Page History

 17:00-18:30 UTC

For other times:

At-Large Leadership Session: Welcome to ICANN72, WG Updates & Policy Talking Points

Agenda:

1. Welcome by Maureen Hilyard, ALAC Chair and Opening Comments - (5 UTC)Virtual Welcome to Seattle and Opening Comments (15 mins8mins)
2. Aims and Overview of At-Large at ICANN72 ICANN72 - Maureen Hilyard (20 mins)
3. Review and Assigning of At-Large ICANN72 Talking Points - Jonathan Zuck ALAC Vice Chair, Policy (20 mins)(UTC)
Overview of Working Groups and 2021 Achievements (30 mins)
CPWG
4. 30 mins)

a. Unfinished Business- Closed Generics (Jonathan Zuck)

b. Tackling DNS Abuse (Joanna Kulesza)

c. ALAC-SSAC meeting (Andrei Kolesnikov)

d. ICANN Accountability & Transparency (Sebastien Bachollet)

e. Board - ALAC meeting (Maureen Hilyard)

f. ALAC - GAC meeting (Yrjo Lansipuro)

g. AFRALO-AfrICANN meeting (Seun Ojedeji)

h. At-Large Wrap-Up (Maureen Hilyard)

i. NARALO Social Events (Eduardo Diaz)

3. Overview of 2021 Achievements of  Core At-Large Workstreams (and including subgroups) (30 mins)

a. Consolidated Policy WG - Jonathan Zuck and Olivier Crepin-Leblond, Co-Chairs

b. Operations, Finance & Budget- Holly Raiche

1. OFB-WG Small Group - Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Chair 

c. Outreach and Engagement - Daniel Nanghaka

4. At-Large ICANN72 Talking Points - Jonathan Zuck ALAC Vice Chair, Policy (20 mins)

5. Closure  - Maureen Hilyard (2 mins)

Moderator: Maureen Hilyard

Lead: HU

Notes:  SV

RPMs: 

19:00-20:30 UTC

For other times: 

At-Large Policy Session 1: Unfinished Business: Closed Generics

Description:

What will happen with Closed Generics in subsequent rounds, where the 2012 Guidebook allowed for them, but the GAC advised against them, and there is currently no policy* in place?

While nearly all of the 300+ Outputs in the Final Report were approved by the GNSO Council, there are three exceptions that were NOT approved (i.e., Topic 23 in its entirety and recommendations 35.2 and 35.4 from Topic 35).

• The single Output under Topic 23: Closed Generics, the Working Group was unable to reach Consensus in recommending an alternate course of action.
• Closed Generics designation as “No Agreement” properly represents the outcome of the WG discussion. Unfortunately, the WG failed to develop a policy going forward for Closed Generics. There was no agreement within the WG on what the default for closed generic applications would be if we failed to recommend a policy. The 2012 AGB allowed for closed generics, but the 2012 implementation did not. 
• The 2012 AGB allowed for closed generics. Following the application period, the GAC issued advice that stated closed generics only be allowed to proceed if they were in the public interest. Applicants changed their designations from “closed” to “open” in order to move their applications through the process rather than get tied up in debates over how to define or prove public interest. 

The Board Public Comment period focused on all Outputs approved by the GNSO Council, rather than the Outputs that were not approved.  Following the Public Comment proceeding and operational assessment, the ICANN Board is expected to take action on the approved policy recommendations.

This begs the question, how will the closed generics issue be resolved? Should a focused PDP tackle the issue? Is the ODP going to consider how to handle closed generics? Is the ICANN Board finding some middle ground?

Agenda: