[ccwg-internet-governance] Scheduling meetings at ICANN63
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond
ocl at gih.com
Wed Oct 10 08:29:26 UTC 2018
thanks for your kind email, kicking off the discussion about the F2F
Please be so kind to find my comments inline:
On 10/10/2018 07:42, farzaneh badii wrote:
> For the F2F the description says that you want to brief the crowd
> about the CCEG charter. Last thing I found about the charter from you
> is here:
> Can you please also brief the members of this CCWG-IG? Sorry I know I
> am back from the dead, I regained my ability to travel and really
> thought it would be a shame not to follow up on this group. I used to
> be NCSG rep, but GNSO is not the chartering org anymore so I would
> like to know how you are progressing with this charter. Was it sent to
> GNSO Council?
You are right, you are all due an update. The status is as follows:
1. The responses to the ccNSO questions were sent on 15 August 2018,
with a reminder on 28 August 2018. An acknowledgement from the ccNSO
Chair was received on 29 August 2018.
2. I have been told that the matter is being discussed in the ccNSO
Council, but we have thus far not received any formal response,
3. Rafik Dammak, GNSO Vice Chair, was CC'ed on the 15 August 2018 email
to Katrina Sataki. A follow-up email from me on 18th August yielded the
response from Rafik on 20th August that the email with all answers to
ccNSO has been shared with the GNSO Chair. A follow-up from Rafik
informed me that the topic of CCWG/CCEG will be on the GNSO's ICANN
4. I have been invited to the GNSO Session on Sunday 21st October to
discuss the CCEG and answer and questions about the proposed charter. A
time has not yet been defined.
5. The ccNSO is meeting with the ALAC on Sunday 21st October at
17:00-18:30 and one of the three topics currently on the agenda is
ICANN's activities in IG, which includes the CCWG/CCEG
My visibility is such that at present I do not know if the ccNSO is
conducting discussions with the GNSO about the CCWG/CCEG and I would
appreciate if someone in the know from GNSO or ccNSO might be able to
inform us on this.
> You said in your August email:
> "The plan is that once the responses are sent to the ccNSO Chair, a copy
> of this response will also be sent to the GNSO Chair +Vice Chairs. This
> should trigger a discussion between the two SOs, if their so desire, and
> we are hoping to receive further replies concerning suggested amendments.
> As a kind reminder, an action item from the Panama Face to Face meeting
> was to complete the transition from CCWG to a CCEG Charter by, or at the
> ICANN Barcelona meeting."
> Was the charter sent to CCNSO and GNSO? Are GNSO and CCNSO talking
> about it? Will they talk about it in Barcelona? I'll be sad if this
> group doesn't meet its deadline for finalizing the charter. I think we
> started some time ago.
I agree. The ball is in the GNSO and the ccNSO's court. I have followed
up on several occasions, but there has so far been very little response
from both supporting organisations. I am still hoping that if we have
satisfied the GNSO and ccNSO, they could act in Barcelona voicing their
support and the CCEG could be chartered either at the meeting or within
a reasonable time after the Barcelona meeting.
Having this matter pending brings confusion in the space, because nobody
really knows if it is supported or not by any SO/AC and it also is
wasting much of our time as an unproductive procedural item that pop up
at each of our F2F meetings.
> Can we know what we will be talking about with the Board?
Yes. Matthew Shears and I have met in the interim and our aim is to not
only discuss how the BWG IG and the CCWG/CCEG can work better together -
we have discussed that ad-nauseum already in past F2F meetings - , but
to get both groups to work together towards a common strategy on
Internet Governance. In this meeting, we need to take concrete steps on
the actual topics and leave procedure aside.
With the Global IGF and the ITU Plenipot just around the corner, we need
> By the way ... I think some people are ahead of us in discussing
> IGO/UN/National initiatives that might affect ICANN :)
The agenda for this GAC HLM is ambitious. I can certainly imagine that
some of the discussions with the BWG IG would focus on the outcomes of
that meeting and on what has been heard there.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ccwg-internet-governance