<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none;"><!-- P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;} --></style>
</head>
<body dir="ltr">
<div id="divtagdefaultwrapper" style="font-size:12pt;color:#000000;background-color:#FFFFFF;font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">
<p>Dear Stephanie,</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Many thanks for your willingness to produce this first draft of Council's response. Paul McGrady and I will discuss further with our IPC colleagues to provide input from the constituency as a whole, but in the meantime, I'll try to contribute from a more
general perspective.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>1. gTLD Safeguards: Current Rounds - We should update the third column ('If yes, is it subject to existing....) to be most current, which is that the Preliminary Issue Report was published on 21 August and the public comment period on that Report closed
on 30 October. Marika or Mary will be in the best position to advise as to timing of GNSO policy development next steps for this third and also the fourth column.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Also under this point, the harmonized methodology for reporting (page 3), if we refer to the work on metrics, it would be helpful to point directly to Council's recent approval (http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#20151021-1) of the Recommendations
set out in the Final Report of the DMPM WG. I wasn't a member of this WG but if any Councillors (or failing that, Jonathan Zuck, as he has led the WG and been providing Council with updates) can offer insight as to whether this issue of GAC Advice Board scorecard
can be dealt with in the framework of what the DMPM WG recommends, that would also be helpful information for the Board to insert here.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>2. Future gTLD Rounds - Is the text in <span style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', NotoColorEmoji, 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Android Emoji', EmojiSymbols; font-size: 16px;">the third column ('If yes,
is it subject to existing....) intended to refer to the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures? If so, this should be updated, as it was published on 21 August and the public comment period closed on 30 October. In column 3 we should specifically identify
the many ongoing GNSO policy development-related work, including: (I'm counting on others to help fill in the gaps if I miss any here, as there are many things ongoing relating to future round/s)</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', NotoColorEmoji, 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Android Emoji', EmojiSymbols; font-size: 16px;">- Competition, Consumer Trust, Consumer Choice (CCT) Metrics/Review
(here is an excellent opportunity to make it known to the Board that the GNSO is very keen to have a sufficient number of representatives on this Review to ensure the full range of GNSO stakeholder perspectives are able to contribute).</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', NotoColorEmoji, 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Android Emoji', EmojiSymbols; font-size: 16px;">- RPM and TMCH Reviews</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', NotoColorEmoji, 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Android Emoji', EmojiSymbols; font-size: 16px;">- CWG Country and Territory Names (</span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">It
would be helpful to highlight that this WG is referred to in the GAC communique as belonging to the ccNSO, but it is in fact a CWG chartered by both the ccNSO and GNSO. We could push the point that it is therefore important that the GAC liaise with both SOs
on this CWG's work; in short, the GNSO must be involved in these interactions.)</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">-Others I have forgotten?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br>
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">3. Protection for IGOs - Phil Corwin is best placed to correct me if I'm wrong, but I understood from our Saturday update in Dublin that </span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Professor Edward Swaine, George Washington University
Faculty of Law, has been appointed to advise on sovereign immunity issues. The PDP will resume work once Professor Swaine’s advice is received.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br>
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">4. CPE - I defer to others for input on this one, as I don't know of anything to add.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br>
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">5. Use of 2-letter Country Codes and Country Names - Donna's input about RySG's work here raises a good point, which is that as we move forward with the concept of this document, we should put into place some sort of processes
whereby the various SGs and Cs can provide input to the drafter of the document.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br>
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">6. Visas - We might usefully note here (Marika and Glen are likely best to offer input) that the GNSO Council also suffers from this problem. We may have statistics or records as to how many Councillors have not been able to
attend recent meetings due to visa issues. This type of hard data could be very useful to the Board.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br>
</span></p>
<p>Best wishes,</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Heather</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
<br>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<hr tabindex="-1" style="display:inline-block; width:98%">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" color="#000000" style="font-size:11pt"><b>From:</b> owner-council@gnso.icann.org <owner-council@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, November 10, 2015 10:46<br>
<b>To:</b> gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org; Marika Konings; 'Volker Greimann'; David (dave@difference.com.au) (dave@difference.com.au); council@gnso.icann.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [council] Re: GNSO Review of the Dublin GAC Communique Template</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div>
<div class="moz-forward-container">
<div>Colleagues, attached is a draft review of the Dublin GAC communique. I would appreciate your input and discussion on a couple of the items, where our proposed response seems to me rather unclear.<br>
A proposed motion folllows. Thanks to Marika for her help on this task.<br>
Stephanie Perrin<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>
<p style="margin:0px; padding:0px 0px 10px; line-height:16px; color:rgb(121,114,108); font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12px">
<strong style="margin:0px; padding:0px">Adoption of the GNSO Review of GAC Communiqué for submission to the ICANN Board</strong></p>
<p style="margin:0px; padding:0px 0px 10px; line-height:16px; color:rgb(121,114,108); font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12px">
Whereas,</p>
<ol style="margin:10px 0px; padding:0px 0px 0px 10px; color:rgb(144,137,131); font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12px">
<li style="margin:0px 0px 0.5em 1em; padding:0px; color:rgb(121,114,108)">The Governmental Advisory Committee advises the ICANN Board on issues of public policy, and especially where there may be an interaction between ICANN's activities or policies and national
laws or international agreements. It usually does so as part of a Communiqué, which is published towards the end of every ICANN meeting.
</li><li style="margin:0px 0px 0.5em 1em; padding:0px; color:rgb(121,114,108)">The GNSO is responsible for developing and recommending to the ICANN Board substantive policies relating to generic top-level domains.
</li><li style="margin:0px 0px 0.5em 1em; padding:0px; color:rgb(121,114,108)">The GNSO has expressed a desire to provide feedback to the ICANN Board on issues in the GAC Communiqué as these relate to generic top-level domains to inform the ICANN Board as well as
the broader community of past, present or future gTLD policy activities that may directly or indirectly relate to advice provided by the GAC.
</li><li style="margin:0px 0px 0.5em 1em; padding:0px; color:rgb(121,114,108)">The GNSO Council developed a template to facilitate this process, which was completed following the publication of the Dublin GAC Communiqué by a volunteer and shared with the GNSO Council
for its review </li><li style="margin:0px 0px 0.5em 1em; padding:0px; color:rgb(121,114,108)">The GNSO hopes that the input provided through its review of the GAC Communiqué will further enhance the co-ordination and promote the sharing of information on gTLD related policy activities
between the GAC, Board and the GNSO. </li></ol>
<p style="margin:0px; padding:0px 0px 10px; line-height:16px; color:rgb(121,114,108); font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12px">
Resolved,</p>
<ol style="margin:10px 0px; padding:0px 0px 0px 10px; color:rgb(144,137,131); font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12px">
<li style="margin:0px 0px 0.5em 1em; padding:0px; color:rgb(121,114,108)">The GNSO Council adopts the GNSO Review of the Dublin GAC Communiqué and requests that the GNSO Council Chair communicate the GNSO Review of the Dublin GAC Communiqué to the ICANN Board.
</li><li style="margin:0px 0px 0.5em 1em; padding:0px; color:rgb(121,114,108)">Following the communication to the ICANN Board, the GNSO Council requests that the GNSO Council Chair informs the GAC Chair as well as the GAC-GNSO Consultation Group of the communication
between the GNSO Council and the ICANN Board. </li></ol>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"></span><br>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>