[ALAC] Summary Report for GNSO Council 24 Aug 2023 meeting
Justine Chew
justine.chew.icann at gmail.com
Mon Aug 28 03:33:02 UTC 2023
Dear all,
Here is my summary report of the GNSO Council's 24 Aug 2023 meeting, albeit
a pretty long summary. You can also read this report posted at the ALAC
Liaison to the GNSO workspace, or using the links included below.
*Special Summary Report of 24 Aug 2023 Meeting to ALAC
<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/GNSO+Liaison+Report%2C+post-Oct+2021#Aug2023-SumRep_Aug2023>*
For brevity, I will just highlight a few things here. For some of the
issues, you can glean a wider perspective from GNSO Council Aug 2023
Matters of Interest
<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/GNSO+Liaison+Report%2C+post-Oct+2021#Aug2023-MOI_Aug2023>
and/or
from GNSO Council Aug 2023 Meeting Records
<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/GNSO+Liaison+Report%2C+post-Oct+2021#Aug2023-Meet_Aug2023>
.
*1. Consent Agenda Item - 2023 Customer Standing Committee (CSC)*
- Council approved the slate of 2023 CSC Members and Liaison, which
include the liaison and alternate appointed by ALAC, *Holly Raiche*
and *Ejikeme
Egbuogu*, respectively, for the 2023 - 2025 term.
*2. Next Round of New gTLDs / Subsequent Procedures 38 Pending
Recommendations & "Other Dependencies"*
*a. The 38 Pending Recommendations*
- Since after ICANN77, the GNSO Council Small Team on SubPro has
continued to work with the Board SubPro Caucus co-leads, Avri Doria and
Becky Burr, in developing the Council's 2 next sub-deliverables in respect
of the 38 Pending Recommendations. This involves bifurcating the 38
recommendations into 2 broad groups:
-
- *Group (1)* covers Recommendations on the following SubPro Topics
which were assessed and are understood to merely require clarifying
statements by Council for the Board's consideration in context of the
Board's concerns, in order to facilitate adoption by the Board.
- Due to a late request by the ICANN Board for more time as "*[t]he
Board would like to propose a small tweak to the language* [in the
clarifying statements for Recommendations 9.1, 9.4, 9.8, 9.9, 9.10, 9.12,
9.13, 30.1, 31.16 and 31.17 (all regarding the enforceability of PICs and
RVCs) *to ensure that it is crystal clear*", the recommendations
where there is an expectation that the GNSO Council can resolve the ICANN
Board concerns via a Clarifying Statement was amended to cover:
- Topic 3: Applications Assessed in Rounds - Recommendations
3.1,3.2, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7
- Topic 6: Registry Service Provider Pre-Evaluation -
Recommendation 6.8
- Topic 9: Registry Voluntary Commitments / Public Interest
Commitments - Recommendations 9.1, 9.4, 9.8, 9.9, 9.10, 9.12, 9.13,
9.15
- Topic 26: Security and Stability - Recommendation 26.9
- Topic 29: Name Collision - Recommendation 29.1
- Topic 30: GAC Consensus Advice and GAC Early Warning -
Recommendation 30.7
- Topic 31: Objections - Recommendations 31.16, 31.17
- Topic 34: Community Applications - Recommendation 34.12
- Topic 35: Auctions - Recommendations 35.3, 35.5
- The resulting Clarifying Statement as at 23 Aug which was adopted
by Council for Group (1) recommendations is found at this link
<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2023/draft/draft-subpro-pending-recommendations-clean-23aug23-en.pdf>
.
*Action by ALAC Liaison*
-
-
- To continue participating in Small Team to ensure clarifying
statement captures existing ALAC positions, as relevant/needed.
-
- *Group (2)* covers the remaining pending recommendations for which
the Council Small Team will continue to work on in light of the clear
signal by the Board SubPro Caucus co-leads that the Board will very
likely decline to adopt as they currently read. The Small Team's scope of
work here includes considering whether such recommendations should be
revised, and if so, how - either through the 'GNSO Operating Procedures
section 16' path (which would involve reconvening the SubPro PDP WG), or
through a 'Supplemental Recommendation' path for which Council
will need to
determine the mechanism to produce such supplemental recommendation.
*Action by ALAC Liaison*To continue participating in Small Team to ensure
clarifying statement captures existing ALAC positions, as relevant/needed,
or to advocate for the inclusion of input outside of GNSO where Council
opts for the 'Supplemental Recommendation' path.
*c. Closed Generics Framework*
-
- Council received a substantive update on the status of the Closed
Generics Framework produced by the GAC-GNSO-ALAC Dialogue small
team, post
a review of community comments received in response to the request
for comments on the Draft Closed Generics Framework
<https://community.icann.org/x/Io6ZDg> which closed on 15 Jul 2023.
- The Chairs of the GAC, GNSO and ALAC convened to discuss what
should happen with this Closed Generics Framework, namely
whether there was
sufficient community consensus for it to move to a GNSO policy
development
process. They concluded there was not and that there was not sufficient
demand to take it further through a policy process. As a result, the GNSO
Chair, GAC Chair, and ALAC Chair plan to send a separate communication to
the ICANN Board that reflects the decision they took and, as
stated in the
letter, expressing the collective view that:
-
(1) closed generic gTLDs should not be viewed as a dependency for
the next round;
-
(2) until there is community-developed policy, the Board should
maintain the position from the 2012 round (i.e., any
applications seeking
to impose exclusive registry access for "generic strings" to a single
person or entity and/or that person's or entity's Affiliates
(as defined in
Section 2.9(c) of the Registry Agreement) should not proceed; and
-
(3) should the community decide in the future to resume the policy
discussions, this should be based on the good work that has
been done to
date in the facilitated dialogue.
- This outcome was pre-empted by ALAC Chair Jonathan Zuck at the
CPWG call on 9 August.
*3. Next Round of New gTLDs - Standing Predictability Implementation Review
Team (SPIRT)*
- In its Final Report
<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/final-report-newgtld-subsequent-procedures-pdp-02feb21-en.pdf>,
the Subsequent Procedures Working Group recommended “the formation of a
Standing Predictability Implementation Review Team (‘SPIRT’) (Pronounced
‘spirit’) to serve as the body responsible for reviewing potential issues
related to the Program, to conduct analysis utilizing the framework, and to
recommend the process/mechanism that should be followed to address the
issue (i.e., utilize the Predictability Framework). The GNSO Council shall
be responsible for oversight of the SPIRT and may review all
recommendations of the SPIRT in accordance with the procedures outlined in
the GNSO Operating Procedures and Annexes thereto.”
- Council discussed the task of chartering (not constituting) the SPIRT
and concluded that it would be useful to set up a chartering team to
include participation from the At-Large/ALAC, GAC and other parts of the
community.
*Action by ALAC Liaison*To alert the ALAC on timing of the call to form the
SPIRT chartering team, in due course.
*4. Discussion Paper on .Quebec *
- The GNSO Chair led the commentary on this issue which essentially
concluded that the issue of .quebec (TLD) not being a variant of “.québec”
did not require an immediate resolution and one that did not squarely sit
in the remit of the Expedited Policy Development Process on
Internationalized Domain Names (EPDP on IDNs).
*5. GNSO Council Committee for Overseeing and Implementing Continuous
Improvement (CCOICI) Recommendations Report on Review of the Statement of
Interest (SOI) Requirements *
- Council received an overview
<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2023/presentation/presentation-ccoici-recommendations-report-24aug23-en.pdf>
of
the CCOICI Recommendations Report
<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2023/correspondence/chen-to-gnso-council-14aug23-en.pdf>on
the SOI Requirements which concluded that no consensus was reached on the
ability to exempt participants from declaring in their GNSO SOI who they
represented whenever they participated in a PDP in case of professional
ethical obligations preventing complications
- Although it was recommended that the GNSO SOI format be updated to
form two parts (see below), *the existing SOI language in relation to
exemption is to remain as is.*
- a) General Statement of Interest which contains general information
about a participant (parent).
- b) Activity Specific Statement of Interest which contains
information that is provided specific to the activity, for example,
motivation for participation (child)
Thanks for reading / considering.
Justine Chew
ALAC Liaison to the GNSO
GNSO Liaison Report Workspace
<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/GNSO+Liaison+Report%2C+post-Oct+2021>
------
On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 at 20:00, Justine Chew <justine.chew.icann at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I have just been informed that with regards to the agenda item 4 for the
> GNSO Council Meeting which will take place in just over an hour today that
> the Board has requested more time because "*[t]he Board would like to
> propose a small tweak to the language* [to the clarifying statements for
> Recommendations 9.1, 9.4, 9.8, 9.9, 9.10, 9.12, 9.13, 30.1, 30.16 and 31.17
> (all regarding the enforceability of PICs and RVCs) *to ensure that it is
> crystal clear*". Therefore the update to that agenda item is as follows:
>
> *Item 4: COUNCIL VOTE - SubPro Small Team Clarifying Statement*
>
> - Hence the recommendations where there is an expectation that the
> GNSO Council can resolve ICANN Board concerns via a Clarifying Statement
> are now
>
>
> - Topic 3: Applications Assessed in Rounds - Recommendations 3.1, 3.2,
> 3.5, 3.6, 3.7
> - *The SubPro Final Report recommendation envisions that “the next
> application procedure should be processed in the form of a round” and
> “Application procedures must take place at predictable, regularly occurring
> intervals without indeterminable periods of review”. However, the GNSO
> Council confirms its willingness to engage with the ICANN Board to explore
> a shared vision for the long-term evolution of the program, which could be
> materially different than what is envisioned for the next round of the New
> gTLD Program in the Topic 3 recommendations.*
> - Topic 6: Registry Service Provider Pre-Evaluation - Recommendation
> 6.8
> - *The GNSO Council confirms its understanding of the
> Implementation Review Team (IRT) Principles & Guidelines that state that,
> “the IRT is convened to assist staff in developing the implementation
> details for the policy to ensure that the implementation conforms to the
> intent of the policy recommendations.” The Council therefore recognizes
> that ICANN org will be responsible for establishing the fees charged for
> the RSP pre-evaluation program, in consultation with the IRT, as is
> consistent with the roles and responsibilities captured in the IRT
> Principles & Guidelines. The language used in Recommendation 6.8 is not
> intended to alter the respective roles and responsibilities of staff and
> the IRT.*
> - *Topic 9: Registry Voluntary Commitments / Public Interest
> Commitments* - Recommendations 9.1, 9.4, 9.8, 9.9, 9.10, 9.12, 9.13,
> 9.15
> - *Recommendations 9.1, 9.4, 9.8, 9.9, 9.10, 9.12, 9.13 - The GNSO
> Council confirms that in respect to any new Public Interest Commitments
> (PICs) and Registry Voluntary Commitments (RVCs), PICs/RVCs entered into
> must be contractually enforceable, and in respect of RVCs, enforceability
> is determined by both ICANN org and the applicant. And further, the Council
> observes that among the purposes of PICs / RVCs is to address public
> comments, in addressing strings deemed highly sensitive or related to
> regulated industries, objections, whether formal or informal, GAC Early
> Warnings, GAC Consensus Advice, and/or other comments from the GAC.*
> - *Recommendation 9.15: The GNSO Council confirms that this
> recommendation does not require any implementation nor creates any
> dependencies for the Next Round of the New gTLD Program.*
> - Topic 26: Security and Stability - Recommendation 26.9
> - *The GNSO Council confirms that the “any level” language
> referenced in the recommendation should be interpreted to only be in
> respect of domain names that are allocated by the registry operator.*
> - *Topic 29: Name Collision* - Recommendation 29.1
> - *The GNSO Council believes that Recommendation 29.1 can be
> adopted by the Board on the understanding that it does not need to be acted
> on until such time any next steps for mitigating name collision risks are
> better understood out of the Name Collision Analysis Project (NCAP) Study
> 2.*
> - Topic 30: GAC Consensus Advice and GAC Early Warning -
> Recommendation 30.7
> - *Please see the Council’s clarifying statement for
> Recommendations 9.1, 9.4, 9.8, 9.9, 9.10, 9.12, 9.13.*
> - Topic 31: Objections - Recommendations 31.16, 31.17
> - *Please see the Council’s clarifying statement for
> Recommendations 9.1, 9.4, 9.8, 9.9, 9.10, 9.12, 9.13.*
> - *Topic 34: Community Applications *- Recommendation 34.12
> - *The GNSO Council confirms its recommendation that terms included
> in the contract between ICANN org and the CPE Provider regarding the CPE
> process must be subject to public comment. This recommendation however is
> not intended to require ICANN org to disclose any confidential terms of the
> agreement between ICANN org and the CPE Provider.*
> - *Topic 35: Auctions* - Recommendations 35.3, 35.5
> - *The GNSO Council confirms that the references to private
> auctions in Recommendations 35.3 and 35.5 merely acknowledge the existence
> of private auctions in 2012 and should NOT be seen as an endorsement or
> prohibition of their continued practice in future rounds of the New gTLD
> Program. The Council notes that there were extensive discussions on the use
> of private auctions in the SubPro working group. To the extent that draft
> recommendations were developed as to private auctions, these did not
> receive consensus support in the working group but did receive strong
> support with significant opposition.*
>
>
> - Council will vote on the clarifying statement to be submitted to the
> ICANN Board.
>
>
>
> Justine Chew
> ALAC Liaison to the GNSO
> GNSO Liaison Report Workspace
> <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/GNSO+Liaison+Report%2C+post-Oct+2021>
> ------
>
>
>
> On Tue, 15 Aug 2023 at 17:47, Justine Chew <justine.chew.icann at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> Just a note to inform you that the agenda for the GNSO Council meeting of
>> 24 Aug 2023 at 13:00 UTC is out as follows:
>>
>> It's another packed agenda; for a curated version of the highlighted
>> agenda items (especially item 4), please visit this link
>> <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/GNSO+Liaison+Report%2C+post-Oct+2021#Aug2023-MOI_Aug2023>
>> .
>>
>> *GNSO Council Meeting #8 of 2023 held on 24 Aug 2023*
>>
>> *Full Agenda <https://community.icann.org/x/0IBXDg> | Documents
>> <https://community.icann.org/x/yIBXDg> | Motions
>> <https://community.icann.org/x/voBXDg>*
>>
>> - *Item 1: Administrative Matters*
>> - Item 2: Opening Remarks / 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*
>> - Approval of the 2023 Customer Standing Committee (CSC) Slate
>> - *Item 4: COUNCIL VOTE - SubPro Small Team Clarifying Statement*
>> - *Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - GNSO Council Committee for Overseeing
>> and Implementing Continuous Improvement (CCOICI) Recommendations Report on
>> Review of the Statement of Interest (SOI) Requirements *
>> - *Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Chartering the Standing
>> Predictability Implementation Review Team (“SPIRT”)*
>> - *Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - SubPro Pending Recommendations -
>> Expected Non-Adoption *
>> - *Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Closed Generics*
>> - *Item 9: AOB*
>> - *9.1 Update from NIS2 Outreach Team *
>> - 9.2 ICANN78 Planning
>> - *9.3 Discussion Paper on .Quebec*
>> - *9.4 Grant Program Implementation update to Chartering
>> Organizations*
>>
>>
>> As usual, Council meetings are open to observers in listen-only mode. If
>> you would like to observe the meeting, please check this link
>> <http://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/GNSO+Liaison+Report%2C+post-Oct+2021#Aug2023-Meet_Aug2023temp> for
>> details.
>>
>> Thanks for reading / considering.
>>
>> Justine Chew
>> ALAC Liaison to the GNSO
>> GNSO Liaison Report Workspace
>> <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/GNSO+Liaison+Report%2C+post-Oct+2021>
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/attachments/20230828/b9c6e354/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the ALAC
mailing list