[council] Proposed Agenda | GNSO Council Meeting | Thursday, 18 April 2024
Akinremi Peter Taiwo
compsoftnet at gmail.com
Wed Apr 17 00:14:52 UTC 2024
Deal all,
During the NCSG meeting, the group expressed gratitude for the council's
diligent assessment of the Expired Domain Name Deletion Policy ("EDDP") and
the Expired Registration Recovery Policy ("ERRP"). The decision to deffer
the policy status report (PSR) on the Expiration Policies after a period of
five years was acknowledged. However, recognizing the minor confusion,
particularly regarding domain renewal processes such as grace periods and
aftermarket activities as highlighted in the ICANN compliance report, the
NCSG proposes shortening the deferral period from five years to two years.
Kind regards.
Peter
On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 12:35 PM Terri Agnew via council <
council at gnso.icann.org> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> Please find below the final proposed agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting
> taking place on Thursday, 18 April 2024 at 21:00 UTC for 2 hours This has
> been posted on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/_oAvEQ>.
>
>
>
>
> Thank you.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
>
> Terri
>
> Policy Team Supporting the GNSO
>
>
>
> *Draft GNSO Council Agenda:*
>
>
>
> Please note that all documents referenced in the agenda have been gathered
> on a Wiki page for convenience and easier access:
> https://community.icann.org/x/A4DyEg.
>
>
>
> This agenda was established according to the GNSO Operating Procedures
> <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/op-procedures-15mar23-en.pdf>
> v3.5, updated on 15 March 2023.
>
> For convenience:
>
> - An excerpt of the ICANN Bylaws defining the voting thresholds is
> provided in Appendix 1 at the end of this agenda.
> - An excerpt from the Council Operating Procedures defining the
> absentee voting procedures is provided in Appendix 2 at the end of this
> agenda.
>
>
>
> GNSO Council meeting on Thursday, 18 April 2024 at 21:00 UTC:
> https://tinyurl.com/2xcnuymd
>
>
>
> 14:00 Los Angeles; 17:00 Washington DC; 22:00 London; 23:00 Paris; 00:00
> Moscow (Friday); 07:00 Melbourne (Friday)
>
>
>
> *GNSO Council Meeting Remote Participation:*
> *https://icann.zoom.us/j/92283565389?pwd=QnlHK1JSbzdiSFFZSjRjamxMTkNGdz09*
> <https://icann.zoom.us/j/92283565389?pwd=QnlHK1JSbzdiSFFZSjRjamxMTkNGdz09>
>
> Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if they will not
> be able to attend and/or need a dial out call.
>
> ___________________________________
>
> *Item 1: Administrative Matters (5 minutes)*
>
> 1.1 - Roll Call
>
> 1.2 - Updates to Statements of Interest
>
> 1.3 - Review / Amend Agenda
>
> 1.4 - Note the status of minutes for the previous Council meetings per the
> GNSO Operating Procedures:
>
> Minutes
> <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2024/minutes/minutes-gnso-council-15feb23-en.pdf>
> of the GNSO Council Meeting on 15 February 2024 were posted on 02 March
> 2024
>
> Minutes
> <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2024/minutes/minutes-gnso-council-06mar24-en.pdf>
> of the GNSO Council Meeting on 06 March 2024 were posted on 23 March 2024.
>
>
>
> *Item 2: Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action List (0 minutes)*
>
> 2.1 - Review focus areas and provide updates on specific key themes /
> topics, to include review of Projects List
> <https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/project> and Action Item List.
> <https://community.icann.org/x/RgZlAg>
>
>
>
> *Item 3: Consent Agenda (5 minutes)*
>
> - GNSO Council Review of the GAC Communiqué
> <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2024/correspondence/dibiase-to-sinha-04apr24-en.pdf>
> - GNSO Council Small Team Guidance Document
> <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2024/draft/updated-small-team-guidelines-05apr24.pdf>
> - Confirmation of Standing Predictability Implementation Review Team
> (SPIRT) Charter Drafting Team Leadership (Chair - Nitan Walia; Vice-chair -
> Alan Greenberg; GNSO Council liaison - Anne Aikman-Scalese)
>
> *Item 4: COUNCIL VOTE - Deferral of Policy Status Report Request -
> Expiration Policies (10 minutes)*
>
> The GNSO Council previously considered when to request a Policy Status
> Report (“PSR”) for the purpose of conducting a review of the two Expiration
> Policies, the Expired Domain Name Deletion Policy (“EDDP”) and the Expired
> Registration Recovery Policy (“ERRP”). In November 2020, given concerns
> about its capacity and no known issues with the policies, the Council
> agreed to delay the request for the Policy Status Report (PSR) for a period
> of 24 months. After 24 months had passed, the Council reconsidered whether
> it was an appropriate time to request a Policy Status Report.
>
> To that end, in July 2022, the Council agreed that it would be helpful to
> consult with both registrars and ICANN org to help determine if there are
> any known issues or concerns with either of the two Expiration Policies
> which could warrant requesting a PSR.
>
> In making its decision whether to request to a PSR at this time, the
> Council consulted:
>
>
>
> 1. Registrars, who were asked to flag substantial issues with the
> policies that would warrant a near team request for policy status report
> and did not note any issues
> 2. ICANN Compliance, who provided a write-up
> <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/2022-November/026164.html>, noting
> confusion with key terms in the policy and persistent registrant confusion
> with the auto-renew grace period and aftermarket activities, et.al.
> 3. ICANN org Registrant Program, which provided a catalog of the
> available educational resources on domain name expiration and renewal
> (Brian Gutterman’s update at Council)
>
> In reviewing these materials, the Council determined that the EDDP and
> ERRP seem to have been implemented as intended and imminent policy work is
> not needed at this time. Accordingly, the GNSO Council will reconsider a
> PSR on the Expiration Policies in five years time, or earlier, if requested.
>
> Here, the Council will vote to consider a PSR on the Expiration Policies
> in five years.
>
> 4.1 - Presentation of motion
> <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+2024-04-18>
> (Greg DiBiase, Chair)
>
> 4.2 - Council Discussion
>
> 4.3 - Council vote (voting threshold: simple majority)
>
>
>
> *Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Diacritics in Latin Script (20 minutes)*
>
> Several parties raised an issue to the GNSO Council’s attention with
> regard to the challenge affecting future applied-for strings in the Latin
> script containing diacritics that may be confusingly similar to ASCII
> strings, and are non-variants.
>
> For background, an applied-for IDN gTLD string in the Latin script
> containing diacritics, which is NOT an allocatable variant label of the
> base ASCII string (existing or applied-for) according to RZ-LGR, are
> sometimes seen as equivalents. In some instances however, the base ASCII
> string is seen as a workaround and not necessarily “correct”. The base
> ASCII string and the Latin diacritic string may be determined to be
> confusingly similar (i.e., in which case, the strings would be placed in a
> contention set or if an existing gTLD is involved, the applied-for label
> would not pass the String Similarity Review).
>
> During the GNSO Council Meeting at ICANN78 in Hamburg on 25 October 2023
> <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2023/minutes/minutes-gnso-council-part1-25oct23-en.pdf>,
> the GNSO Council received a detailed briefing on this issue and agreed to
> request a study from ICANN org to help inform the GNSO Council on the issue
> of diacritics in Latin Script. Prior to the request being made to ICANN
> org, the org volunteered to investigate what mechanism or mechanisms might
> be appropriate to address this issue.
>
>
>
> Here, the Council will receive an update from ICANN org on the status of
> the research and analysis.
>
> 5.1 - Introduction of Topic (Greg DiBiase, GNSO Chair)
>
> 5.2 - Council Discussion
>
> 5.3 - Next Steps
>
>
>
> *Item 6: COUNCIL VOTE - SubPro Supplemental Recommendations (20 minutes)*
>
> In March 2023, the ICANN Board approved the majority of the
> recommendations contained in the Final Report on the new gTLD Subsequent
> PDP, but also placed some recommendations into a pending status. The
> Council convened a small team that worked collaboratively with the ICANN
> Board to resolve all pending recommendations. While the majority of the
> pending recommendations were able to be adopted by the ICANN Board,
> recommendations across six Topics were non adopted by the ICANN Board.
>
> With the primary task of addressing the pending recommendations now
> complete, the Council tasked the Small Team Plus with an updated
> assignment form
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yDgWIwKZqKk0WY0q7CS2pf7aD4VupCWV/edit>.
> The Small Team Plus has committed to a work plan
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IhxKi0dvkS-a3ot7w8YG0iFxw4LiZuLz/edit> to
> address the recommendations not adopted by the Board. Following that plan,
> the Small Team agreed to Supplemental Recommendations
> <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2024/agenda/new-gtld-subpro-supplemental-recommendations-2apr24-en.pdf>
> on five of the six Topics, e.g., Registry Voluntary Commitments / Public
> Interest Commitments, Applicant Support, Terms and Conditions, String
> Similarity Evaluations, and Limited Challenge/Appeal Mechanisms. Based on
> the expected implementation as it relates to the Continued Operations
> Instrument (COI), the Small Team Plus determined it was unnecessary to
> develop a Supplemental Recommendation for Topic 22: Registrant Protections.
> On 1 April, an “Explainer” document
> <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2024/agenda/new-gtld-subpro-supplemental-recommendations-2apr24-en.pdf>was
> shared with the Council that consolidates all of the Supplemental
> Recommendations and provides a brief explanation for each of them.
>
>
>
> Here, the Council will vote on the SubPro Supplemental Recommendations
> developed by the Small Team Plus.
>
> 6.1 - Presentation of motion
> <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+2024-04-18>
> (Paul McGrady, Small Team Plus Lead)
>
> 6.2 - Council Discussion
>
> 6.3 - Council vote (voting threshold: GNSO Supermajority in order to
> trigger the threshold that “the Board shall adopt the recommendation unless
> more than two-thirds (2/3) of the Board determines that such policy is not
> in the interests of the ICANN community or ICANN.”)
>
>
>
> *Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - New gTLD Auction Proceeds Cross Community
> Working Group - Auction Proceeds (CCWG-AP) - Proposed Update to
> Recommendation 7 (20 minutes) *
>
>
>
> The CCWG-AP’s Recommendation 7 sets out limitations on the use of ICANN
> accountability mechanisms (namely, the Independent Review Process, IRP, and
> Reconsideration process) to challenge decisions made on individual
> applications within the Grant Program. The CCWG-AP offered this
> recommendation to minimize use of the proceeds for purposes other than
> grants, such as administrative costs or legal fees. The Board has noted it
> continues to support the CCWG-AP’s goal in making this recommendation.
>
>
>
> Recommendation 7 currently provides, “Existing ICANN accountability
> mechanisms such as IRP or other appeal mechanisms cannot be used to
> challenge a decision *from the Independent Project Applications
> Evaluation Panel *to approve or not approve an application. Applicants
> not selected should receive further details about where information can be
> found about the next round of applications as well as any educational
> materials that may be available to assist applicants. The CCWG recognizes
> that there will need to be an amendment to the Fundamental Bylaws to
> eliminate the opportunity to use the Request for Reconsideration and
> Independent Review Panel to challenge grant decisions.” (emphasis added)
>
>
>
> In its 2 March 2024 letter, the Board notes it “has been considering
> whether there are further ways to meet the community’s broader intention
> with Recommendation 7. If the phrase ‘from the Independent Project
> Applications Panel’ is removed from Recommendation 7, many of the Board’s
> concerns that supported the October 2023 action would be addressed. The
> Board also notes that removal of that phrase would support what it has
> always understood to be the intention of the CCWG-AP in making
> Recommendation 7 - to preserve the auction proceeds for funding projects,
> not challenges. Therefore, the Board asks for the Chartering Organizations’
> support in considering an update to the recommendation. Specifically, the
> Board asks for each Chartering Organization to the CCWG-AP to approve an
> update to Recommendation 7 that would remove the phrase ‘*from the
> Independent Project Applications Evaluation Panel*’ from the text of the
> recommendation. If the Chartering Organizations approve this update, the
> Board believes that there is a path to full implementation of the CCWG-AP’s
> Recommendation 7, including the ability to apply the restriction to third
> parties.”
>
>
>
> The Board is asking for feedback by 17 May 2024. It may be helpful to
> consider this requested amendment to Recommendation 7 separately from the public
> comment
> <https://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/proceeding/proposed-bylaws-updates-to-limit-access-to-accountability-mechanisms-27-02-2024>
> on the Proposed Bylaws Updates to Limit Access to Accountability Mechanisms.
>
>
>
> Here, the Council will discuss the proposed update to CCWG-AP
> Recommendation 7.
>
> 7.1 - Introduction of Topic (Greg DiBiase, GNSO Chair)
>
> 7.2 - Council Discussion
>
> 7.3 - Next Steps
>
>
>
> *Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Review of Action Decision Radar (15 minutes)*
>
> During the GNSO Council’s most recent strategic planning session, the
> Council discussed the topic of how to be an effective manager of the GNSO’s
> Policy Development Process (PDP). In recognition of the importance of
> regularly reviewing the Council’s portfolio of work, the Council agreed to
> the following action item, “During a session at ICANN79, Council to prepare
> for a careful review of the work captured in the Program Management Tool
> (PMT) that will conclude or initiate prior to the next AGM, or continue
> beyond the next AGM[.]”
>
> The Council conducted this inaugural review of the Projects List during
> its Working Session at ICANN79
> <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/GNSO+Council+Working+Session+1+of+3+-+ICANN79>
> on Sunday, 3 March 2024. The review also intended to include an overview of
> the Action Decision Radar
> <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Decision+Radar>
> (“ADR”); however, due to timing constraints, the Council agreed to review
> the ADR at an upcoming Council meeting.
>
> The ADR is a tool designed to assist the Council by highlighting imminent
> decisions or actions that need to be taken by the GNSO Council. The ADR
> contains a series of range markers, e.g., 0-1 month, 1-3 months, etc., to
> alert the Council to the timing of the upcoming action or decision.
>
>
>
> Here, the Council will review the contents of the ADR and discuss next
> steps.
>
> 8.1 - Introduction of Topic (Greg DiBiase, GNSO Chair)
>
> 8.2 - Council Discussion
>
> 8.3 - Next Steps
>
>
>
> *Item 9: Update on Status of Privacy and Proxy Services Accreditation
> Implementation (15 minutes)*
>
>
>
> The Privacy and Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP achieved full
> consensus on its recommendations and delivered its Final Report
> <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/filefield_48305/ppsai-final-07dec15-en.pdf>
> on 8 December 2015, with subsequent Council adoption
> <http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201601> of the Final Report
> on 21 January 2016. On 9 August 2016, the ICANN Board adopted
> <https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2016-08-09-en#2.e>
> all recommendations of the PPSAI PDP, directing ICANN org to begin
> implementation. After some initial preparatory work, the Implementation
> Review Team (IRT) first met on 18 October 2016.
>
>
>
> Subsequently, as a result of potential conflicts and/or overlap of work
> between the PPSAI IRT and GDPR-related work, especially the EPDP on the
> Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data, ICANN org, in its
> letter to the GNSO Council, proposed to delay the implementation of PPSAI
> until the EPDP completes.
>
>
>
> In its 4 March 2019 letter
> <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/namazi-to-drazek-et-al-04mar19-en.pdf>
> to GNSO Council leadership, ICANN org posed the following question to the
> GNSO Council, “whether ICANN org should continue to delay public comment
> and implementation of PPSAI or take additional steps pending completion of
> the EPDP in consultation with the PPSAI Implementation Review Team (IRT).”
> GNSO Council Leadership responded, “given the divergent views among
> Councilors and considering the respective roles of ICANN Org in leading
> implementation work of consensus policy recommendations and the PPSAI IRT
> in overseeing the implementation work, the GNSO Council considers it
> appropriate to defer the decision on this issue to ICANN org and the PPSAI
> IRT, taking into account the various views of the SOs and ACs.”
>
>
>
> On 2 March 2021, ICANN org delivered the Wave 1.5 Report
> <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/2021-March/024506.html> to the
> GNSO Council, which included a detailed analysis of the extent to which the
> EPDP Phase 1 recommendations may require modification to the PPSAI and
> Translation & Transliteration policies, which are in the policy
> implementation phase. Following review of the Wave 1.5 Report, the Council
> observed the following in its 1 July 2021 letter
> <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/fouquart-to-lentz-01jul21-en.pdf>
> :
>
>
>
>
> - The decision to pause the implementation of the PPSAI and
> Translation & Transliteration policy recommendations was a decision that
> was made by ICANN org, not the GNSO Council. As such, the Council is of the
> view that a decision to restart the implementation activities is not within
> the remit of the GNSO Council but for ICANN org to make. The Council would
> also like to point to its letter of February 2019 in which it also
> concluded that “considering the respective roles of ICANN Org in leading
> implementation work of consensus policy recommendations and the PPSAI IRT
> in overseeing the implementation work, the GNSO Council considers it
> appropriate to defer the decision on this issue to ICANN org and the PPSAI
> IRT, taking into account the various views of the SOs and ACs”.
> - Should any policy issues arise during the implementation of these
> policy recommendations, there are processes and procedures that allow the
> Council to further consider these, but the Council is of the view that the
> respective Implementation Review Teams (IRTs) will be best placed to
> identify such possible issues.
> - The Council would also like to point to the letter
> <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/namazi-to-drazek-et-al-05sep19-en.pdf>
> that was sent to the Council in September 2019 in which it was noted that
> “following the completion of relevant EPDP work, ICANN org will reassess
> the existing draft PP materials in consultation with the PPSAI IRT and
> determine how to proceed with implementation of the Privacy and Proxy
> Services Accreditation Program”. From a Council’s perspective this still
> seems a relevant and timely next step.
>
>
>
> During its wrap-up session at ICANN79
> <https://icann79.sched.com/event/1a1Cl/gnso-council-wrap-up>, the GNSO
> Council appointed two liaisons, Paul McGrady and Stephanie Perrin, to serve
> as GNSO Council liaisons to the PPSAI IRT.
>
>
>
> Here, the Council will receive an update on the recent meeting.
>
> 9.1 - Introduction of Topic (Greg DiBiase, GNSO Chair)
>
> 9.2 - Council Discussion
>
> 9.3 - Next Steps
>
>
>
> *Item 10: Any Other Business (10 minutes)*
>
> 10.1 - Update on ICANN80 planning and GNSO Draft schedule
> <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2024/draft/icann80-gnso-draft-schedule-04apr24-en.pdf>
>
> 10.2 - Replacement of Council representative to the Continuous Improvement
> Program Community Coordination Group (CIP-CCG)
>
> 10.3 - Upcoming Sessions/Updates on the Registration Data Request System
> (RDRS)
>
> _______________________________
>
> Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article 11,
> Section 11.3(i))
>
> See https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#article11.
>
> Appendix 2: GNSO Council Absentee Voting Procedures (GNSO Operating
> Procedures, Section 4.4)
>
> See
> https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/op-procedures-15mar23-en.pdf
>
>
>
>
> *References for Coordinated Universal Time of 21:00 UTC*
>
> Local time between March and November in the NORTHERN hemisphere
>
> See https://www.timeanddate.com/time/change/ for Dates for Daylight
> Saving Time and Clock Changes
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> California, USA (PDT) UTC-7 14:00
>
> San José, Costa Rica (CST) UTC-6 15:00
>
> New York/Washington DC, USA (EDT) UTC-4 17:00
>
> Buenos Aires, Argentina (ART) UTC-3 18:00
>
> Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo (WAT) UTC+1 22:00
>
> Paris, France (CEST) UTC+2 23:00
>
> Moscow, Russia (MSK) UTC+3 00:00 (Friday)
>
> Singapore (SGT) UTC+8 05:00 (Friday)
>
> Melbourne, Australia (AEST) UTC+10 07:00 (Friday)
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com and
> https://tinyurl.com/2xcnuymd
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> council mailing list
> council at gnso.icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
>
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
Best regards
*Taiwo Peter Akinremi*
------ ------ ------- ------ ------ ------- ------ ------ ------- ------
------ ------- ------ ------
*Policy Advisory | Data Governance and Privacy Consultant | Information
Security & Cybersecurity | Certified Salesforce Administrator*
*Phone*; +2348117714345, +2347063830177 *Skype*: akinremi.taiwo
*Email:* compsoftnet at gmail.com, peterexecute at gmail.com
___________________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20240416/0cbd9369/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the council
mailing list