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

Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez G. carlosraulg at gmail.com
Thu Dec 15 13:05:20 UTC 2016


I fully agree with James´ view. We have now a formally defined 
framework for CCWGs and we have to show if ti is the most convenient one 
for ongoing processes, or if another one would be more efficient.

Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez
+506 8837 7176
Skype: carlos.raulg
Current UTC offset: -6.00 (Costa Rica)
On 14 Dec 2016, at 16:17, 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
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
> --
> Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
> http://www.gih.com/ocl.html[gih.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.gih.com_ocl.html&d=DgMF-g&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=RrrXyaBfa00GH1liTedM3FwobVakuhJ-qs1N8-Ji8VE&m=rV5iUEyisLZxeegKMafT8kIiXya1e18XgDcart_Nx6k&s=BzzM75q7NfnxhkC6SThIzhp5Kcj2qKzcSACfBIXCLjM&e=>


> _______________________________________________
> ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
> ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-internet-governance/attachments/20161215/389430d5/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the ccwg-internet-governance mailing list