[ccwg-internet-governance] Fwd: [council] AMENDMENT - Motion on Conditional Participation of the GNSO as a Chartering Organization for CCWG-IG

matthew shears mshears at cdt.org
Thu Dec 15 00:48:24 UTC 2016


I don't think that we should assume that the work warrants a CCWG.  We 
should consider it among a range of options that will give the WG the 
best opportunity to function productively and efficiently and show 
relevance to the community.


Matthew


On 14/12/2016 17:17, James Gannon wrote:
> Im sorry but I must chime in here, its not that simple, there is a 
> framework for CCWGs and its up to the CCWG-IG to show how it can 
> conform to this framework, its not enough to just say well we have to 
> be one. This attitude is one of the reasons the original motion was 
> brought to council.
>
> -James
>
> From: <ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org 
> <mailto:ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of 
> Nigel Hickson <nigel.hickson at icann.org <mailto:nigel.hickson at icann.org>>
> Date: Wednesday 14 December 2016 at 20:45
> To: Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com 
> <mailto:marilynscade at hotmail.com>>, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond 
> <ocl at gih.com <mailto:ocl at gih.com>>, Greg Shatan 
> <gregshatanipc at gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>>, farzaneh 
> badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com <mailto:farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>>
> Cc: "ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org 
> <mailto:ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>" 
> <ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org 
> <mailto:ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>>
> Subject: Re: [ccwg-internet-governance] Fwd: [council] AMENDMENT - 
> Motion on Conditional Participation of the GNSO as a Chartering 
> Organization for CCWG-IG
>
> Good evening
>
> I completely agree; the work we do is of a status, comparatively 
> speaking, that warrants us as a CCWG,
>
> Best
>
> Nigel
>
> From: <ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org 
> <mailto:ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of 
> Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com <mailto:marilynscade at hotmail.com>>
> Date: Wednesday 14 December 2016 13:55
> To: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com <mailto:ocl at gih.com>>, Greg 
> Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>>, 
> farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com 
> <mailto:farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>>
> Cc: ccwg <ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org 
> <mailto:ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>>
> Subject: Re: [ccwg-internet-governance] Fwd: [council] AMENDMENT - 
> Motion on Conditional Participation of the GNSO as a Chartering 
> Organization for CCWG-IG
>
> before we suggest that we are not a legitimate CCWG, I prefer that we 
> try to assuage the objections and explain to those who are not perhaps 
> aware of the challenges to ICANN that continue and why the CCWG -- 
> which is cross community is important to continue.
>
> M
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:*ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org 
> <mailto:ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org> 
> <ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org 
> <mailto:ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of 
> Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com <mailto:ocl at gih.com>>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 14, 2016 1:12 PM
> *To:* Greg Shatan; farzaneh badii
> *Cc:* ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org 
> <mailto:ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [ccwg-internet-governance] Fwd: [council] AMENDMENT - 
> Motion on Conditional Participation of the GNSO as a Chartering 
> Organization for CCWG-IG
> Thanks for your eager follow-up everyone.
>
> Rafik and I have held a call with Nigel Hickson and Desiree Cabrera 
> earlier today. From this call came several action items:
>
> 1. The Doodle Poll which has appeared in your mailboxes. Please fill 
> it ASAP so we can choose a good time for our next call. This call will 
> understandably be a process call for the CCWG IG. In this call, we 
> were going to propose the further AIs below:
>
> 2. Propose to the CCWG-IG a two-pronged approach in response to the 
> GNSO's request:
> - review the current Charter by putting it into a table & pointing out 
> its discrepancies with the guidelines for CCWGs as ratified by the 
> GNSO Council. Can these discrepancies be fixed? Can the CCWG continue 
> to operate as a CCWG with amendments made to its charter so it fits 
> into a CCWG box?
> - Rafik has obtained from GNSO Staff a list of other vehicles that 
> could be used to accomplish the CCWG's mandate. (attached is a DRAFT 
> table on GNSO Structures & Mechanisms that could be helpful) - we were 
> going to suggest studying the other vehicles, perhaps proposing a mix 
> of vehicles that have already been tried and tested. (so there is a 
> precedent)
>
> 3. Proposal for the drafting of an Annual Review of Working Group 
> activities
>
> To include:
>     - Some of staff reports on CSTD, WTSA etc.
>     - Report on WSIS Forum in Geneva - including the note on the CCWG 
> IG workshop there
>     - Reports Rafik and I have made for GNSO in Marrakech & Helsinki 
> (can take from transcripts)
>     - Staff report from IGF workshops in Guagdalajara - on topics that 
> affect ICANN
>
> Rafik and I were told that there were staff resources available to 
> facilitate the drafting of this Annual Review, but that with the 
> holiday period approaching, we should aim at a mid-January date for 
> this. It is well understood that much of our problems have stemmed 
> from having very little reporting done back to our respective 
> chartering SOs and ACs, so having an annual report appears to be 
> helpful. We could also have monthly reporting starting from January.
>
> Finally, on the suggestion made by Greg to have a sub-drafting team, I 
> am all for this; I do not think that Charter discussions are the cup 
> of tea for everyone participating in the CCWG, thus we can form a 
> small group quickly and it would be great if the sub-group to start 
> operations by our next call.
>
> Kindest regards,
>
> Olivier
>
>
>
> On 14/12/2016 17:53, Greg Shatan wrote:
>> I suggest we assemble a (Re-)Drafting Team and get on with it.
>>
>> Marilyn has volunteered.
>> It might be a fair assumption that Keith and Farzi have "volunteered" 
>> as well, by replying to this email.  (Which probably means I have 
>> volunteered too).
>> Whether or not that's a fair assumption, I think we need some 
>> non-GNSO participation in the drafting team to round things out 
>> (Marilyn, Keith, Farzi and I are all similarly afflicted, though with 
>> different strains of the GNSO virus).  A preponderance of GNSO folk 
>> is fine (especially since the GNSO is the "inspiration" for this 
>> project), but we should be somewhat more diverse than that.... 
>>  (Farzi no longer even gives us geographic diversity, since she's now 
>> a North American Georgia Peach, or Georgia Tech Yellow Jacket, or 
>> something like that...)
>>
>> Let's not wait until the meeting next week to get this going.  
>> Wouldn't it be nice to have a progress report at next week's meeting 
>> instead?
>>
>> Any other volunteers?
>>
>> Anyone volunteering to chair?  (Not I, with apologies, I'm 
>> chaired-out at the moment.)
>>
>> Greg
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 11:15 AM, farzaneh badii 
>> <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com <mailto:farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     Thanks Keith for bringing this up again. I think we need to start
>>     doing something about it and we have to start soon.
>>
>>     On 14 December 2016 at 11:10, Drazek, Keith <kdrazek at verisign.com
>>     <mailto:kdrazek at verisign.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         Hi all,
>>
>>         Is there a plan to get this process started? Copenhagen will
>>         be here before we know it.
>>
>>         Regards,
>>
>>         Keith
>>
>>         Keith Drazek
>>
>>         Vice President
>>
>>         Public Policy & Government Relations
>>
>>         Verisign, Inc.
>>
>>         +1-571-377-9182 <tel:+1%20571-377-9182>
>>
>>         kdrazek at verisign.com <mailto:kdrazek at verisign.com>
>>
>>         *From:*ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org
>>         <mailto:ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org>
>>         [mailto:ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org
>>         <mailto:ccwg-internet-governance-bounces at icann.org>] *On
>>         Behalf Of *Rafik Dammak
>>         *Sent:* Monday, November 07, 2016 4:10 AM
>>         *To:* ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
>>         <mailto:ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>
>>         *Subject:* [ccwg-internet-governance] Fwd: [council]
>>         AMENDMENT - Motion on Conditional Participation of the GNSO
>>         as a Chartering Organization for CCWG-IG
>>
>>         Hi everyone,
>>
>>         GNSO council just approved unanimously this motion. It is
>>         still chartering organization but we got work to do by
>>         Copenhagen meeting.
>>
>>         Best,
>>
>>         Rafik
>>         ---
>>         >
>>         > 2. MOTION – Conditional participation of the GNSO as a
>>         Chartering Organization for the Cross Community Working Group
>>         to discuss Internet governance (CWG-IG) issues affecting ICANN
>>         >
>>         > Made by: Darcy Southwell
>>         >
>>         > Seconded by:
>>         >
>>         >
>>         >
>>         > WHEREAS:
>>         >
>>         > a)      The GNSO Council adopted the charter for a Cross
>>         Community Working Group to discuss Internet governance
>>         (CWG-IG) issues affecting ICANN and make recommendations to
>>         the chartering organization on these issues on 15 October
>>         2014, and as such became a Chartering Organization.
>>         >
>>         > b)      The Charter foresees that “At each ICANN Annual
>>         General Meeting, starting 2014, the Charter and deliverables
>>         of the WG shall be reviewed by the participating SO’s and
>>         AC’s to determine whether the WG should continue, or, close
>>         and be dissolved. Consistent with ICANN community practices,
>>         the WG will continue if at least two of the participating
>>         SO’s or AC’s extend the Charter of the WG and notify the
>>         other participating SO’s and AC’s accordingly one month after
>>         the annual review date”.
>>         >
>>         > c)      The CWG-IG provided its first written status update
>>         on 23 June 2016 (see
>>         https://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/ccwg-internet-governance-23jun16-en.pdf[gnso.icann.org]
>>         <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_drafts_ccwg-2Dinternet-2Dgovernance-2D23jun16-2Den.pdf&d=DgMF-g&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=RrrXyaBfa00GH1liTedM3FwobVakuhJ-qs1N8-Ji8VE&m=rV5iUEyisLZxeegKMafT8kIiXya1e18XgDcart_Nx6k&s=HQSOqNAYgl1t2Fxm0G9KfvTXeFoJOFE2Vmau-hwdp0M&e=>).
>>         >
>>         > d)      The GNSO Council recently adopted the “Uniform
>>         Framework of Principles and Recommendations for Cross
>>         Community Working Groups” (CWG Framework) which details the
>>         lifecycle of a CCWG including initiation, formation,
>>         operation, decision-making, adoption of Final Report by
>>         Chartering Organizations and closure of CCWG, and
>>         post-closure of CCWG.
>>         >
>>         > e)      The GNSO Council has observed that the CWG-IG does
>>         not follow this lifecycle, nor has it established or adopted
>>         an initial work plan and associated schedule as foreseen in
>>         its Charter.
>>         >
>>         > f)       The GNSO Council recognizes the importance of a
>>         continued dialogue and discussion in relation to the topic of
>>         Internet Governance within an ICANN context.
>>         >
>>         > g)      The GNSO Council has shared its concerns with the
>>         ccNSO Council and representatives of other SO/ACs on the
>>         subject of this CWG and its future.
>>         >
>>         >
>>         >
>>         > RESOLVED:
>>         >
>>         > a)      The GNSO Council will continue to participate as a
>>         Chartering Organization for the CWG-IG. However, this
>>         participation is conditioned upon a comprehensive review of
>>         the CWG-IG Charter by the CWG-IG, in accordance with the CWG
>>         Framework
>>         (http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/uniform-framework-principles-recommendations-16sep16-en.pdf[gnso.icann.org]
>>         <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_drafts_uniform-2Dframework-2Dprinciples-2Drecommendations-2D16sep16-2Den.pdf&d=DgMF-g&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=RrrXyaBfa00GH1liTedM3FwobVakuhJ-qs1N8-Ji8VE&m=rV5iUEyisLZxeegKMafT8kIiXya1e18XgDcart_Nx6k&s=idhdGmymJga9P7KWocGrZW0PxwJ0CokvgwTeTcG8Z0M&e=>).
>>         In particular, the GNSO Council expects future work to be
>>         subject to a clear work plan, with regular updates and clear
>>         deliverables.
>>         >
>>         > b)      The GNSO Council expects that the CWG-IG will
>>         present by ICANN58 a report on its findings, which may
>>         include a revised charter or a recommendation to reconstitute
>>         the group under a new structure.
>>         >
>>         > c) Following the submission of the CWG-IG report, the GNSO
>>         Council will consider the recommendations and decide whether
>>         or not it will continue as a Chartering Organization.
>>         >
>>         > d)      The GNSO Secretariat will communicate this decision
>>         to the CWG-IG Chairs as well as the other Chartering
>>         Organizations.
>>         >
>>         >
>>
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
>>         ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
>>         <mailto:ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>
>>         https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance
>>         <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     -- 
>>     Farzaneh
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
>>     ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
>>     <mailto:ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>
>>     https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance
>>     <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
>> ccwg-internet-governance at icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance
>
> -- 
> Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
> http://www.gih.com/ocl.html[gih.com]
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
> ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance

-- 
------------
Matthew Shears
Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
+ 44 771 2472987



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-internet-governance/attachments/20161214/e6fb81a8/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the ccwg-internet-governance mailing list