Logo

051040011 GNSO Council - Shared screen with speaker view
James Gannon
45:49
Made it just in time =)
Nathalie Peregrine
47:19
Please review ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior here: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-standards-2016-06-28-en.
Nathalie Peregrine
47:57
Welcome Matthew to the call!
Matthew Shears
48:22
Thanks!
erikamann
51:08
I can introduce the topic but I may not be able to read the motion. Thank you Rafik for doing this.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
52:12
Apologise for my delay in joining
Nathalie Peregrine
53:53
Welcome Cheryl!
Philippe Fouquart
57:44
+1 it'd be helpful.
Philippe Fouquart
57:49
(thanks Berry)
James Gannon
58:58
Yes much appreciated
Osvaldo Novoa
59:32
Hello all, sorry I’m late.
Nathalie Peregrine
59:45
Welcome Osvaldo!
Nathalie Peregrine
01:00:21
A reminder to all councilors to please set their chat dropdown menu to All Panelists and Attendees for observing attendees to be able to follow the exchanges.
Mary Wong
01:01:31
FYI WS2 implementation planning is continuing, including with the new Planning function under Xavier.
Berry Cobb
01:05:00
@James - I just emailed the MPP file to the list in the meantime.
Keith Drazek (Verisign)
01:06:30
Welcome to Becky and Matthew, the GNSO's appointed Board members. We very much appreciate your participation.
Keith Drazek (Verisign)
01:08:34
Also welcome to today's attendees/observers. Thanks for joining!
John McElwaine
01:22:52
Agree - Thank you to the hard work of the CCWG on Auction Proceeds.
Marie Pattullo
01:25:13
How many "can't live with" items are there, Rafik?
Marika Konings
01:27:21
Originally there were 41 but the group has managed to work their way through quite a few.
Marie Pattullo
01:27:49
Thanks Marika - so some are still outstanding? Do you know how many?
Marika Konings
01:28:04
but there may be a few were no agreement can be found - and where the group may need to agree to disagree.
Marie Pattullo
01:28:21
Thanks.
Marika Konings
01:28:46
For today’s meeting, we have a cluster of 6 items that are all related to the same topic, as well as one other item related to another recommendation.
Greg DiBiase
01:42:36
Marie- So if voting would not extend the reconvening of the group past September it would be acceptable to you?
Maxim Alzoba
01:43:25
after Tatiana
Marie Pattullo
01:44:46
I just don't think we need that dependency Greg - of course it would be great if we can get delivery/discussion/voting in short order but it doesn't need to be tied to it, I don't think?
Marie Pattullo
01:45:35
I can only speak for the BC reps, Maxim.
Greg DiBiase
01:45:38
but if it doesn't result in delay, what is the specific downside of voting that you are concerned about?
James Gannon
01:45:39
+1 to Maxim, we are already burning people out to the extent of them leaving ICANN
Maxim Alzoba
01:46:22
there is no value in discussing the same items again and again without any changes in input data.
Carlton Samuels
01:46:52
I have been following the EPDP . I cannot exclude a logical conclusion. There are folks dedicated to keeping the thing prolonged by the recurring arguments. And it seems to me someone needs to bell the cat
Marie Pattullo
01:48:57
As we say in the intro to the next steps doc, the issues were in the charter & need to be looked at properly with, for example, the new legal vs natural report. We've always seen this issues as important.
Carlton Samuels
01:49:55
When do we call time and get on with it?
Maxim Alzoba
01:50:44
all items were discussed in full
Marie Pattullo
01:50:57
Yes we need to manage time correctly & respectfully, but no - this is not a "business as usual" items, these aspects are part of the EPDP and have been from day one.
Maxim Alzoba
01:51:02
not agreed upon is not ‘not looked into’
Maxim Alzoba
01:51:40
also we need to take into account COVID and how it is affected the capacity of the community members
Maxim Alzoba
01:52:36
to participate
Tom Dale
01:52:43
Shifting too quickly into “EPDP3” will not give time to assess what worked/did not work/needs changing in terms of procedure and structure.
Maxim Alzoba
01:52:54
there might be no EPDP 3
Berry Cobb
02:04:19
Agreed. Actions or decisions made in regards to ADR, many will require a marker to point back too.
Maxim Alzoba
02:04:45
Aug is a vacations month, so it might be not a good idea
James Gannon
02:11:25
Would like to see observers admitted to that track, important for transparency and accountability etc
James Gannon
02:12:11
We previously had struggles on the Spec11 working group wit that I would like to see that avoided in advance
Keith Drazek (Verisign)
02:12:36
Correct, there is overlap and that's the subject of the Board's resolution from Kobe on IDN Variants.
Philippe Fouquart
02:13:17
THanks Ariel. Thanks Keith.
Berry Cobb
02:21:23
Here's the elevator summary pitch of the items: Informal:
Berry Cobb
02:21:26
URS Procedure Items:1. Terminology update - add as implementation guidance2. Terminology update - add as implementation guidance3. Addressed by draft WG recommendation4. Addressed by draft WG recommendation5. Not yet addressed - add as implementation guidance6. Not yet addressed - add as implementation guidance7. Not yet addressed, Reference Purpose 6-PA5 lawful basis8. Better addressed by IRT - add as implementation guidanceURS Rules Items:1. Terminology update - add as implementation guidance2. Terminology update - add as implementation guidance3. Terminology update - add as implementation guidance4. Terminology update - add as implementation guidance5. Terminology update - add as implementation guidance6. Addressed by draft WG recommendation7. Addressed by draft WG recommendation8. Better addressed by IRT - add as implementation guidance
Berry Cobb
02:21:55
Each item tracks to the details in the Wave 1 report.
erikamann
02:22:00
Apologies, everyone, but I have to continue driving. I still have few hours ahead of me. Take good care, friends.
Marie Pattullo
02:22:12
Drive safely, Erika!
Nathalie Peregrine
02:22:14
Thank you Erika!
erikamann
02:22:31
Thank you Nathalie! And thanks for all the help today.
Keith Drazek (Verisign)
02:22:37
Thanks Erika!
erikamann
02:22:56
Keith, Marie … thanks!
Mary Wong
02:24:18
The RPM WG’s prelim recs address a few of the issues to some extent. There will likely need to be some procedural discussions that may result (as Berry said) in terminology updates. Staff has some suggestions on that which, as John noted, we will be discussing with the WG chairs on Monday.
Marie Pattullo
02:26:27
Got you. That makes perfect sense. Thanks Berry!
James Gannon
02:27:04
Can we add them to the operational track in the ADR
Berry Cobb
02:28:22
@James all Rec27 items will be tracked to conclusion within the RDS Program, until we reach 100%.
Philippe Fouquart
02:29:33
And I believe the proposed next steps are that it's not.
Berry Cobb
02:29:58
@Marie - I forgot to mention, while redline terminology updates are not a decision to be made by the Council, there will be public comments on these redlines for the community, SGs/Cs to provide comments to any of the proposed changes.
James Gannon
02:31:13
new hand
Becky Burr
02:33:54
Just for note, Bylaws say SO/AC nominates a slate of proposed panel members, Board to confirm.
Keith Drazek (Verisign)
02:34:14
Thanks Becky
Mary Wong
02:35:08
To the extent that the community agreement is that a community group should be constituted, it is up to the GNSO how it wishes to appoint a rep to that group - which may be the SSC if you choose. That’s an internal GNSO selection issue but we are not at that stage yet.
Becky Burr
02:35:56
The IRP IOT does not have current authority for panel nominations, and technically Board/Org selects members in consultation with SO?AC
Becky Burr
02:36:18
the slate nomination is very very important and does require a specific skill set
Ariel Liang
02:36:49
This is the draft response open for Council comment: https://docs.google.com/document/d/12oTOgCo6Z98QZoMj1fA0sWfETe8m1BFn-hIjy8qumyo/edit?usp=sharing
James Gannon
02:36:54
Agree Becky, we would need to actively vest them with that role from our side. And doubly agree on its importance.
Maxim Alzoba
02:37:11
old hand
Mary Wong
02:37:23
+1 Becky. So if the decisio is to use the IRP IOT members (wholly or in part) and/or a community group (including IOT members if so desired) that is the vehicle for which the community may wish to use for the consultation.
Rafik dammak
02:39:57
deadline for comment on GNSO draft response is this Friday
Becky Burr
02:40:03
I think that at this point the choice of vehicle is up to the community. I believe that the community could designate the IRP IOT, but would need a process for doing so.
Julf Helsingius
02:40:23
Many thanks! I will still be here (and in the GAC liaison job) until ICANN69.... :)
Flip Petillion
02:40:39
I think Mary, Becky and I are saying the same thing.
Maxim Alzoba
02:40:39
Thanks Julf for all the work done
Flip Petillion
02:40:54
Thank you Julf !
Becky Burr
02:41:03
and of course, it might be appropriate for Board/Org to further consult with SO/ACs regarding composition of IRP IOT if that is the way the community wants to proceed, to ensure that the group has the necessary skill set and expertise.
James Gannon
02:41:15
Nope it was valuable for them both to be here too!
Becky Burr
02:41:20
thanks for inviting us, this has been extremely useful for me
Maxim Alzoba
02:41:23
thanks all and bye
Elsa Saade
02:41:24
Thank you all!
Matthew Shears
02:41:24
Thanks Keith - thanks all
Pam Little, RrSG
02:41:30
Thank you all
Marie Pattullo
02:41:31
Thanks all!
Osvaldo Novoa
02:41:34
Thanks all, bye
Philippe Fouquart
02:41:36
Thanks Keith, thanks all, bye.
David Olive
02:41:38
Thanks ALL