Logo

051040011 GNSO Council - Shared screen with speaker view
Nathalie Peregrine - ICANN Org
34:48
Welcome Mark, welcome Farell!
Mark Datysgeld
35:07
Apologies for missing rollcall, the link from the agenda was giving me "meeting expired".
Nathalie Peregrine - ICANN Org
35:17
@mark we are looking into this
Farell Folly
35:40
Thx all, apologies for joining late.
Maxim Alzoba
39:31
@Berry - what is the change of the ODP timeframe shift from the last time?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
42:23
this style of dashboard regular outout has been found *very* usable and accessible in other Reviews/Activities I have been involved with... Useful indeed!
Maxim Alzoba
42:59
it is still a static tool for us
Mary Wong - ICANN Org
47:29
There is a broader context for Berry’s and the GNSO team’s current approach toward project and program management. The Policy Team is developing a uniform approach toward these matters that utilizes relevant tools and frameworks that have been deployed org-wide (an initiative you may recall from previous updates by Goran and org). Berry has been key to the Policy Team’s efforts and what we hope to ultimately achieve is clearer and more data-driven reporting to the community.
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
54:57
Where are the dates for selection of ODP Liaison for Next Round, and Implementation Review Team for Next Round?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
58:17
Thank you @Berry
Maxim Alzoba
01:00:03
@Berry, please return numbers of lines to the PDF, it is easier to refer to a particular items
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:02:01
Right - Council Approves ODP Liaison and doesn't the Council create the IRTs?
Maxim Alzoba
01:02:31
I have a short notice on the tool
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:03:46
But by the time the Board kicks it off, shouldn't we be prepared? If we wait, then we lose another few months, right?
Mary Wong - ICANN Org
01:03:51
The timing for implementation depends on the Board taking action, and responsibility for the implementation work lies with GDS rather than Policy - so we don’t manage those timelines (as Berry is indicating).
Maxim Alzoba
01:04:11
very short
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:04:27
@Mary - of course....but we should not always have to be reactive.....that causes delay.
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:05:00
We were told the Board WILL launch an ODP, and of course there WILL be an IRT.....we should still estimate in advance in my opinion as opposed to rushing last minute
Berry Cobb
01:05:26
Thanks Maxim. I will add back the row numbers.
Steve Chan - ICANN Org
01:05:50
@Jeff, that is the purpose of agenda item 7.2. While the ODP is not yet official, the intention is indeed, to plan ahead and think about that process to identify the Council liaison to the SubPro ODP.
Mary Wong - ICANN Org
01:05:51
The Council can of course decide when to initiate an IRT, but it may be helpful to consult with GDS to ascertain an optimal time to do so.
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:06:55
@Mary and Steve - I was just using those as "examples". If we know things WILL happen, we should still put them on the Action Decision Radar in my opinion.
Berry Cobb
01:08:10
Thanks Philippe. That is for sure where I'd like to see it evolve. I also depend on the Council and the GNSO to see if I'm off base with a date. I try to see all I can, but difficult to be everywhere. ;-)
Maxim Alzoba
01:08:37
Congrats, Olga!
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:08:44
Unrelated question....Is it possible to have all of these project management docs in 1 place as opposed to have to first go to the Wiki Page for the ADR, then separately to the PM Tool, and then separate to the others? Can we just have a "Program Management Page"?
Olga Cavalli
01:09:02
thanks
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:09:20
Congratulations @Olga!
Mark Datysgeld
01:09:30
Great to have you, Olga.
Pam Little
01:09:30
Thanks Olga for stepping up to lead this effort.
Tatiana Tropina
01:09:37
Thank you Olga!
Tatiana Tropina
01:10:11
Not only okay, very grateful that you stepped up.
Stephanie Perrin
01:10:23
Yes we are delighted you stepped forward Olga!
Olga Cavalli
01:10:47
thanks all, looking forward to working with you all!
Mary Wong - ICANN Org
01:15:35
Councilor may recall that there was extensive discussion amongst the Council prior to your action on the Curative Rights PDP recommendations in April 2019.
Maxim Alzoba
01:17:58
there was a situation with the potential of court hearings (which delayed the whole thing)
Stephanie Perrin
01:18:16
Nice explanation Pam, thanks.
Mark Datysgeld
01:18:31
What was the Board decision regarding recommendations 1-4 at the end of the day?
Mark Datysgeld
01:18:48
I remember them discussing the matter in... 2019?
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:18:57
I believe the Board was waiting for us to complete this work
Tatiana Tropina
01:19:03
I remember us discussing in Panama like crazy, June 2018.
Mary Wong - ICANN Org
01:19:25
The Addendum elaborates further on this point, noting that some Councilors had been concerned that the effect of Rec 5 would be to give IGOs less protection than they have today, while the Curative Rights PDP had been launched to explore how to address IGO (and INGO) needs and concerns regarding the current UDRP and URS.
Tatiana Tropina
01:19:26
Can’t believe it’s already 3 years.
Mark Datysgeld
01:19:27
Aha. A little lost on why this work hasn't wrapped up.
Maxim Alzoba
01:19:37
there is no way to remove the immunity here, without the desire of the countries who formed the particular IGO (why do they need that?)
Mark Datysgeld
01:19:41
Okay, very lost rather
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:20:16
To make it more complicated, this actually has been considered together with our 2013/2014 Consensus Policy on removing the reservations of IGO Acromymns
Mary Wong - ICANN Org
01:20:28
@Tanya, LOTS of discussion, yes :) @Mark, confirming that the Board has not yet voted on Recs 1-4.
Tatiana Tropina
01:20:41
Maxim, no — there is no way to remove immunity. But I don’t think the WT is going to remove it, they just have to decide what to do in that situation where things go to square one because of it
Marie Pattullo
01:20:42
There are many IGOs affected - not just one.
Stephanie Perrin
01:20:58
I have a feeling it is clearer for those of us who have not focused on this work :-)
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:21:33
That was the point of the GAC Advice in the Communique. The Board let the GAC know that it was going to implement the 2013/2014 Consensus Policy and the GAC has asked that before it does (eg., remove the reservation of acronyms), that this work be finalized.
Mark Datysgeld
01:21:55
So it's basically in an endless loop
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:22:36
Its a set of issues each dependent on the other....but there is an end.
Tatiana Tropina
01:22:48
So basically we have to compete this work in order to release the acronyms blocked for the IGOs?
Mark Datysgeld
01:23:02
+1 to Tatiana's qurstion
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:23:05
@Tatiana - That is the GAC's Advice.
Marie Pattullo
01:23:08
That's what we said at the time Stephanie - it's international law/jurisdiction expertise that's needed, not really RPMs expertise.
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:23:18
But that does not mean that we have to accept that.
Mary Wong - ICANN Org
01:23:22
@Tanya, @Mark, not necessarily.
Tatiana Tropina
01:23:28
Mary, thanks.
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:23:35
Which was my point at the last meeting of addressing the GAC Advice, but the Council chose not to
Tatiana Tropina
01:23:57
In any case it would be up to the Board?
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:24:30
It is up to the Board, yes. But unfortunately, they do not have the GNSO view in front of them because we did not respond
Mary Wong - ICANN Org
01:25:20
@Tanya, the shortest answer for today’s purpose is that launching an EPDP to provide a procedural home for the IGO Work Track isn’t related to the question of how IGO acronyms that are currently temporarily reserved can be removed from the Reserved List :)
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:25:22
But that relates to my recommendations of what we should put in the communique response or some other vehicle to respond/comment on advice
Tatiana Tropina
01:25:48
Jeff I am not sure we can have a “view” on this on the Council if there is no agreed policy outcomes yet (personal opinion) well certainly at least not in our response to GAC communique
Marie Pattullo
01:26:22
Right Mary - this is procedure, to allow the WG to get on with substance.
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:26:31
@Mary - Yes, this decision to initiate the ePDP has nothing to do with the Board's decision of whether to approve or not approve the removal of the reservations.
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:26:55
BUT, the GAC believes it does impact the WHEN this removal occurs
Tatiana Tropina
01:27:11
@Mary, thanks. Pieces came together. I very much understand the WT after spending hours on discussing this — starting with addendum and up till now, but there were some missing connections between the parts
Mark Datysgeld
01:27:13
Can we actually ensure that the EPDP teamm will have the tools and information they need to do this work?
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:27:36
@MArk - we should refer that question to John
Mark Datysgeld
01:27:41
mine
Marie Pattullo
01:27:45
That's a question for John I think, Mark, as liaison?
Mark Datysgeld
01:27:50
Possibly
Mary Wong - ICANN Org
01:27:52
@Jeff, as Philippe noted in his introduction, providing a procedural home for the Work Track is a practical way to maintain the current momentum within the Work Track and allow for timely conclusion of the work.
Tatiana Tropina
01:27:58
We have Chris who is a chair on the call
Pam Little
01:28:34
@Nathalie, could you move up to slide #3
Pam Little
01:28:37
pelase
Pam Little
01:28:41
please
Marie Pattullo
01:28:41
Oops - sorry - then ask Chris! Chris?
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:28:57
@Mary - no one was saying otherwise. My point was related to Mark's question on the interdependencies at the Board level.
Maxim Alzoba
01:28:57
it might be a good idea
Chris Disspain
01:29:00
Hello All, thanks for having me…Happy to explain when called upon
Mark Datysgeld
01:30:27
yes
Pam Little
01:32:10
Welcome, Chris.
Maxim Alzoba
01:36:12
IGOs may enjoy immunity in all cases
Kurt Pritz
01:36:26
Do the EPDP rules prohibit changing a prior PDP recommendation or do I misunderstand that? (So that the EPDP must be consistent and not “generally” consistent with Recs1-4.)
Maxim Alzoba
01:36:34
and there is no way to prevent that
Mark Datysgeld
01:37:28
Transparency is good, the "problem" is in terms of the fragmentation of the process and our ability to help procedures be set in the best way possible,
Marie Pattullo
01:38:12
No we can't change any laws of course Maxim, but we can figure out a procedure that works in the (rare) cases where this might be an issue,
Mark Datysgeld
01:38:23
One very serious complaint from the ICANN reform project (Brian's project) was "groups arrive at conclusions only to find out way later on that it cannot be implemented or is not consistent with X and Y"
Mary Wong - ICANN Org
01:38:50
@Kurt, an EPDP at heart is, like a PDP, a policy making mechanism for the GNSO. As such, the Council can in subsequent policy development work (whether PDP or EPDP) overturn prior policy decisions, if so warranted and appropriate. However, it will depend on the scope of the later instructions - whether that later EPDP/PDP has the width to do so.
Maxim Alzoba
01:39:06
@Marie, we will see, anyway we could say after that - we did all we could
Tatiana Tropina
01:39:21
We had the discussion about shadow policy repeal after EPDP
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:39:37
The only difference between an ePDP and a PDP is that no issue report is required and no constituency statements need to be collected prior to starting work
Marie Pattullo
01:39:38
And no one can ask more of us Maxim ;-)
John McElwaine
01:39:50
If it can't then I'd like to re-raise the issue of Thick WHOIS being overturned by the EPDP.
Tatiana Tropina
01:40:06
John, this is vile :-)
Chris Disspain
01:40:11
Go for it John!!!
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:40:15
Therefore, any outcome in an ePDP has the same effect as an outcome in an ePDP
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:40:33
sorry the last word should be PDP
Mary Wong - ICANN Org
01:40:35
@Pam, exactly, thank you.
Berry Cobb
01:41:02
TPR is not an EPDP.
Tomslin Samme-Nlar
01:41:22
hahaha...good observation @Maxim
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:41:25
Or, we can just redefine the ePDP as a PDP
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:41:34
:)
Mark Datysgeld
01:41:45
Jeff is echoing my thoughts right now
Tatiana Tropina
01:41:47
No no there are very limited reasons to start the EPDP
Mark Datysgeld
01:41:52
we seem to just be moving to EPDP period
Tatiana Tropina
01:41:56
It jus seems we have a reason every time :D
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:42:15
Apparently we just don't like Issue Reports
Maxim Alzoba
01:42:50
in Russian we have a saying : there is nothing more constant than temporary
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:43:10
So really, we can just revise the PDP Manual to remove the Issue Report requirements and then every ePDP is actually now a PDP
Tatiana Tropina
01:43:11
Maxim yes that’s be best and the truest one :D
Maxim Alzoba
01:43:13
what is going to be next - eePDP?
Mark Datysgeld
01:43:37
@Maxim hopefully yes
Mark Datysgeld
01:43:44
then we can take 5 years instead of 10
Stephanie Perrin
01:43:56
I think xepdp is better….extra EPDP
Maxim Alzoba
01:44:52
sePDP = super express PDP
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:45:01
Stephanie - xPDP sounds more hip
Chris Disspain
01:45:37
Thank you all…It’s been 16 years since I last chaired a PDP (ccNSO internal rules!) so I am privileged to be given another opportunity after all this time!!! :-)
Maxim Alzoba
01:46:37
it was only 16 years :)
Chris Disspain
01:46:50
:-)
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:48:32
Lets vote :)
Stephanie Perrin
01:48:34
Just promise the XEPDP won’t take 16 years Chris! I am beginning to wonder about the current EPDP….
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:48:36
Well you all vote :)
Tatiana Tropina
01:48:49
😆 Jeff
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:49:12
You vote....I will have a drink
Mark Datysgeld
01:49:46
Free drinks? What are those? Last time I heard of those, we were all in Canada.
Nathalie Peregrine - ICANN Org
01:57:31
@Jeff yes, I just realised that, will find another slot.
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
01:59:41
I will help however I can
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
02:00:06
Thanks Nathalie :)
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
02:03:12
Who did you all get for the entertainment this year?
Steve Chan - ICANN Org
02:03:35
Jeff, no one told you that you’ll be singing?
Maxim Alzoba
02:03:46
we will all read PDFs
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
02:03:47
Hey...if the price is right
Maxim Alzoba
02:04:14
due to being the most liked and excited enjoinment here
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
02:05:20
I would be happy to do a Musical Theater for Beginners seminar
Marie Pattullo
02:05:30
Do we have rough dates?
Marie Pattullo
02:06:30
i.e. Nov/Dec/Jan...?
Marika Konings
02:07:15
@Marie - the current thinking is November
Nathalie Peregrine - ICANN Org
02:07:20
@Marie, the SPS would start tentatively on the week of the 8th November, but spanning two weeks. It seemed sensible to leave a week break between ICAN72 and the start of the SPS.
Marika Konings
02:07:56
With some of the meet & greet an induction sessions taking place prior to the AGM.
Maxim Alzoba
02:08:13
as an additional material (also we could copy paste names of items from that )
Marie Pattullo
02:10:03
Thanks both!
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
02:10:11
Timing?
Marika Konings
02:10:16
@Maxim - I am not sure I understand what you are suggesting. Which references are you referring to in which materials?
Tatiana Tropina
02:10:25
Nothing from me
John McElwaine
02:10:32
That's a good idea
Maxim Alzoba
02:11:03
@Marika, we had items from the previous SPS meeting, on a dashboard, so just lists of those items as PDFs , numbered like , item 5 (2020) - something
Mark Datysgeld
02:11:21
Getting some Daft Punk here
Mark Datysgeld
02:11:28
Sounds nice
Maxim Alzoba
02:11:31
audio is borked
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
02:11:34
I thought it was just my audio
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
02:11:41
Good reference @mark
Maxim Alzoba
02:11:52
the only word was “until … can you hear”
Mark Datysgeld
02:12:29
we can do it... one more time
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
02:12:38
While waiting - Is there a timeline for the EOI
Marika Konings
02:12:39
Thanks, Maxim - I’ll need to look back at the materials we used for the previous SPS to see exactly what you mean, but yes, if we can make things easier, we’ll definitely try to do that :-)
Marie Pattullo
02:13:34
I kind of love that I can hear Australia better than France. Now that's tech for you.
Maxim Alzoba
02:13:37
@Marika, it is a side material to simplify copy pasting + allow to understand how GNSO Council thinking evolved
Maxim Alzoba
02:13:56
yes
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
02:14:08
I always hear Australia over every one else....they are genetically louder ;)
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
02:14:30
:-)
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
02:14:33
That was a joke in case the Ombudsman is reaading
Marie Pattullo
02:14:58
And that from an American, Jeff? ;-)
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
02:15:11
Lol....A New Yorker American too
Jeff Neuman (GNSO Liaison to GAC)
02:16:09
So "No Agreement" is DIvergence?
Maxim Alzoba
02:17:53
Could we ensure it is not the Eternal PDP this time?
Pam Little
02:20:49
https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/expressions-of-interest-chair-of-registration-data-accuracy-scoping-team-4-8-2021-en
Pam Little
02:21:12
Or help spread the word.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
02:21:50
Bye for now then....
Flip Petillion
02:21:57
Thx !
Pam Little
02:22:00
Thanks all. Bye now
Tatiana Tropina
02:22:01
Thanks all, bye
Tom Dale
02:22:02
Thanks all. Bye.
John McElwaine
02:22:03
Bye
Marie Pattullo
02:22:04
Bye all!
David Olive
02:22:05
Thanks All