Expand all   Collapse all
NCSG Open Membership Meeting
3 September 2013 - Tuesday
20:00 - 22:00 UTC
Draft Discussion Agenda
I.  Review of Upcoming NCSG Annual Elections
A. Membership Check-In Process
B. Election Time-Table
C. Positions to Elect: 3 GNSO Councilors & 1 NCSG Chair
II.  NCSG DIDP / Reconsideration Request & ICANN's Lack of Accountability
ICANN's Unresponsive Response to NCSG DIDP Request - All data is secret!
  See background documents:
III.  Preparation for GNSO Council Meeting of 5 September

GNSO Council meeting audio cast : 
http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u

Item 3: Consent agenda 
3.1 - Locking of a Domain Name subject to UDRP Proceedings
GNSO Council approval of Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board
3.2 – Policy & Implementation Working Group
GNSO Council approval of co-chairs J.Scott Evans (BC) and Chuck Gomes (RySG).

Item 4: DRAFT MOTION - To approve Whois Survey Working Group (WSWG) final report and recommendations

 
This report is published in response to a request by the GNSO Council for a report and analysis on a survey about possible technical requirements of a future WHOIS Service.  The objective for the Working Group is to develop a set of proposed recommendations around the measurement of support of proposed technical requirements.  After consideration of community input on a draft survey and the implementation of the Lime Survey software within the ICANN IT infrastructure, the survey was made available to the community in September 2012.  ICANN staff compiled and consolidated the survey results and the WSWG completed the WSWG Final Report for delivery to the GNSO Council. Here the Council will review a draft motion in preparation for voting to approve the report it at the next meeting.

4.1 – Review the draft motion
Motion to approve Whois Survey Working Group (WSWG) Final Report and Recommendations:
WHEREAS,
 

1.     on 07 May 2009, the GNSO Council resolved that Policy Staff, with the assistance of technical staff and GNSO Council members as required, should collect and organize a comprehensive set of requirements for the Whois service policy tools;

 

2.     on 29 July 2010, Staff published the Inventory of Whois Service Requirements - Final Report;

 

3.     in July 2011, volunteers drafted a proposed charter for a Whois Survey "Working Group", preferring the term "Working Group" to "Drafting Team" in this case; http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/charter-wswg-06oct11-en.pdf;

 

4.     on 30 May 2012, the WSWG published a draft of the Whois Service Requirements Survey for public comment, http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/draft-whois-requirements-survey-30may12-en.htm;

 

5.     on 13 September 2012, the WSWG released the final Whois Service Requirements Survey to solicit input from community members on the possible technical requirements of a future Whois system, http://gnso.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-13sep12-en.htm;   

 

6.     on 13 September 2012, ICANN staff compiled and consolidated the survey results and the WSWG completed the WSWG Final Report, (http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/whois/wswg-final-21aug13-en.pdf)

 
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED,

1.     that the GNSO Council thanks the Whois Survey Working Group (WSWG) and ICANN staff for their efforts in conducting the survey and compiling survey results of possible technical requirements of a future Whois system;

 

2.     the GNSO Council further approves the recommendations, as defined in the Final Report (http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/whois/wswg-final-21aug13-en.pdf), to send the survey results to other applicable efforts regarding Whois and Domain Name Registration Data for their consideration. 

 
 
Item 5: UPDATE & DISCUSSION – A PDP to develop relevant policies for issues not dealt with during the course of the development of the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA)
ICANN staff has prepared a paper which summarises the outcomes of the 2013 RAA negotiations and so sets the scene for the subsequent, relevant policy development work to be managed by the Council.  Here the Council will receive an update from staff and confirm the intended course of action.

Item 6: UPDATE & DISCUSSION – Metrics and Reporting Working Group (WG)
Despite the unanimous support for this resolution, only six volunteers (3 GNSO, 3 ALAC) have signed up for this effort to date, which is not considered sufficiently representative to kick off the Drafting Team (DT).  At the ICANN meeting in Durban, ICANN staff was tasked with looking into and proposing alternative ways forward. Apart from renewing the call for volunteers or delaying this effort, the GNSO Council could consider, as this is a non-PDP WG, to explore an alternative approach not necessarily requiring the formation of a DT or WG.  Here the Council will review and discuss the alternatives and consider the next steps.

Item 7: DISCUSSION – GAC Engagement / Working with the BGRC WG
Here the Council will discuss activity to date and confirm the intended course of action going forward. 

Item 8: INPUT & DISCUSSION – Prospective improvements to the Policy Development Process (PDP)
The Council is committed to ongoing enhancements to the methods of working of the Council and the work initiated and managed by the Council. The PDP process is a cornerstone of policy making within the GNSO and, as such, the work of the Council.  The PDP outcomes and associated processes are the subject of focus and attention both within the GNSO and the broader ICANN Community. In this agenda item we will discuss a paper prepared by ICANN staff on potential improvements to the PDP process and consider the appropriate next steps.

Item 9: DISCUSSION – Role and scope of the Standing Committee on GNSO Improvements Implementation (SCI)
Here the Council will review input received at the ICANN meeting in Durban as well as any subsequent information and confirm the intended course of action.

Item 10: DISCUSSION – Forthcoming reviews of the GNSO and GNSO Council
As part of a periodic review process that is built into the ICANN model, board initiated reviews of the GNSO and the GNSO Council as an integral part of the GNSO are expected.  In order to be effectively prepared for these reviews, it was proposed in Beijing that a group be formed to understand the issues and begin to take appropriate next steps.  One key suggestion from Beijing was that any group (such as the Council) being reviewed undertakes a form of self-review.  The intended course of action may have been impacted by the recently announced proposal to delay any board initiated review activity.  Here the Council will discuss and potentially confirm the intended course of action of initiating a non-PDP WG.
IV.  Other Comment Periods or Policy Working Groups Updates
A.  Expert Working Group on Directory Services (aka WHOIS)
B.  Accountability and Transparency Review Team
C.  Special privileges for Red Cross, Intl Olympic Cmte and others Working Group
D.  Policy vs Implementation Working Group
E.  WHOIS working groups

V.  AoB?
For comments, suggestions, or technical support concerning this space, please email: ICANN Policy Department
© 2015 Internet Corporation For Assigned Names and Numbers