Overview

This APAC Space session was a readout of the virtual ICANN70 Meeting. In addition to an overview by Jia-Rong Low (ICANN), six community leaders/members shared their key perspectives and takeaways, with ICANN Board member Akinori Maemura providing reading notes on Board perspectives in his absence (under “Appendix” in the Presentation Slides).

Edmon Chung (DotAsia) facilitated the open community discussion. For AOB, Jean Chong (ICANN) reminded those interested about the next APAC Universal Acceptance (UA) Training session to be held on 13 April 2021.


Details of Session

ICANN70 Overview: Jia-Rong Low, ICANN APAC

ICANN70 welcomed 1,537 active participants, of which 287 participants were from the APAC region. Considering the Cancún meeting time zone, Jia-Rong noted that APAC attendance was “pretty good”. The top three participating APAC economies were India (70 participants), China (49), and Australia (34).

Compared to ICANN69, ICANN70 was condensed with 71 virtual sessions focusing on stakeholder group and cross-community discussions. GNSO Policy Development Process (PDP) Working Group (WG) meetings were also not featured but were conducted in parallel. Nevertheless, some policy related topics were discussed in cross-community discussions, such as:

  • PDP to Review the Transfer Policy – Jia-Rong noted the ongoing Call for Expressions of Interest for a Chair by 16 April 2021, and encouraged APAC nominations for the role. SO/AC leaders would receive invitation letters to appoint members to the PDP WG.
  • Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) Phase 2 Recommendations – The ICANN Board had agreed to proceed with an Operational Design Phase (ODP) review of the System for Standardized Access and Disclosure (SSAD). This would be an assessment by ICANN org on the SSAD’s operational aspects for the Board’s consideration.
  • Second Security, Stability and Resiliency Review (SSR2) – The Final Report included, amongst others, the topic of DNS abuse and was open for Public Comment till 8 April 2021.
  • ccNSO PDPs – ccPDP3 on the retirement of ccTLDs had its Initial Report out for Public Comment till 14 April 2021, while ccPDP4 on the deselection of IDN (Internationalized Domain Name) ccTLD strings reported good work progress.

Other notable topics featured at ICANN70 include:

  • High-interest plenary on Registry Voluntary Commitments (RVCs), previously known as Voluntary Public Interest Commitments (PICs).
  • Technical sessions held included Tech Day, a DNSSEC (DNS Security Extensions) and Security Workshop, and a session on KINDNS (Knowledge-sharing and Instantiating Norms for DNS and Naming Security) – a program by ICANN and the DNS technical community to develop a framework on key operational best practices.

GAC Stakeholder Perspectives: Pua Hunter, GAC Vice Chair

ICANN70 was the first time since virtual ICANN Meetings began that the GAC was able to provide consensus advice, this time to the Board to consider the GAC Minority Statement (in the GAC’s ICANN70 communique) on the EPDP Phase 2 Final Report. The GAC also sought follow-up on two of its previous advice to the Board. One was on the Competition, Consumer Trust and Consumer Choice Review (CCT), where the GAC was seeking a coordinated approach on the implementation of Review recommendations and requested periodic updates. The other advice was on protecting International Governmental Organization (IGO) Identifiers.

At ICANN70, the GAC focused on the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures (SubPro) PDP, DNS abuse mitigation, EPDP, and the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPM) PDP. For SubPro PDP, the GAC discussed seven topics of interest to it:

  1. Clarity and Predictability of Application Process – The GAC had concerns about the implementation of SPIRT (the Standing Predictability Implementation Review Team for reviewing potential issues related to the new gTLD program), which may be an area for GAC consensus advice.
  2. PICs – There was work here to address future public policy concerns and the need to establish policy recommendations on DNS abuse mitigation in the Final Report.
  3. Applicant Support and Participation of Underserved Regions – The GAC was interested to see an increase in the number of applications from underserved regions including support for reducing registry fees.
  4. Closed Generics (gTLDs of a generic or commonly used word (e.g. .book etc.) that do not allow second-level registrations by any other registrant except the registry itself) – The GAC’s opinion was for such applications to be suspended until related policy work could be developed.
  5. Community Based Applications and Auctions/Mechanisms of Last Resort – There was GAC support to align with ALAC’s Minority Statement on both these areas.
  6. GAC Early Warning and GAC Advice – The GAC noted that some applicants might not be able to address GAC Early Warnings and so decided to recall its language on these.

The GAC had its usual bilateral meetings with the Board, ALAC, and GNSO, and participated in cross-community sessions like the RVC plenary.

The GAC also shared concerns with other sections of the ICANN community about the costs and benefits of a new gTLD round. As next steps, the GAC would review the ALAC’s advice which could provide a basis for GAC consensus comments. It would also consider potential interstitial statements that it could separately put to the Board or together with the ALAC. The GAC might also provide advice to the Board before the latter decided on the SubPro PDP Final Report.

ccNSO Stakeholder Perspectives: Ai-Chin Lu, ccNSO Council Member

Ai-Chin shared some highlights of ccNSO’s various sessions:

  • Members Meeting Governance Session – This discussed current efforts to update ccNSO Rules and Guidelines on its governance. The expected work timeline was to call for volunteers to join the Rules drafting team, have the first draft of new Rules presented at ICANN71, and the final draft at ICANN 72.
  • Dialogue with 7 ccTLD-related ICANN Board Members – The practical implications of returning to face-to-face meetings was discussed where the importance of cross-community interactions and online learning was highlighted.
  • ccTLDs and the Future – Across two sessions, ccTLDs from different regions shared their views on future major developments and how to address them. The first session considered what the future of the Internet would look like, where, for example, Anil Kumar Jain (.in) shared on marketing, market consolidation, domain name growth, security, and the commitment of multistakeholders. Ai-Chin felt the second session had good atmosphere with more interactive discussion. This session covered domain name issues (such as maintaining a competitive edge and sustainable growth), ccTLD operational issues (such as what small and medium-sized ccTLDs could do to remain relevant), and government issues (such as how ccTLDs can encourage government participation in the GAC, and whether ccTLD-Government relationships are more of an opportunity or a threat to the future of the ccTLD industry).

New appointments were also announced in the ccNSO’s Council Meeting. Alejandra Reynoso (.gt) was appointed Council Chair. From APAC, Jordan Carter (.nz) was appointed as a Vice Chair.

ALAC Stakeholder Perspectives: Maureen Hilyard, ALAC Chair

Maureen said ALAC’s program at ICANN70 was very much aligned with its mandated role in ICANN to support policy development activities and community outreach. This included presenting its two new At-Large courses on ICANN Learn which were worked on for a year to help provide training/education for both members and the wider community:

  • ICANN At-Large: Welcome to Our World – An introduction to the At-Large community and ALAC; and
  • At-Large Policy Development: A Guide for At-Large Participants – A guide on how At-Large contributes to ICANN policy development and unravels how At-Large operates.

At-Large had established a tradition for ICANN Meetings where a welcome session would introduce At-Large Talking Points – their perspectives on issues that may arise at the ICANN Meeting, which were also handy for At-Large members to remember when contributing to sessions. There were also three At-Large policy sessions developed around a model that were hoped to be more conversational and interesting:

  • The Future of ICANN’s Mandate and the Development of the DNS – On getting more young people involved in ICANN and their perspectives of those who had been in the Fellowship and NextGen programs.
  • Reimagining ICANN’s Role; Responding to National Pressures – How ICANN and its multistakeholder model could be reimagined for the future. Key discussion points touched on how an early warning system was also needed for global changes such as the impact of the EU’s GDPR, how important it is for ICANN stakeholders to work together on these, and to ensure an effective evolution of ICANN’s multistakeholder structure. ALSes were seen as essential to public awareness-raising about how the Internet works and ICANN’s role.
  • Applicant Support: What does Success Look Like? – What concrete indicators might identify effective and useful applicant support for the next round of new gTLDs, but also what would make for a more targeted and effective outreach to underserved regions.

Maureen also noted how the ALAC had been developing a very close relationship with the GAC. Although both sides did not always agree, she felt they had discovered that they could support each other.

During the open discussion, Donna Austin (GoDaddy) shared her view that the community and the Board seemed to be overwhelmed with the weight of their work and a review of bottlenecks should be undertaken to relieve or re-prioritise the situation. Pua agreed, while Edmon thought that the COVID pandemic and virtual-only meetings could partly be contributing factors. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (ALAC) highlighted that the third Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3) had also taken very seriously proposals for continuous improvements and a holistic review of ICANN’s initiatives. Continuing on participation, she also reiterated that there is need for stronger representation from APAC in PDP WGs. She suggested APAC views can be channelled through stakeholder groups such as the ALAC or community platforms like APAC Space.

GNSO Stakeholder Perspectives: Pam Little, GNSO Council Vice Chair

In the GNSO Council’s Recommendations Report on SubPro PDP, the Council had requested for the ICANN Board to initiate the ODP. Private auctions and ICANN auctions of last resort – two topics with obtained strong support but significant opposition – were not adopted by the Council, which wanted the Board to take into consideration. For closed generics, there was full consensus by the PDP WG that there was no agreement on the topic, which the Council viewed as still being a divergent outcome and thus did not approve either.

On the Transfer Policy PDP, Pam shared on the composition of the 31-member WG and the rationale behind balancing it to try and support diversity and greater participation. Due to the policy’s impact on Contracted Parties, RrSG (10 members) and RySG (3 members) would be allowed more representatives than other stakeholder groups (2 members each only). However, the number of representatives per stakeholder group should not sway the consensus-decision process, and the Chair of the WG will have to ensure that all perspectives are appropriately accounted for when assessing consensus.

On EPDP Phase 2A, the team continued to work on unresolved Phase 2 topics (e.g. on differentiating legal vs. natural persons, and anonymizing email contacts), and were waiting for external legal advice on any possibility of consensus. The team aims to release its Initial Report in May 2021. On the EPDP’s SSAD, the Council requested the Board for a consultation, given the number of minority statements expressing concerns and the number of recommendations that did not reach consensus.

RSSAC Stakeholder Perspectives: Hiro Hotta, RSSAC Member

Three RSSAC meetings were held at ICANN70 to discuss:

  1. Principles Guiding the Operation of the Public Root Server System (RSS) – Referring to the RSSAC037 model published in 2018, Hiro highlighted the 11 core principles of the Root Server System (RSS) that enabled the RSS to be successful so far. However, the wording of some of the principles was not easy to understand, hence comprehensive explanations were being elaborated as text. This would also help the new RSS governance body being deliberated by the RSS Governance Working Group (RSS GWG).
  2. Illustrative Types of ‘Rogue’ Root Server Operators (RSOs) – This was being worked on by an RSSAC Caucus Work Party as part of proposing an RSSAC Advisory to define what a ‘rogue’ RSO could be, and what actions might be needed (e.g. dismissal).
  3. Measurement of the Local Perspective on the RSS – Another RSSAC Caucus Work Party was working to measure where RSS service levels in various locations might be underserved, and therefore know better where new root server instances could be placed.

On the establishment of a new RSS governance body, Anupam Agrawal (RSSAC Caucus) suggested during the open discussion that it could be established in APAC to balance against the US where most RSOs were based. Hiro responded that details like this about the governance body would likely be discussed only at a later stage on implementation.

Youth Stakeholder Perspectives: Manju Chen, Youth4IG

Manju shared her personal experience as an ICANN70 participant, and of meetings by the Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group (NCSG) of which she is a member. EPDP, and conditions for return to face-to-face meetings, were of interest to the NCSG.  

On the virtual meeting experience, Manju felt the embedded interpretation services in Zoom encouraged more participants to speak in their native languages, while the reduction in use of Zoom webinar mode was welcomed for allowing more interactions and private chats. Meanwhile, time zone challenges remained, while existing language translation services did not extend to many APAC languages (only Chinese currently). She felt the meetings were more US and Europe-centric from the cultural references used and a lack of awareness of major APAC holidays compared to holidays like Christmas. She wished there would be more mentors for youths to encourage and support youth participation in the ICANN community. She also made a call for more mentors and youths to join Youth4IG.

In the open discussion, Cheryl concurred with Manju’s comments about language translation services being inadequate for APAC’s linguistic diversity which should be reconsidered. Edmon agreed. Pam also took note of the need to heighten awareness of cultural differences within the ICANN community and will share this feedback with the GNSO Council.

  • No labels