[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from today's CCWG AP meeting

Mon Oct 23 01:33:19 UTC 2017

Two changes for the consideration of the DT.  Alan

At 19/10/2017 10:59 AM, Marika Konings wrote:

>Dear All,
>
>Please find below the notes and action items 
>from todayâ€™s CCWG meeting. Please take 
>particular note of the action items and associated deadlines.
>
>Best regards,
>
>Marika
>
>Notes & Action Items â€“ new gTLD Auction 
>Proceeds CCWG Meeting on 19 October 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://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=>https://community.icann.org/x/DLHDAw.
>
>1. Roll Call
>    * Attendance will be taken from Adobe Connect
>    * Please state your name before speaking and 
> remember to mute your mics/computers when not speaking
>
>2. Welcome / DOI
>    * Please remember to keep your DOI/SOI up to date
>
>3. Review of open and interoperable Internet description
>    * A number of comments were received 
> following the circulation of the proposed draft 
> by the Drafting Team earlier this week
>    * Some updates have already been made in 
> response to the comments made (see version up 
> on the screen during meeting), but additional 
> comments were received since then.
>    * CCWG requested to review latest version 
> and encouraged to provide input on open issues 
> (highlighted in yellow) as well as any other issues people may want to flag.
>
>Action item #1: CCWG to review latest version 
>and provide comments / input (see attached) by COB on Sunday 22 Oct.
>Action item #2: DT to review / address remaining 
>comments and share proposed final version in 
>time for final review by CCWG at next meeting (at ICANN60).
>
>4. Review of examples (see 
>https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zQ66hCxrboAJPKeuU6nHwzHQwmU6g_3kS0JUSSC_tSk/edit[docs.google.com]) 
>
>    * See summary document circulated on mailing list yesterday
>    * Note that proposed draft CCWG conclusion 
> is currently based on fairly limited input so 
> important for all to review to make sure it aligns with the CCWG's perspective
>    * Idea is to share the CCWG conclusions with 
> board & staff liaisons to obtain their input 
> and assess whether there is alignment between 
> the perspectives on what is deemed consistent with ICANN's mission.
>
>Action item #3: Staff to upload latest version 
>as Google Doc and share as Word doc
>Action item #4: CCWG to review proposed CCWG 
>conclusions re. examples identified and provide 
>feedback before start of ICANN60.
>
>5. Next steps in relation to charter question 7 
>â€˜(â€˜Should ICANN oversee the solicitation and 
>evaluation of proposals, or delegate to or 
>coordinate with another entity, including, for 
>example, a foundation created for this purpose?â€™)
>    * Based on the presentation during the last 
> meeting, there are three different scenarios 
> that are to be considered but it is deemed too 
> early to make a preliminary determination as further details is needed.
>    * Consider running another survey to ask 
> CCWG to indicate preference at this point in 
> time to help inform deliberations (not to come 
> to preliminary agreement at this stage) and ask 
> to identify what the main criteria are to make 
> a final determination at a later point in time 
> (for example, overall cost to ICANN or ability to provide oversight by ICANN).
>    * All three scenarios would be considered as 
> mechanisms are considered in the next phase of 
> the work. Once further details are available as 
> a result of further deliberations, another 
> survey could be conducted to help inform a final decision.
>
>Action item #5: Staff to run short survey to 
>obtain further input on this question.
>
>6. Planning for ICANN60
>    * In order to take full advantage of the F2F 
> time and recognising that the CCWG is ready to 
> embark on the next phase of its work (phase 3 - 
> Compile list of possible mechanisms that could 
> be considered by CCWG), set up first session as 
> a whiteboarding exercise to flesh out the 
> different possible mechanism, incl. pros/cons, criteria, etc.
>    * Erika has taken a first stab at developing 
> a skeleton framework for the whiteboarding 
> session. Skeleton framework will be shared 
> shortly after the meeting for CCWG input prior to ICANN60.
>    * Staff will aim to summarize input from 
> first session for review at second session, 
> noting that no final decisions or 
> determinations will be made at ICANN60 as not 
> everyone may be available to participate.
>    * This exercise is intended to inform which 
> mechanisms would be considered in further 
> detail during the next phase of work in which 
> the charter questions are to be answered from 
> the perspective of the different mechanism(s) 
> the CCWG agrees to pursue further.
>
>Action item #6: Staff to circulate skeleton 
>framework to CCWG for input prior to ICANN60
>
>7. Confirm next steps and next meetings 
>(Thursday 02 November 2017 - 8:45– 10:15 Working 
>Grouup F2F Meeting in Hall B Section B/C and 
>13:30 – 15:00 WWorking Group F2F Meeting in Hall B Section B/C)
>
>Marika Konings
>Vice President, Policy Development Support – 
>GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
>Email: <mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>marika.konings at icann.org
>
>Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO
>Find out more about the GNSO by taking our 
><http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso>interactive 
>courses and visiting the 
><http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-efforts.htm#newcomers>GNSO 
>Newcomer pages.
>
>Content-Type: 
>application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document;
>         name="ICANN - Open Internet definition 
> working group discussion 19 Oct 17 -"
>  comments in TC.docx"
>Content-Description: ICANN - Open Internet definition working group discussion
>  19 Oct 17 - comments in TC.docx
>Content-Disposition: attachment;
>         filename="ICANN - Open Internet 
> definition working group discussion 19 Oct 17"
>  - comments in TC.docx"; size=21722;
>         creation-date="Thu, 19 Oct 2017 14:59:58 GMT";
>         modification-date="Thu, 19 Oct 2017 14:59:58 GMT"
>Content-ID: <1701BF7229858141A43A306F55980BCA at pexch112.icann.org>
>X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:
> 
>1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:dTZmOpLHos/jKXnFpjY95RKqZR1MoYUe7LbA7c8EFsYO7wd5gyb0NbRNSIxAeZyaqYo5SI2j+aoBVIGuyvdpcX3jAlMTON2Jp+51ADRxE1e3k1QVk0F8VZuNiLYAeNGG
>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Content-Disposition: inline
>X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:
> 
>1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:dTZmOpLHos/jKXnFpjY95RKqZR1MoYUe7LbA7c8EFsYO7wd5gyb0NbRNSIxAeZyaqYo5SI2j+aoBVIGuyvdpcX3jAlMTON2Jp+51ADRxE1e3k1QVk0F8VZuNiLYAeNGG
>
>_______________________________________________
>Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
>Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-auctionproceeds/attachments/20171022/16df0236/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ICANN - Open Internet definition working group discussion 19 Oct 17-ag.docx
Type: application/msword
Size: 25893 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-auctionproceeds/attachments/20171022/16df0236/ICANN-OpenInternetdefinitionworkinggroupdiscussion19Oct17-ag-0001.docx>