high-level notes are designed to help the CCWG navigate through the content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the transcript and/or recording. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately and are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/x/DLHDAw[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_DLHDAw&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=4zHolvsBo6lsC2fsFnhbQd0l8fVzyqdj0t9oV6_NWjM&s=-vuUpZTVZXrpFcq3-nA--Ltl_ESCT71X4cBhx3axkEY&e=>.

1) Roll Call

·         Roll call will be taken from Adobe Connect

·         Please state your name before speaking for transcription purposes and remember to mute your lines when not speaking

2) Welcome / DOI

·         Response to ICANN Board has been sent and has been posted under the correspondence on the wiki page (see https://community.icann.org/x/V7XRAw)

3) Input received on letter to chartering organizations concerning work plan and approach for dealing with charter questions

·         Draft was circulated to the list. A number of edits were suggested (see version shared during the call).

·         If there are no further comments / edits, the letter will be sent to the chartering organizations on behalf of the CCWG Co-Chairs.

·         Need to clarify #2 to make clear what is meant here (notion of gating questions that need to be addressed before CCWG can make a determination on which mechanisms have the most potential). Consider adding a 'further detailed response' to #2.

Action item #1: Staff to add clarification after first paragraph to clarify how the CCWG has dealt with the charter questions to facilitate understanding of different steps as well as updating #2 as discussed.

4) Initial run through of charter question 4

·         See template distributed.

·         May be difficult to discuss this without further details on the mechanism. May make sense to postpone this question until an exchange of views can take place with experts. Is it helpful to debate this question now or is it better to discuss it once the CCWG has had a chance to discuss this with experts from other organizations & a better understanding of how this has been dealt with in similar situations.

·         Also linked to question of overhead.

5) Initial run through of charter question 6

·         See template distributed

·         Note that question has been answered from two different perspectives: 1) does it relate to those applying or 2) does it relate to where/target audience for projects, or both. Add this to sub-questions.

·         Link is also to charter question 2 - overall objective may determine to a certain extent the response to this question.

·         No % reservation at this stage, may only become clear at the moment of applications received whether something like that is needed. Fund allocation will be constrained by ICANN's mission so that will be determining factor. There are also underdeveloped regions within developed regions - those should not be excluded.

·         Need to be focused on beneficiaries not organizations.

·         Should be clear that funds are being used to e.g. .help people in need, disadvantaged, underpriviliged etc. to make sure that the funds are allocated to those that need it most or priority is given to those, but not restrict it in a geographic sense. May not be easy to identify 'need' though.

·         The use of the funds has to be within ICANN's Mission, in addition, our Core Commitments require ICANN Seeking and supporting broad, informed participation reflecting the functional, geographic, and cultural diversity of the Internet at all levels of policy development and decision-making to ensure that the bottom up,multistakeholder policy development process is used to ascertain the global public interest and that those processes are accountable and transparent.

·         At this point, don't set preferences or priorities in recipient groups - too prescriptive at this stage.

·         Will have to come back to this question at a later point in time.

·         Funds shoulds be easily accessible to those from developing countries. Mechanism shouldn't limit participation from developing world.

·         There may also be important research projects e.g. relating DNSSEC that would have an important impact on the impact which would not necessarily focus on those 'in need'. Those should not be excluded. We need to keep an opening for core SSR issues in either an R&D or operational context.

·         Shouldn't fund projects that would normally be funded out of the ICANN budget.

Action item #2: Staff to update template accordingly.

Action item #3: Elliot and Alan to frame their proposals in response to this charter question so that it may be possible to poll the CCWG on these proposals during a future meeting.

6) Initial run through of charter question 8, if time allows

·         See template distributed

·         Overhead has different meaning in different context - it may mean overhead for administering the program, but could also mean overhead for those administering projects that are funded. Important to be specific and define.

·         This topic will also be addressed during the briefing on 15 June on audit requirements. What is considered overhead? Xavier to work on a briefing document to address some of the comments / questions raised by the CCWG.

Action item #4: Staff to update template accordingly

Action item #5: Xavier to provide briefing document on audit requirements either pre- or post briefing on 15 June.

7) Identification of external experts - reminder (see https://community.icann.org/x/DAnfAw)

See https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QtwFa9nCIMq8JYCtBHxAyQraWQ6M-iNNP4Kyq6q9Cds/edit

Action item #6: CCWG to review list and to add experts and/or contact details

8) Confirm next meeting – 8 June at 14.00 UTC (Note, this meeting is followed by a meeting on 15 June during which Xavier Calvez will provide a briefing on audit requirements. The meeting on 22 June will be cancelled due to its proximity to ICANN59)

Marika Konings
Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Email: marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>

Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO
Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-efforts.htm#newcomers>.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-auctionproceeds/attachments/20170525/4e1cb0c6/attachment-0001.html>