Logo

GNSO Council Meeting - Shared screen with speaker view
Mark Datysgeld
01:02:55
Welcome, Theo
Herb Waye Ombuds
01:03:14
Greetings from the Office of the Ombudsman. The Ombuds team is available all week in our virtual office. The Zoom room details are on the Conversation page of the ICANN73 home page under Discussions. Stay safe and be kind. ombudsman@icann.org
Julie Hedlund - ICANN Org
01:03:24
Hello, my name is Julie Hedlund and I will be monitoring this chat room. In this role, I am the voice for remote participants.Hello, my name is Julie Hedlund and I will be monitoring this chat room. In this role, I am the voice for remote participants.Hello, my name is Julie Hedlund and I will be monitoring this chat room. In this role, I am the voice for remote participants.Hello, my name is Julie Hedlund and I will be monitoring this chat room. In this role, I am the voice for remote participants.Hello, my name is Julie Hedlund and I will be monitoring this chat room. In this role, I am the voice for remote participants.
Theo Geurts GNSO Council
01:03:25
Thanks Mark
Maxim Alzoba (RySG)
01:03:29
Hello all
Julie Hedlund - ICANN Org
01:03:40
The Open Mic session scheduled at the end of this session, observers will be invited to raise their hands to be unmuted and to ask questions or comments. Questions & comments from the chat will only be considered during the Open Mic if posted in the correct format.
Julie Hedlund - ICANN Org
01:03:55
When submitting a question or comment that you want me to read out loud on the mic, please start with a <QUESTION> and end with a “</QUESTION>” or <COMMENT> </COMMENT>. Text outside these quotes will be considered as part of “chat” and will not be read out loud on the microphone.
Stephanie Perrin
01:04:00
Welcome Theo! Great to have you here.
Julie Hedlund - ICANN Org
01:04:06
To view the real time transcription, click on the “closed caption” button in the Zoom toolbar. As requested verbally, please rename your sign-in name with your full name. You will need to exit the Zoom Webinar and rename yourself before signing in again. If you do not use your full name (e.g. First Name + Last Name/Surname), you may be removed from this Zoom session.
Maxim Alzoba (RySG)
01:04:13
Welcome, Theo.
Julie Hedlund - ICANN Org
01:04:16
Please note that chat sessions are being archived and are governed by the ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior. http://www.icann.org/en/news/in-focus/accountability/expected-standards.
Juan Manuel Rojas
01:04:42
I wish the "here" were real and no web
Paul McGrady
01:05:29
I just set my chat to "Everyone" because I always fail to do so and I want to save Nathalie having to remind me (for the 1,000th time). :)
Olga Cavalli
01:07:06
Welcome Theo!
Theo Geurts GNSO Council
01:07:24
A F2F would be really great :)
Michael Palage
01:07:54
Kurt - is multi-tasking :-)
Jeff Neuman #2
01:08:54
Just to Panelists: Jeff Neuman and Jeff Neuman #2 are both me. Have to sign on with two devices. No one is impersonating me (that I know of).
Maxim Alzoba (RySG)
01:09:44
@Jeff, are you sure?
Nathalie Peregrine - ICANN Org
01:09:49
Thanks Jeff!
Paul McGrady
01:11:43
Thanks "Jeff".
Stephanie Perrin
01:13:00
Maxim, that is a remarkably philosophical question for the beginning of a Council meeting…..😀
Gopal Tadepalli
01:14:26
Greetings. - Dr. T V Gopal, Professor, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, College of Engineering, Guindy Campus, Anna University , Chennai, INDIA.
Maxim Alzoba (RySG)
01:23:36
strange sound
Maxim Alzoba (RySG)
01:23:47
like electric shaver
Jia-Juh Kimoto
01:24:20
2022 NomCom Announcement: https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/apply-now-for-icann-and-pti-leadership-positions-15-12-2021-en
Paul McGrady
01:24:20
I am aware of NomCom. :-)
Mark Datysgeld
01:24:23
maybe it's the way the noise gate is processing ambient sound
Jia-Juh Kimoto
01:25:19
2022 NomCom: Job Descriptions and Open Leadership Positions: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/nomcom2022-positions-2021-12-15-en
Maxim Alzoba (RySG)
01:25:41
I did not hear few sentences
desiree_miloshevic
01:30:05
@Maxim, check the live transcript
Maxim Alzoba (RySG)
01:31:19
@Desiree, thank you
Taiwo Peter Akinremi
01:33:07
Thank you all
desiree_miloshevic
01:35:12
Thank you Taiwo!
Stephanie Perrin
01:42:04
To do so, you would have to charge for access at the various rates suggested in the ODP
Maxim Alzoba (RySG)
01:42:37
via making pilot payments?
Stephanie Perrin
01:42:58
In a small pilot, some users might be willing to invest, just to get this thing off the ground. You would then have to correct for that…don’t know how you could do that.
Stephanie Perrin
01:43:24
Yes Maxim, I think so...
Maxim Alzoba (RySG)
01:43:27
it might be a question - how many users of the system is going to be using it after 3 months
Stephanie Perrin
01:43:43
exactly
Maxim Alzoba (RySG)
01:47:22
like sending e-mails
Paul McGrady
01:47:33
@Kurt - but that would be good to know and why a lightweight ticketing system seems like a great option.
Michael Palage
01:47:46
@Kurt there is no need to build a ticketing system, to save money it can be integrated into ICANN's existing SalesForce platform, just look at what Ash did in integrating Compliance into SalesForce. He saved $ and increased functionality.
Maxim Alzoba (RySG)
01:48:04
@Michael, the current platform is slow enough
Paul McGrady
01:49:23
+1 Kurt - Staff could do a lightweight ticketing system without a formal recommendation from us.
Alex Deacon
01:49:50
+1 Michael Palage
Maxim Alzoba (RySG)
01:50:51
just for clarity - the current platform , if too much added on the top, might stop performing even the current functions in a reasonable time manner
Xavier Calvez - ICANN Org
01:51:17
Not wanting to be overly technical here, but before assuming what potential impact lower volumes would have on the cost of an SSAD, you may want to validate first what the sensitivity of the costs to volume is. Org can help with that.
Nathalie Peregrine - ICANN Org
01:51:21
5 mins left on this item
desiree_miloshevic
01:51:29
Wouldn’t there be an output of the Pilot to give insight if recommendations should be changed?
Chris Disspain
01:51:45
Good point Xavier
Kurt Pritz
01:51:45
Agree with Desiree
Michael Palage
01:53:46
@Stephaine - please take the extra time and try to resolve the accuracy definition issue :-)
Paul McGrady
01:54:31
@Stephanie - I hear you, but if we have to solve every problem at once in order to solve a problem we will never solve any problems.
Stephanie Perrin
01:55:13
Michael, if you wanted to resolve the accuracy definition issue, your doodle poll would have included other options for the definition.including the one that the Registrar proposed and we (NCSG) supported.
Julie Hedlund - ICANN Org
01:56:02
See the link to the SubPro ODP Question Set #2: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_A5oEnsFQHAvXDtNNRkDGzPoC2GRTxtlnMCwd3rNMOM/edit
Alex Deacon
01:56:18
IMO - If a ticketing system results in insight and concrete data into issues related to accuracy then all the better.
Stephanie Perrin
01:57:13
Paul, as anyone on an international policy, treaty, or standards drafting committee would agree…..definitions are the baseline. In the accuracy committee, absent any other work on that definition, the definition remains what is in the RAA. Which was omitted from the Doodle poll I just mentioned. Hence my concern about going in circles.
Julie Hedlund - ICANN Org
01:58:31
Posted above.
Julie Hedlund - ICANN Org
01:58:35
Will post again.
Julie Hedlund - ICANN Org
01:58:40
See: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_A5oEnsFQHAvXDtNNRkDGzPoC2GRTxtlnMCwd3rNMOM/edit
Julie Hedlund - ICANN Org
02:00:59
Link above it to the SubPro ODP Question Set #2
Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC)
02:02:00
Standing Predictability IRT
Maxim Alzoba (RySG)
02:05:05
PDP —> GNSO Council -> ICANN Board -> usually IRT
Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC)
02:06:55
+1 Jeff. The additional work is Implementation work and there are checks and balances in the Consensus Policy Framework and in the GNSO Operating Procedures that assure Accountability for the IRT working on the additional work.
Tomslin Samme-Nlar
02:08:10
Thanks for clarifying that Jeff
Alan Woods
02:10:20
Just thinking - as an outsider (apologies) Why not just work on the basis that the GNSO can be informed of a likely issue (ODP benefit IMHO)- so let the GNSO work on it - then be ready with an answer and present it when the Board poses the expected question. - this would merely be using the ODP to it’s fullest. And working with the Board and the ORD as the ODP seems to be intended to do?
Alan Woods
02:10:35
*org
desiree_miloshevic
02:10:57
I like Kurt’s approach
Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC)
02:11:29
+1 Kurt
Kurt Pritz
02:12:14
Jeff, Your favourite class was civil procedure???? That says a lot.
Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC)
02:12:29
@Jeff - however, there are specific guardrails for what constitutes policy in ICANN and there are specific Annexes that allow GNSO to make the determination as to what requires policy work.
Maxim Alzoba (RySG)
02:12:33
Must be really fun
Thomas Rickert
02:13:10
Kurt, I instantly thought about exactly the same question :-)
Justine Chew (ALAC Liaison)
02:15:14
Right. GNSO does the policy and ICANN Org does the implementation.
Paul McGrady
02:15:22
Thanks Jeff - super helpful to understand the context.
Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC)
02:15:32
Jeff - the SPIRT clearly contemplates a system where ICANN org does NOT control whether or not an issue involves policy.
Justine Chew (ALAC Liaison)
02:16:11
@Anne, SPIRT does not come into play as yet.
desiree_miloshevic
02:16:46
Thank you Jeff
Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC)
02:17:00
yes - Justine and that is the organizational problem. ODP is new and its creation requires recognition that it is doing implementation without the benefit of oversight by an IRT
Justine Chew (ALAC Liaison)
02:19:20
@Anne, I could be misunderstanding you but this is what I understand - ODP isn't implementation, it is "fact finding" for ICANN Board. There will still be an IRT to do implementation if and after the Board approves the Outputs.
Maxim Alzoba (RySG)
02:19:31
AGB is a historical PDF now
Jim Prendergast
02:19:48
The group could not reach consensus on what the status quo was on closed generics. Important distinction.
Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC)
02:20:31
@Paul - there was no Sub Pro consensus on the point of view you express that the lack of a ban in 2012 meant that was the status quo. Several members of Sub Pro believed the Status Quo was the Board's denial of Closed Generics based on the REsolution
Chris Disspain
02:21:09
I agree Jim. From a Board perspective (as I had at the time) the absence of the mention of closed generics did not mean they were fine. Rather that they weren’t considered. Y+The Board felt cornered in having to create a way to deal with them and decided at that time that it should not owe put in tat position again.
Chris Disspain
02:21:39
*shoud not be put in that position again
Maxim Alzoba (RySG)
02:21:39
no consensus meant - no changes
Kurt Pritz
02:21:54
@Chris: they were discussed in the many public sessions reviewing and modifying the AGB
Chris Disspain
02:22:10
but there was no policy Kurt
Keith Drazek (Verisign)
02:22:47
Noting the chat above, I'd probably frame ODPs as "assessing implementation requirements and impacts" rather than "doing implementation." But clearly, the role of PDP, ODP and IRT in GNSO processes require a common understanding across the community, Board and Org, and I feel that's what we're wrestling with at the moment. We need to maintain the procedural structures that provide predictability and transparency, while also looking for opportunities to conduct our work more efficiently. (I'm not speaking about SubPro specifically here, but process generally.)
Kurt Pritz
02:23:24
Right - the policy was a set of restrictions and regulations. The policy could not state everything that was allowed.
Chris Disspain
02:23:33
that’s true
Mark Datysgeld
02:24:05
Can anybody outline very specifically and narrowly what the key issue with closed generics would be?
Justine Chew (ALAC Liaison)
02:24:12
@Paul, I wouldn't say that the SubPro PDP operated on the status quo being CG as allowed is accurate.
Chris Disspain
02:24:14
But if I remember correctly, the Board provided the GNSO with a list of matter it wanted delay with in sub pro and closed generics was one of them
Chris Disspain
02:24:31
*wanted dealt with
Justine Chew (ALAC Liaison)
02:24:34
What the Board says now is what the Board says now.
Chris Disspain
02:24:44
true, again
Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC)
02:24:45
@Paul - just Love your characterization of this issue as a "bridge that can be quickly and easily crossed". Wonderful optimism on your part!
Paul McGrady
02:25:09
@Anne - optimism is my thing! :-)
Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC)
02:25:41
I think Jeff made a very practical proposal on resolving this issue within the Sub Pro process.
Griffin Barnett
02:27:46
On DNS abuse, ultimately we need to identify where we can implement standard, enforceable policies (via contract) on issues where there is agreement it is within ICANN's remit... if there is no hook for contractual improvements, there's no use having endless dialogue and ICANN's role in all this will be lost
Maxim Alzoba (RySG)
02:28:34
there is a need to avoid DNS abuse and non DNS related internet abuse being conflated
Stephanie Perrin
02:29:13
+1 Maxim, drawing that bright red line is something that could have been addressed as a risk in a PIA
Stephanie Perrin
02:29:28
It is another unresolved definitional problem
Theo Geurts GNSO Council
02:30:28
I doubt there is any low hanging fruit out there, but who knows
Kurt Pritz
02:34:03
To those who could not attend, I recommend watching the recording of the Plenary DNS Abuse session (that explained malicious v abused domains) that immediately preceded this meeting. I learned quite a bit how parties handle different abuse types differently.
Stephanie Perrin
02:34:43
Thanks Kurt, hard to cover everything at these meetings.
Stephanie Perrin
02:35:02
So recommendations of relevancy very much appreciated.
Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC)
02:35:22
@Mark D. - re Closed Generics - the specific narrow issue is bound to be the GAC Consensus Advice that a Closed Generic must "serve a public interest goal". (This is not the same as the TLD operating in the Global Public Interest. It is specific to the string applied for and the details of the Application.) There were three models discussed in Sub Pro. As Paul mentioned, some Sub Pro participants advocated no such restriction on CG applications. Then Jeff proposed a way forward and in addition, several other members backed a third model. Presumably those three models would be the starting point for the cooperative effort requested by the Board.
Paul McGrady
02:35:32
@Kurt - agree. That was a very interesting session. Part of a very rich week on DNS abuse content.
Javier Rúa ccNSO Council
02:35:43
Agreed @Kurt and if anyone can get a look at the chat room in that DNS Plenary, it was very very rich and substantive.
Maxim Alzoba (RySG)
02:35:51
+1
Amr Elsadr
02:36:03
You’ve been missed in the GNSO, Lars.
Mark Datysgeld
02:36:37
@Anne thank you for the explanation
Jeffrey Neuman
02:40:30
Karen and Lars have great teams! Plus Lars I do love the graphics you use on your slide ;)
Karen Lentz
02:41:09
@Jeff, 100%
Jeffrey Neuman
02:41:20
Don’t worry Lars, i try to block that out too
Jeffrey Neuman
02:45:27
This is a great presentation and I think worth the time we went over.
Jeffrey Neuman
02:47:25
Rather than just surveys, perhaps scheduling a few 1:1 meetings with members of the IRTs to discuss how things went. Surveys do not provide the greatest feedback IMHO
Jeffrey Neuman
02:50:01
Yes, 100% support earlier ODPs / implementation
Stephanie Perrin
02:50:57
I certainly support the ODPs, which we acknowledged was fact finding/research, at an earlier phase
Jeffrey Neuman
02:51:44
In future meetings, I think this type of presentation is very useful and would be great to do this with other teams that interact with the GNSO.
Justine Chew (ALAC Liaison)
02:51:51
Thank you @Lars, but you didn't have any your signature graphics in the slides ;)
Maxim Alzoba (RySG)
02:51:52
adding some timelines to the presentation would be really good
Thomas Rickert
02:51:58
Thanks Lars! Great job!
Jeffrey Neuman
02:53:32
I believe there is a lot of interaction between the GNSO Policy staff and the GDS teams. So that does take place, but perhaps Paul is suggesting that some of that interaction (which we know is going on) is brought out into the public.
Stephanie Perrin
02:54:15
Berry certainly has excellent scary spreadsheets to work from….adding another consultation column to revise estimates
Alex Deacon
02:54:52
On timing and volunteer expectations I note that the Phase 1 EPDP Policy took 6 months. Yes the Phase 1 EPDP IRT will take almost 4 years. (3.75 years if we believe the IRT will complete in Q3 2022). Not to mention the IRT will go into enforcement 18 months after approved. Something is broken.
Paul McGrady
02:54:57
Berry has the best, scariest spreadsheets!
Jeffrey Neuman
02:55:04
So, at each ICANN GNSO Council meeting, perhaps a spotlight on different GDS teams like this one
Alex Deacon
02:55:06
*Yet (not Yes)
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
02:55:43
Yes that work could indeed be well referenced in this @Stephanie
Amr Elsadr
02:55:52
@Paul: +1 :-)
Lawrence Olawale-Roberts (MicroBoss)
02:56:08
Excellent presentation, timely implementation is key
Jeffrey Neuman
02:56:09
@Alex - Sometimes implementation can understandably take longer than the policy development, but yes this IRT has been taking quite a long time.
Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC)
02:56:16
+1 Stephanie - the checks and balances are in the GNSO Operating Procedures
Jeffrey Neuman
02:57:00
Yes I agree
Paul McGrady
02:57:02
@Lars - agree, those kind of exit poll questions make sense. We already have a process on the "did we get it right" kinds of questions (reviews).
Jeffrey Neuman
02:57:13
And those discussions during the PDP would be the best solution
Justine Chew (ALAC Liaison)
02:57:59
@Lars, I'd like to know if there's anything GDS thinks GNSO Council can do to help you help us.
Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC)
02:58:04
Lars is correct that the questions would have come up during implementation. That is why I say the ODP is doing implementation work. The Final Report assumed IRT and SPIRT and provided mechanisms to deal with those questions.
Paul McGrady
02:58:08
@Kurt - upstream! :-) Love it.
Stephanie Perrin
02:58:10
It is indeed a problem. Certainly we are guilty of vague wording in the Charters we produce, in the interests of moving forward
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
02:58:17
I have to agree (for what that is worth) @Jeff
Tomslin Samme-Nlar
02:58:28
Absolutely agree and support having those conversations during the PDP. If we did, we wouldn't be going to the GAC now for an "agreeable position" on closed generics. That would have been dealt in the PDP
Jeffrey Neuman
02:58:59
One thing we have done during this ODP is that the ICANN ODP team has access to the Google Doc where we are drafting our answers. And if they have any questions, they can bring them up while we are drafting the answers as opposed to waiting until after the answers are submitted.
Jeffrey Neuman
02:59:07
This can and should be done during the PDPs
Jeffrey Neuman
02:59:29
[And by “this ODP”, I mean SubPro ODP]
Lars Hoffmann - ICANN org
02:59:39
@justine. thank you for the question. maybe that is something we can start discussing during future meetings.
Stephanie Perrin
03:00:02
The question is, who bears the responsibility for pulling these issues out, and reporting to the council. Sounds like the liaison, already a burnout role IMHO
Steve Chan - ICANN Org
03:00:29
Here is the response from Goran that Flip just referenced: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/marby-to-fedorov-02mar22-en.pdf
Jeffrey Neuman
03:00:59
Thanks Flip. Important questions.
Justine Chew (ALAC Liaison)
03:00:59
Apologies, I have to leave for the IDNs EPDP.
Maxim Alzoba (RySG)
03:00:59
ICANN Bylaws do not seem to be in favour of the Internet separation (personal comment)
Phil Marano
03:01:27
Doesn't ICANN's response to Ukraine necessitate that ICANN do something about RUNet, because it is de facto fragmentation of the Internet?
Phil Marano
03:01:59
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-50902496
Nathalie Peregrine - ICANN Org
03:02:09
If you would like to comment, please raise your hand and we will prompt you to unmute your mics.
Jeffrey Neuman
03:02:40
I always have questions, but since we are way over, I will not ask any - to everyone’s relief
Keith Drazek (Verisign)
03:02:41
Great meeting of the GNSO Council! Thanks all.
Olga Cavalli
03:02:53
thanks all!
Maxim Alzoba (RySG)
03:02:54
thanks all
Herb Waye Ombuds
03:03:00
Take care all, stay safe and be kind
Paul McGrady
03:03:02
great call! thanks all
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
03:03:04
bye Thx
Jeffrey Neuman
03:03:05
Thanks all. See you at The Hague!
Antonia Chu - GNSO Council
03:03:06
Thanks all
Matthew Shears
03:03:06
Many thanks!
Wisdom Donkor
03:03:07
Thanks all
Keith Drazek (Verisign)
03:03:08
Thanks Philippe!
John McElwaine
03:03:10
bye
David Olive - ICANN Org
03:03:11
Thanks All
Roberto Gaetano - NextGen Mentor
03:03:21
Bye all