[CCWG-Accountability] CCWG ACCT Meeting #6 Notes, Action Items

Tue Jan 13 13:39:05 UTC 2015

Dear all,

The notes and recordings for the CCWG-Accountability Meeting #6 call on 13 January are available on
the Wiki here:  https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=51414987

Also here is a summary of the action items:

Action:  Steve DelBianco within WA2 to capture formulation for the definition. 

Action: Staff to re-cap who the community is accountable to. 

Action:  Frankfurt for some definition for the basis of further work

Action: Colleagues to provide concrete re-wording suggestions on this section before Frankfurt to
the list.

Action: Provide any suggestions about "purpose" To come to conclusion in Frankfurt. 

Action: Include time for an update from CWG

Action: Expand time allowed for discussion on contingencies

Action:  Call for volunteers to do present ideas on what a post transition accountability framework
might look like.

Action:  ICG liaisons will clarify if CCWG Accountability is expected to submit proposals on
accountability to the ICG process.

Agenda and Notes:  

1. Welcome & Roll Call & SOI 

2. CWG update and high level principles 

3. WS1/WS2 recap

4. Definitions / scoping document : Public Interest discussion 

5. Contingencies : finalize list 

6. Draft agenda for Frankfurt meeting 

7. AOB 

8. Closing remarks 

1. Welcome & Roll Call & SOI

*       On the call:  Alice Munyua, Julia Wolman

*       No updates to Statement of Interest

*       Six advisors have been appointed by the PEG.  A call between the co-chairs and advisors to
get the advisors on-board is scheduled later this week.  One advisor,  Jan Scholte, will join the
F2F in Frankfurt.  A search for an international legal expert is ongoing.

*       Independent legal advice on California law - discussion with ICANN staff ongoing, the action
is in progress

*       Apologies from Olga Cavalli

2. CWG update and high level principles

*       CCWG high level principles and CWG intense work weekend.  4 CWG calls over the weekend 10-11
January

*       Updates from CWG members

*       Avri Doria:  CWG reviewed the surveys of members and participants and others to gauge
impressions on aspects of the public comments received for all customer standing committee (CSC), MS
review team (MRT), the independent appeals panel (IAP) and Contract Co and alternate proposals.

*       Discussion of various points of agreement and disagreement.

*       On CSC, MRT and IAP, consensus not agreed but some agreement on how they may be set up. On
Contract Co, strong lack of consensus, with one notion of alternate proposals being worked on.

*       A list of the various accountability issues that came up in the CWG discussion is being
drawn up.  Hopefully in time for CCWG Frankfurt F2F.  And how the accountability requirements may
differ for the different proposals.

*       Do not expect consensus by January 15.

*       Would have been better if CCWG Accountability were further along.  Some catch-up required
and alignment of work of the two groups.

*       Greg Shatan:  new sub-group has been formed to look at an "internal to iCANN" solution that
does not involve a Contract Co.  And the required accountability measures that an internal solution
would necessitate.Cheryl Langdon-Orr:  suggestion to add possible agenda item for Frankfurt to speak
to ongoing work of CWG and new working group RFP3B.

3. WS1/WS2 recap

*       WS1, mainly about the community prevailing over ICANN

*       What do we mean by consensus?  What is the "community"?  Who would the community itself be
accountable to?  (Russian dolls or balance based on separation of powers)

*       Balance of different types of powers (judicial, legal, executive). 

*       What happens if some ICANN accountability mechanisms disappear with the transition. 

*       Affect of CWG discussions.

*       Inventory of WS1 and WS2 items (WA2) is being reformulated.

*       Question for the group: what would we consider "committed to", in what form the commitment
might take. Will require further work.

Action:  Steve DelBianco within WA2 to capture formulation for the definition. 

Action: Staff to re-cap who the community is accountable to. 

Action:  Frankfurt for some definition for the basis of further work

4. Definitions / scoping document : Public Interest discussion

*       Who are the stakeholders in directly affected, indirectly affected, and parties affecting
ICANN?

*       The purpose of ICANN's accountability: (1) compliance purposes, (2) acceptable to achieved
certain level of performance.  In addition (3) that ICANN should be accountable to comply with
relevant legislation. (4) ICANN accountable to ensure its decisions are in the interest of all
stakeholders.

*       Preferred mapping of stakeholder and whether to use NETmundial? 

*       The NETmundial definition is not felt as appropriate for CCWG work.  Need to clarify wording
in the document.  Appropriate categorization of indirectly affected parties and others, particularly
the impact on ccTLDs.

Action: Colleagues to provide concrete re-wording suggestions on this section before Frankfurt to
the list.

Action: Provide any suggestions about "purpose" To come to conclusion in Frankfurt. 

5. Contingencies : finalize list

*       Discussion in WA4.  Stress tests and whether certain items should be taken off the list if
the contingency was felt very unlikely to occur. The Charter does not suggest probability of a
contingency - Should we take into account probability of a contingency when including or not in the
list?

*       Importance to understand the likelihood opt something happening, for binary issues or other.
Some scenarios seem to re-state the same problem set, e.g around financial issues. Suggestion to
discuss what success conditions might look like.

*       The list is not finite and new items can be added via sub-group WA4.  With discussion in
Frankfurt.

6. Draft agenda for Frankfurt meeting

*       Progress on scope

*       Progress on WS1 and WS2

*       Conclude the work on the inventory of current ICANN accountability mechanisms

Action: Include time for an update from CWG

Action: Expand time allowed for discussion on contingencies

*       Volunteers to provide what they think as the ideal outcomes, 2/3minutes.  4 or 5 "pitch
visions" of that the post transition accountability might look like. 

Action:  Call for volunteers to do present ideas on what a post transition accountability framework
might look like.

Action:  ICG liaisons will clarify if CCWG Accountability is expected to submit proposals on
accountability to the ICG process.

7. AOB

*       Issue of independent legal advice. Ongoing discussion, and the independent expert advisors
may also be able to advise.  Goal to provide legal advice in Frankfurt.

8. Closing remarks

*       Please provide feedback on the documents to be discussed in Frankfurt.  Comment or Edits.

For a full list of upcoming meetings, please see:
https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/Meetings 

Best regards,

Brenda 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150113/1306711e/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 92 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150113/1306711e/image001.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5035 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150113/1306711e/smime.p7s>