[Gnso-newgtld-wg] Fwd: Work Plan Changes and Preliminary Information on Consensus Calls

Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch
Fri Dec 11 18:27:38 UTC 2020

Dear Cheryl and Jeff

I guess you‘ll understand that this is not satisfactory - at least to me.

GAC consultations without a stable text are just not feasible - it is just not possible to consult GAC Members, who in turn need to consult within their Governments, based on unstable and provisional texts. I feel the different character of Government representation should be better considered, especially after all the efforts we have made to deliver timely GAC inputs during prior steps.

And starting December 18th a vast amount of people will be on leave... hence the days between December 19 and January 4 are basically of no use.

(hence the availability of a stable text on December 17 is logically of very limited help)

Hence, it is really unfortunate to stick to such key consultation over a well-known holiday period.




Von: Cheryl Langdon-Orr <langdonorr at gmail.com>
Datum: 11. Dezember 2020 um 18:49:12 MEZ
An: gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>, Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch>
Betreff: Fwd: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Work Plan Changes and Preliminary Information on Consensus Calls

Jorge, please see interspaced below responses from Jeff and me...

On Sat, 12 Dec 2020 at 01:11, Jorge.Cancio--- via Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>> wrote:
Dear Jeff and all

Thanks very much for this email!
Thank you also for your thoughtful reply

Speaking personally, I’m afraid that the proposed timeline with consensus calls over the holiday break (at least in the Northern hemisphere) is not very helpful.
We recognise this is an impost and a challenge, and regret that not everyone will find it at all convenient, but we are needing to complete our finalisation of the work in a manner that allows us to meet the January GNSO Council Meeting document deadline.   Considering that we have been flagging the  "End of Calendar Year" endpoint for the delivery of our Final Report to the Council for a lengthy period of time we had hoped that these dates and the minor *extension in timing* we propose would not be seen as too problematic, we trust that everyone will appreciate we added time into the End Dec point to allow for the activities to be completed recognising that a few days at least for some, would be being carved out for their social and familial purposes at this time of year. We note this timing is regrettable but in our view unavoidable.

At least for those of us needing to do extensive consultations (be it inside a Government or within a larger community) such dates are completely unworkable.
We note that the consensus call had been planned for an earlier date from Dec 17 on, leaving 7 days the finalisation of other steps before the 23rd and then the close of the ICANN Offices, the planning we have now produced allows a longer time (14 days)  with yes all be it some public holidays in some places... As WG Members and their associated communities had been working towards the earlier date and less time between these final steps, and noting we have ensured the regular updating and sending of redlined text as we go to reduce the burden of looking for changes in a Final Report we hope that the extent of such consultations would be being already managed, and we note that some parts of the ICANN COmmunity have certainly done so...  The Government Advisory Committee of course (along with the other ACs) also have the post Report to GNSO opportunity to create any Advice on the Report that it sees fit and that works within the constraints of their consultative mechanisms.  We do hope however that they will also through any Members of the WG also contribute to the Consensus Call.

Not sure how others feel about this…

Personally, I would suggest starting the consensus calls once we are back from the break, e.g. on January 4th.
That would at the least push Report lodgement to the GNSO to at least February and that would require us to petition the GNSO Council for permission to do so. That is not a timeline we have either endorsed or worked towards since our last petition for an extension of the timeline to the end of the Calendar year earlier in 2020.

In addition, I feel that for the same reasons (need for consultations etc.) the time allotted between consensus designations by the co-chairs and the deadline for submitting minority reports should be significantly extended (e.g. at least to one full week).
We trust that as we have encouraged for some time now consideration, if not the preparation of Minority Reports has been at least kicked off by WG Members, noting that with the freeze of text on the 17th December everyone will have all that goes into the final report with the exception of the specific detailing of the degree(s) of consensus associated with the recommendations designated by the Co-Chairs after the Consensus Call formally completes.  So we would encourage you and others to make full use of that time from the 17th onward if such Minority Report drafting has not already begun.

Hope this is doable…

Kind regards


Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org>> Im Auftrag von Jeff Neuman
Gesendet: Freitag, 11. Dezember 2020 06:08
An: gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>
Betreff: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Work Plan Changes and Preliminary Information on Consensus Calls


The Leadership Team met a few hours ago to discuss a number of issues including how to get to the finish line……We are nearly there!

As discussed on the last call (about 24 hours ago), we are making the following changes to the Work Plan:

  *   11 December 2020
     *   Latest Redline of Final Report containing changes from all topics discussed to date as well as changes (if any) as a result of the 9 Topical E-mails
     *   Meeting of the small team on Auctions to see if there can be any recommendations to the Full Working Group
  *   14 December 2020
     *   Discussing (a) Auctions Topic (results if any from small team; (b) Conflicts of Interest, (c) Applicant Freedom of Expression, and (d) Dispute Resolution Procedures after Delegation.
  *   15 December 2020
     *   Comments due to 11 December 2020 Redline
     *   Release of Any redlines to as a result of the topics discussed on 14 December 2020
  *   17 December 2020
     *   Comments due to December 15 Redline
     *   Working Group Call (already on your calendars) to close out any last issues
     *   Content Freeze / Lockdown – Other than if there are any changes to close out last issues, all content is locked down for the Consensus Call
  *   22 December 2020
     *   Final Report is released to the Working Group
     *   Commencement of Consensus Call (See some notes below)
  *   5 January 2020
     *   Consensus Call Ends
  *   6 January 2020
     *   Designation of Levels of Support by Working Group Leadership Team
  *   7 January 2020
     *   Call of the Working Group to discuss designations, answer questions, and hopefully celebrate a job well done
  *   8 January 2020
     *   Challenges to Designation of Levels of Support by Working Group Leadership Team are due (if any)
     *   Minority Reports (if any) are due
  *   11 January 2020
     *   Final Report delivered to the Council
     *   Document Deadline for discussion during January’s GNSO Council Meeting

Some Notes

  1.  A longer note will follow in the next couple of days on how we will structure the Consensus Call.  We strongly recommend that if you were not on the last working group call on 10 December 2020 at 03:00 UTC, please do go back and review at least the first 15-20 minutes of the call. (Link to Call<https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/2020-12-07+New+gTLD+Subsequent+Procedures+PDP.>)

  1.  Although more details will be provided later:
     *   Leadership will be grouping the Topics into batches for purposes of the Consensus Calls.  We will not be voting on each recommendation / implementation guidance separately (as there are several hundred of them).
     *   We will do our best to only include in the batches the lesser controversial topics; stated differently, Leadership has a sense of which sections should be supported by either full consensus or (rough) consensus.  Of course we could always be wrong, but we will do our best.

                                                               i.      If there is a batch that contains a part that you do not support, then in the Consensus Call, we will ask you specifically which element or elements do you not support.    In other words, if we grouped topics 1,2 and 3 together and you indicate that you do not support the batch, you will be asked to specify which of the Topics you do not support, and which element(s) within that topic you do not support.  We will assume that the topics / elements you do not list are ones that you would support.  So being specific will be important.

     *   Topics where we can already foresee that there will be a difference of opinion (eg., Closed Generics, Mechanisms of Last Resort), we will make sure we have those topics in the Consensus Call on their own (i.e., not in batches with other topics).
     *   All expressions of support / non support during the Consensus Call MUST be submitted through the formal mailing list.  We will not be counting any responses to the Consensus Call that are not submitted on the list.  It is critical that all of the information is on the record and documented.
     *   The Consensus Call is NOT A VOTE – Leadership will not be determining levels of support based on the quantity of responses, but will take into consideration other factors such as the groups with whom an individual associates, etc.
     *   We will be following Section 3.6 of the Working Group Guidelines (https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/annex-1-gnso-wg-guidelines-24oct19-en.pdf).

  1.  Minority Reports are due just 2 days after the designation of Levels of Consensus.  We know that is not a lot of time.  However, given that we have had a draft final report, comments to the draft final report, extensive discussions of those comments of the draft final report, and you have seen several redlines already, we believe that if you disagree with the way the group is heading, you should pretty much know that now.  There is no reason to wait until the designations of levels of support to start drafting.  In fact, I am told that the ALAC has already been working on a minority report to certain topics for some time now.  Bottom Line – you can start working on any minority report now.  The worst thing that will happen is that you draft your report and there is a consensus call surprise where you find out you may not be in the minority and you decide not to submit the statement 😊

  1.  We are nearly there!!!!!!!!!


Your humble Leadership Team,

Cheryl and Jeff – Co-Chairs

With very special thanks to Martin, Annabeth, Robin and Flip who have been participating in Leadership calls for many months and providing valuable insight & of course to Steve, Emily and Julie, without whom, none of this would be possible

Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>
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.

More information about the Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list