AT-LARGE GATEWAY

At-Large Website

ALAC

RALOs

At-Large Regional Policy Engagement Program (ARPEP)

At-Large Governance

At-Large Reports

Policy Comments & Advice

Working Groups

ICANN Meetings

At-Large Summit (ATLAS III)

At-Large Review Implementation Plan Development

ALAC and RALO Elections, Selections, and Appointments

At-Large FY25 Strategic Priority Activities

Versions Compared

Old Version 669

changes.mady.by.user Justine Chew

Saved on

compared with

New Version 670

changes.mady.by.user Justine Chew

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

Deck of Cards
idJul2024


Card
idShow_Jul2024
labelSHOW ME

GNSO Council Meeting #7 of 2024 held on 18 July 2024 


Card
idAgenda_Jul2024
labelAGENDA

GNSO Council Meeting #7 of 2024 held on 18 Jul 2024

Full Agenda  |  Documents  |  Motions

  • Item 1: Administrative Matters
  • Item 2: Opening Remarks / Review of Projects List and Action Item List. 
  • Item 3: Consent Agenda
    • GNSO PR Officer - Roles & Responsibilities
    • Confirmation of GNSO nominees to the Pilot Holistic Review
  • Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP on Temporary Specification Phase 1 Urgent Requests
  • Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Accuracy Check-in
  • Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - GNSO Review of GAC Communiqué
  • Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Update from Small Team Plus on Singulars/Plurals
  • Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - SubPro Small Team Supplemental Recommendations - Non-Adopted Recommendations
  • Item 9: COUNCIL UPDATE - Intellectual Property Constituency Request for Reconsideration
  • Item 10: Any Other Business

    • 10.1 - Aspirational Statement

    • 10.2 - SPS Actions Follow-up

      • Recommendations Report
      • Public Comment Review
      • Board Readiness

For notes on highlighted items click on MATTERS OF INTEREST tab above


Card
idMOI_Jul2024
labelMATTERS OF INTEREST

Matters of interest to ALAC/At-Large 

  • Item 1: Administrative Matters
    • Minutes of the GNSO Council Meeting on 16 May 2024 were posted on 01 June  2024.
    • Minutes of the GNSO Council Meeting on 12 June 2024 were posted on 01 July 2024.
  • Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP on Temporary Specification Phase 1 Urgent Requests
    • On 18 May 2019, the ICANN Board adopted the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data to enable contracted parties to continue to comply with existing ICANN contractual requirements and community-developed policies as they relate to registration directory services. GNSO Council initiated a one-year policy development process to confirm whether or not the Temporary Specification should become a consensus policy, and whether it provided an enduring framework for complying with the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). 
    • The EPDP Team sent its Phase 1 Final Report to Council on 20 February 2019, and Council voted to approve the Final Report on 4 March 2019. The Board subsequently adopted the Phase 1 Final Report on 15 May 2019, with the exception of Recommendation 1, Purpose 2, and Recommendation 12, which the Board did not adopt in full. The Board directed the ICANN President and CEO or their designee(s) to implement the policy recommendations. 
    • ICANN org convened an Implementation Review Team, which began meeting in May 2019. ICANN org published the draft Registration Data Policy for public comment on 24 August 2022. Several commenters expressed dissatisfaction with the implementation of Recommendation 18, specifically around the issue of the response timeline for urgent requests. The relevant portion of Recommendation 18 reads, “A separate timeline of [less than X business days] will considered [sic] for the response to ‘Urgent’ Reasonable Disclosure Requests, those Requests for which evidence is supplied to show an immediate need for disclosure [time frame to be finalized and criteria set for Urgent requests during implementation].”
    • Following the public comment period and subsequent discussion by the Implementation Review Team, the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) wrote to the Board about the topic of urgent requests on 23 August 2023. The Registrar Stakeholder Group wrote to the Board on 8 September 2023 in response to the GAC’s letter.
    • Following the receipt of these letters and further communication amongst Board members, the Board sent a letter to the GNSO Council on 3 June 2024, expressing its concerns with the text of Recommendation 18 related to urgent requests. 
    • Council will discuss the concerns raised in the Board’s letter and discuss next steps in light of the concerns.
  • Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Accuracy Check-in
    • The Registration Data Accuracy (RDA) Scoping Team was initiated by Council in July 2021 per the formation instructions. The Scoping Team was tasked with considering a number of accuracy-related factors such as the current enforcement, reporting, measurement, and overall effectiveness of accuracy-related efforts before making a recommendation to Council on whether any changes are recommended to improve accuracy levels, and, if so, how and by whom these changes would need to be developed (for example, if changes to existing contractual requirements are recommended, a PDP or contractual negotiations may be necessary to effect a change). 
    • The Scoping Team completed Assignment #1 (enforcement and reporting) and Assignment #2 (measurement of accuracy) and submitted its write up to Council on 5 September 2022. In its write up, the Scoping Team suggested moving forward with two proposals that would not require access to registration data, namely a registrar survey (recommendation #1) and a possible registrar audit (recommendation #2) that may help further inform the team’s work on assignment #3 (effectiveness) and #4 (impact & improvements), while it awaits the outcome of the outreach to the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) by ICANN org in relation to proposals that would require access to registration data (recommendation #3). 
    • On 19 October 2023, ICANN org provided an update on Registration Data Accuracy efforts, and Council discussed the update during its 16 November 2023 meeting. During that meeting, some Councilors noted that, barring (i) completion of the Data Processing Agreement, (ii) implementation of the NIS2 directive, or (iii) publication of the Inferential Analysis of Maliciously Registered Domains (INFERMAL) Study, it may not be the appropriate time to reconvene the Accuracy Scoping Team.  Council voted to extend the deferral of the Accuracy Scoping Team’s recommendations by another six months during its meeting on 15 February 2024. During this meeting, Council agreed to check in on the progress of these items during its June 2024 meeting.

    • Following the ICANN80 GNSO Council Wrap-Up, the GNSO Council Chair asked Councilors to consider the following questions: 

      1. Evaluation of Proposed Alternatives: In its write-up, ICANN noted limitations in processing data for the purpose of assessing accuracy and proposed two alternatives (analyzing historical audit data and engagement with Contracted Parties on ccTLD practices – see detail below). Is pursuing these alternatives worthwhile? If not, are there other alternatives for obtaining data Council should consider?
      2. Consideration of Scoping Team Restart: Given the limitations with respect to access to data, would there be value in restarting the Scoping Team at this time?
      3. Advancing the Topic: If restarting the Scoping Team at this time is not deemed advisable, what other ideas do you have to advance this topic given its importance to the ICANN community?
    • Council will discuss the above questions and determine next steps.
  • Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Update from Small Team Plus on Singulars/Plurals
    • In March 2023, the ICANN Board approved the majority of the recommendations contained in the Final Report on the new gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP, but also placed some recommendations into a pending status. Council convened a small team that worked collaboratively with the ICANN Board to resolve all pending recommendations. While the majority of the pending recommendations were able to be adopted by the ICANN Board, recommendations across six Topics were non adopted by the ICANN Board. 

    • Council tasked the Small Team Plus with developing Supplemental Recommendations on five of the six Topics, i.e., Registry Voluntary Commitments / Public Interest Commitments, Applicant Support, Terms and Conditions, String Similarity Evaluations, and Limited Challenge/Appeal Mechanisms. Based on the expected implementation as it relates to the Continued Operations Instrument (COI), the Small Team Plus determined it was unnecessary to develop a Supplemental Recommendation for Topic 22: Registrant Protections. The Small Team Plus developed Supplemental Recommendations for all five topics and shared them with the Council.

    • Because of information received just prior to Council consideration in April 2024, Council elected to defer consideration of the Supplemental Recommendation related to String Similarity Evaluations, or more specifically, singular/plurals. The new information received was a strawperson developed by ICANN org, which provided a potential path forward for singular/plurals. The Council asked to consider whether it felt that the strawperson was promising enough to task the Small Team Plus considering whether strawperson, or and amended version, could be agreed upon.

    • Council will receive an update from the  Small Team Plus on Singulars/Plurals
  • Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - SubPro Small Team Supplemental Recommendations - Non-Adopted Recommendations
    • As mentioned above, the ICANN Board had not adopted recommendations across six topics from the new gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP (i.e., Registry Voluntary Commitments / Public Interest Commitments, Applicant Support, Terms and Conditions, String Similarity Evaluations, and Limited Challenge/Appeal Mechanisms. Based on the expected implementation as it relates to the Continued Operations Instrument (COI)).
    • At Council's direction, the Small Team Plus developed Supplemental Recommendations for five topics and shared them with Council and on 18 April 2024, Council voted to approve these Supplemental Recommendations for the non-adopted SubPro recommendations. The Small Team Plus determined it was unnecessary to develop a Supplemental Recommendation for Topic 22: Registrant Protections.  
    • On 8 June 2024, the ICANN Board adopted the following scorecard, wherein it approved the Supplemental Recommendations related to Topic 17: Applicant Support and Topic 32: Limited Challenge/Appeal Mechanism. The Board did not adopt the Supplemental Recommendations related to Topic 9: Registry Voluntary Commitments / Public Interest Commitments and Topic 18: Terms & Conditions. 
    • Council will discuss whether any further actions should be pursued for any of the non-adopted Supplemental Recommendations.
  • Item 9: COUNCIL UPDATE - Intellectual Property Constituency Request for Reconsideration

    • On 22 November 2023, the Intellectual Property Constituency (IPC) filed a Request for Reconsideration  of the ICANN Board Resolutions 2023.10.26.11 and 2023.10.26.122, regarding (i) the actions and inactions that led to (a) the ICANN Board’s public comment of 6 December 2018 on the Initial Report of the Cross-Community Working Group on New gTLD Auction Proceeds (CCWG-AP), (b) the organization of the public comment phase on the Proposed Final Report of the New gTLD Auction Proceeds Cross Community Working Group, (c) the ICANN Board Resolutions 2022.06.12.13 to 2022.06.12.16 , and (ii) the actions and inactions involving the implementation of the ICANN Grant Giving Program.

    • During its meeting at ICANN80, a few GNSO Councilors volunteered to draft a letter to the Board regarding the Request for Reconsideration.

    • Council will hear an update on the draft letter and discuss potential next steps for the Council, if any.


Card
idMeetDeets_Jul2024
labelMEETING DETAILS

GNSO Council Meeting #7 of 2024 held on 18 Jul 2024 at 13:00 UTC: https://tinyurl.com/mud7kn9k

06:00 Los Angeles; 09:00 Washington DC; 14:00 London; 15:00 Paris; 16:00 Moscow; 23:00 Melbourne

GNSO Council Meeting Remote Participation: https://icann.zoom.us/j/92283565389?pwd=QnlHK1JSbzdiSFFZSjRjamxMTkNGdz09

Non-Council members are welcome to attend the meeting or call as listen-only observers.


Card
idMeet_Jul2024
labelMEETING RECORD

Records of 18 Jul 2024 Meeting

  • Audio Recording
  • Zoom Recording (includes chat and visual and rough transcript. To access the rough transcript, select the Audio Transcript tab)
  • Transcript
  • Minutes


Card
idSumRep_Jul2024
labelREPORT

Special Summary Report of 18 Jul 2024 Meeting to ALAC

For brevity, I will just highlight a few things here. For some of the issues, you can glean a wider perspective from GNSO Council Jul 2024 Matters of Interest and/or from GNSO Council Jul 2024 Meeting Records.

1. Consent Agenda

2. EPDP on Temporary Specification Phase 1 Urgent Requests

  • The present concern is limited to the issue of urgent requests, stemming from Recommendation 18 of the Expedited Policy Development Process on Temporary Specifications' Phase 1 Final Report which has been adopted by the ICANN Board on 15 May 2019, and which had gone onwards for implementation by ICANN org through an Implementation Review Team (IRT).
    • Rec 18 reads, "A separate timeline of [less than X business days] will considered [sic] for the response to ‘Urgent’ Reasonable Disclosure Requests, those Requests for which evidence is supplied to show an immediate need for disclosure [time frame to be finalized and criteria set for Urgent requests during implementation].
  • Following the public comment period and subsequent discussion by the IRT, the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) wrote to the Board about the topic of urgent requests on 23 August 2023. The Registrar Stakeholder Group wrote to the Board on 8 September 2023 in response to the GAC’s letter.  Following the receipt of these letters and further communication amongst Board members, the Board sent a letter to the GNSO Council on 3 June 2024, expressing its concerns with the text of Rec 18 related to urgent requests, citing the following concerns and issues, and concluding that Rec 18 was not fit for purpose and must be revisited.
    1. To the extent that law enforcement needs registration data to respond to situations that pose an imminent threat to life, serious bodily harm, infrastructure, or child exploitation, the proposed timeline - whether one, two, or three business days - does not appear to be fit for purpose. To respond to truly imminent threats, a much shorter response timeline, i.e., minutes or hours rather than days, would seem to be more appropriate.
    2. At the same time, applicable law, regulation, and reasonable registrar policies will often require registrars to authenticate self-identified emergency responders and confirm the purpose(s) for which registrant data is sought prior to disclosing personal data. Even where not required by law or regulation, authentication will often be appropriate under globally accepted principles of fair information processing to protect the rights and freedoms of data subjects.
    3. Absent some authoritative, legally sufficient cross-border system for validating law enforcement/emergency responders, registrars will require time - almost certainly measured in business days rather than hours or minutes - to authenticate the source of urgent requests.
    4. To the best of the Board's knowledge, such an authoritative, legally sufficient cross-border system for authenticating emergency responders/law enforcement globally is not available to ICANN.
    5. In addition to the fact that the creation, operation, and maintenance of a legally sufficient authentication system would consume significant human and financial resources, such a mechanism cannot be created, operated, and/or maintained without the material, ongoing assistance of law enforcement, first responders, and governments.
  • Absent Bylaws provision and existing procedures account for "un-adopting" Board-adopted policy recommendations to address a situation where the Board concludes that a policy recommendation that it has previously approved should be revisited prior to implementation, the Board now refers the issue back to Council. 
  • Council considered several options in determining whether there is Council agreement to the Board's concerns and if so, what should Council do:
    1. Allow GAC and its Public Safety Working Group (PSGW) to provide a potential solution for an authentication measure;
    2. Just consider that Rec 18 has been implemented and move on since the IRT has considered a timeline but was unable to reach consensus on it;
    3. Support a new policy effort, such as a PDP or EPDP;
    4. Somehow reconsider this Rec 18, noting there is not an established mechanism to "un-adopted" a recommendation that has been adopted by the Board.  

3. Registration Data Accuracy

  • The Registration Data Accuracy (RDA) Scoping Team was initiated by Council in July 2021 per the formation instructions. The Scoping Team was tasked with considering a number of accuracy-related factors such as the current enforcement, reporting, measurement, and overall effectiveness of accuracy-related efforts before making a recommendation to Council on whether any changes are recommended to improve accuracy levels, and, if so, how and by whom these changes would need to be developed (for example, if changes to existing contractual requirements are recommended, a PDP or contractual negotiations may be necessary to effect a change). 
  • The Scoping Team completed Assignment #1 (enforcement and reporting) and Assignment #2 (measurement of accuracy) and submitted its write up to Council on 5 September 2022. In its write up, the Scoping Team suggested moving forward with two proposals that would not require access to registration data, namely a registrar survey (recommendation #1) and a possible registrar audit (recommendation #2) that may help further inform the team’s work on assignment #3 (effectiveness) and #4 (impact & improvements), while it awaits the outcome of the outreach to the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) by ICANN org in relation to proposals that would require access to registration data (recommendation #3). 
  • On 19 October 2023, ICANN org provided an update on Registration Data Accuracy efforts, and Council discussed the update during its 16 November 2023 meeting. During that meeting, some Councilors noted that, barring (i) completion of the Data Processing Agreement, (ii) implementation of the NIS2 directive, or (iii) publication of the Inferential Analysis of Maliciously Registered Domains (INFERMAL) Study, it may not be the appropriate time to reconvene the Accuracy Scoping Team.  Council voted to extend the deferral of the Accuracy Scoping Team’s recommendations by another six months during its meeting on 15 February 2024. During this meeting, Council agreed to check in on the progress of these items during its June 2024 meeting.
  • Council considered the status of accuracy discussions and the need to better inform the ICANN community, especially the GAC, on the factors around the legal as well as resource limitations that are holding Council from future action. 
  • Councill will revisit action needed in the short term.

4. Deferral of Policy Status Report Request - Expiration Policies

  • Council had previously considered when to request a Policy Status Report (“PSR”) for the purpose of conducting a review of the two Expiration Policies, the Expired Domain Name Deletion Policy (“EDDP”) and the Expired Registration Recovery Policy (“ERRP”). In November 2020, given concerns about its capacity and no known issues with the policies, the Council agreed to delay the request for the Policy Status Report (PSR) for a period of 24 months. After 24 months had passed, Council reconsidered whether it was an appropriate time to request a PSR.
  • In July 2022, Council agreed that it would be helpful to consult with both registrars and ICANN org to help determine if there are any known issues or concerns with either of the two Expiration Policies which could warrant requesting a PSR. 

  • In making its decision whether to request to a PSR at this time, Council consulted: 

    1. Registrars, who were asked to flag substantial issues with the policies that would warrant a near-term request for PSR and did not note any issues
    2. ICANN Compliance, who provided a write-up, noting confusion with key terms in the policy and persistent registrant confusion with the auto-renew grace period and aftermarket activities, et al.
    3. ICANN org Registrant Program, which provided a catalog of the available educational resources on domain name expiration and renewal (Brian Gutterman’s update at Council)
  • Council then determined that the EDDP and ERRP seem to have been implemented as intended and imminent policy work is not needed at this time, and so, considered to pursue a PSR on the Expiration Policies in two years' time, or earlier, if a need is determined and it is requested.
  • Primarily at the request of IPC, this decision for a deferral of the PSR was deferred yet again, to Council's Jun 2024 meeting. IPC's belief that the request for a PSR should proceed now since it would take some time for it to be actioned by ICANN org staff, and IPC had wanted a bit more time to shore up its representation on this issue.
  • After much deliberation, Council has now resolved to request ICANN org to deliver a PSR in one (1) year or to confirm that work on the PSR has begun and deliver an updated estimate on when the PSR should be delivered, in one (1) year. 

5. Internet Governance Forum Support Association (“IGFSA”)

  • Council received a presentation on the mission and work of the Internet Governance Forum Support Association which is an independent membership association established in September 2014 to support the United Nations Internet Governance Forum (IGF) and to provide financial and other support for National and Regional IGFs (NRIs) around the world. 
  • This is an outreach by the IGFSA, asking for Councilors to help create awareness of IGFSA to garner support for its activities and to grow IGFSA's organisational and individual membership.
  • Note: The At-Large will receive a similar outreach presentation at the ICANN80 At-Large Leadership Wrap Up Session.


Anchor
A-24-06
A-24-06
24-06 GNSO COUNCIL MEETING #6 (AT ICANN 80, JUN 2024)                         (go up to Directory) 

Deck of Cards
idJun2024


Card
idShow_Jun2024
labelSHOW ME

GNSO Council Meeting #6 of 2024 held on 12 June 2024 


Card
idAgenda_Jun2024
labelAGENDA

GNSO Council Meeting #6 of 2024 held on 12 Jun 2024

Full Agenda  |  Documents  |  Motions

  • Item 1: Administrative Matters
  • Item 2: Opening Remarks / Review of Projects List and Action Item List. 
  • Item 3: Consent Agenda
    • GNSO Council Aspirational Statement (WITHDRAWN)
  • Item 4: COUNCIL VOTE - Request for Policy Status Report - Expiration Policies
  • Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Accuracy Check-in
  • Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Standing Predictability Implementation Review Team (“SPIRT”) Draft Charter
  • Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - ICANN org Implementation Update - Second-Level International Governmental Organizations (IGO) Protections
  • Item 8: COUNCIL UPDATE - Update on the Internet Governance Forum Support Association (“IGFSA”)
  • Item 9: COUNCIL DISCUSSION: Updated Work from Council Strategic Planning Session (“SPS”)
  • Item 10: Any Other Business

For notes on highlighted items click on MATTERS OF INTEREST tab above


Card
idMOI_Jun2024
labelMATTERS OF INTEREST

Matters of interest to ALAC/At-Large (updated on 14 May)

  • Item 1: Administrative Matters
    • Minutes of the GNSO Council Meeting on 18 April 2024 were posted on 03 May 2024.
    • Minutes of the GNSO Council Meeting on 16 May 2024 were posted on 01 June  2024.
  • Item 4: COUNCIL VOTE - Request for Policy Status Report - Expiration Policies
    • Council previously considered when to request a Policy Status Report (“PSR”) for the purpose of conducting a review of the two Expiration Policies, the Expired Domain Name Deletion Policy (“EDDP”) and the Expired Registration Recovery Policy (“ERRP”). In November 2020, given concerns about its capacity and no known issues with the policies, the Council agreed to delay the request for the Policy Status Report (PSR) for a period of 24 months. After 24 months had passed, the Council reconsidered whether it was an appropriate time to request a PSR. 
    • Before voting whether to further defer the request, Council agreed that it would be helpful to consult with both registrars and ICANN org to assist in determining whether there are any known issues or concerns with either of the two Expiration Policies which could warrant requesting a PSR. 
    • During its 16 May 2024 meeting, Council discussed the option of adding the PSR request to ICANN org’s queue of work instead of deferring the request for two years, noting the PSR analysis should be completed but not as an urgent priority.
    • Council will vote to request ICANN org to deliver a PSR in one (1) year or to confirm that work on the PSR has begun and deliver an updated estimate on when the PSR should be delivered, in one (1) year. (voting threshold: simple majority)
  • Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Accuracy Check-in
    • The Registration Data Accuracy (RDA) Scoping Team was initiated by Council in July 2021 per the formation instructions. The Scoping Team was tasked with considering a number of accuracy-related factors such as the current enforcement, reporting, measurement, and overall effectiveness of accuracy-related efforts before making a recommendation to Council on whether any changes are recommended to improve accuracy levels, and, if so, how and by whom these changes would need to be developed (for example, if changes to existing contractual requirements are recommended, a PDP or contractual negotiations may be necessary to effect a change). 
    • The Scoping Team completed Assignment #1 (enforcement and reporting) and Assignment #2 (measurement of accuracy) and submitted its write up to Council on 5 September 2022. In its write up, the Scoping Team suggested moving forward with two proposals that would not require access to registration data, namely a registrar survey (recommendation #1) and a possible registrar audit (recommendation #2) that may help further inform the team’s work on assignment #3 (effectiveness) and #4 (impact & improvements), while it awaits the outcome of the outreach to the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) by ICANN org in relation to proposals that would require access to registration data (recommendation #3). 
    • On 19 October 2023, ICANN org provided an update on Registration Data Accuracy efforts, and Council discussed the update during its 16 November 2023 meeting. During that meeting, some Councilors noted that, barring (i) completion of the Data Processing Agreement, (ii) implementation of the NIS2 directive, or (iii) publication of the Inferential Analysis of Maliciously Registered Domains (INFERMAL) Study, it may not be the appropriate time to reconvene the Accuracy Scoping Team.  Council voted to extend the deferral of the Accuracy Scoping Team’s recommendations by another six months during its meeting on 15 February 2024. During this meeting, Council agreed to check in on the progress of these items during its June 2024 meeting.
    • Council will discuss the status of accuracy discussions and consider ICANN org’s proposed next steps for addressing the charter topics and informing further community discussions, factoring in the legal as well as resource limitations that exist. Specifically, ICANN org suggested (1) providing historical data via ICANN’s existing audit program and (2) engaging with contracted parties on current European ccTLD identity verification practices.
  • Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Standing Predictability Implementation Review Team (“SPIRT”) Draft Charter
    • Council enlisted a Drafting Team to develop a draft charter for the SPIRT, which is a standing implementation review team recommended in the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Final Report. 

    • When relevant issues arise during the course of the New gTLD Program that may need to be addressed, the Standing Predictability Implementation Review Team (“SPIRT”) will utilize the Predictability Framework. The GNSO Council shall be responsible for oversight of the SPIRT.

    • In developing the draft charter, the Drafting Team considered elements such as the composition of the SPIRT, how issues are raised to the SPIRT procedurally, the operating principles and decision-making of the SPIRT, et.al. The New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Final Report included an annex that provides detailed guidance on how the SPIRT should operate. 
    • Council will receive a presentation on the draft charter from its liaison to the Charter Drafting Team.
  • Item 8: COUNCIL UPDATE - Update on the Internet Governance Forum Support Association (“IGFSA”)
    • The Internet Governance Forum Support Association is an independent membership association established in September 2014 to support the United Nations Internet Governance Forum (IGF) and to provide financial and other support for National and Regional IGFs (NRIs) around the world. 
    • The IGFSA will provide an overview of its mission and recent work to Council.


Card
idMeetDeets_Jun2024
labelMEETING DETAILS

GNSO Council Meeting #6 of 2024 held on 12 Jun 2024 at 11:45 UTC: https://tinyurl.com/yeykc7fm 

04:45 Los Angeles; 07:45 Washington DC; 12:45 London; 13:45 Paris; 14:45 Moscow; 21:45 Melbourne

GNSO Council Meeting Remote Participation: refer to ICANN80 Schedule - Zoom link to be shared 24 hours in advance

Non-Council members are welcome to attend the meeting or call as listen-only observers.


Card
idMeet_Jun2024
labelMEETING RECORD

Records of 12 Jun 2024 Meeting


Card
idSumRep_Jun2024
labelREPORT

Special Summary Report of 12 Jun 2024 Meeting to ALAC

For brevity, I will just highlight a few things here. For some of the issues, you can glean a wider perspective from GNSO Council Jun 2024 Matters of Interest and/or from GNSO Council Jun 2024 Meeting Records.

1. Consent Agenda

  • The agenda item (along with a vote) on the GNSO Council Aspirational Statement was withdrawn.

2. Registration Data Accuracy

  • The Registration Data Accuracy (RDA) Scoping Team was initiated by Council in July 2021 per the formation instructions. The Scoping Team was tasked with considering a number of accuracy-related factors such as the current enforcement, reporting, measurement, and overall effectiveness of accuracy-related efforts before making a recommendation to Council on whether any changes are recommended to improve accuracy levels, and, if so, how and by whom these changes would need to be developed (for example, if changes to existing contractual requirements are recommended, a PDP or contractual negotiations may be necessary to effect a change). 
  • The Scoping Team completed Assignment #1 (enforcement and reporting) and Assignment #2 (measurement of accuracy) and submitted its write up to Council on 5 September 2022. In its write up, the Scoping Team suggested moving forward with two proposals that would not require access to registration data, namely a registrar survey (recommendation #1) and a possible registrar audit (recommendation #2) that may help further inform the team’s work on assignment #3 (effectiveness) and #4 (impact & improvements), while it awaits the outcome of the outreach to the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) by ICANN org in relation to proposals that would require access to registration data (recommendation #3). 
  • On 19 October 2023, ICANN org provided an update on Registration Data Accuracy efforts, and Council discussed the update during its 16 November 2023 meeting. During that meeting, some Councilors noted that, barring (i) completion of the Data Processing Agreement, (ii) implementation of the NIS2 directive, or (iii) publication of the Inferential Analysis of Maliciously Registered Domains (INFERMAL) Study, it may not be the appropriate time to reconvene the Accuracy Scoping Team.  Council voted to extend the deferral of the Accuracy Scoping Team’s recommendations by another six months during its meeting on 15 February 2024. During this meeting, Council agreed to check in on the progress of these items during its June 2024 meeting.
  • Council considered the status of accuracy discussions and the need to better inform the ICANN community, especially the GAC, on the factors around the legal as well as resource limitations that are holding Council from future action. 
  • Councill will revisit action needed in the short term.

3. Standing Predictability Implementation Review Team (“SPIRT”) Draft Charter 

  • The formation of the Standing Predictability Implementation Review Team (SPIRT, pronounced as 'SPIRIT') is the result of Recommendation 2.1 of the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Final Report, a recommendation that the Board has since adopted.
  • The role of the SPIRT is to serve as the body responsible for reviewing potential issues which may arise during the course of the New gTLD Program (Next Round and beyond) application and evaluation processes AFTER the next Applicant Guidebook (AGB) has been approved by the Board, by conducting analysis utilizing the Predictability Framework, and to recommend the process/mechanism that should be followed to address those issues. The Predictability Framework is found in Annex E of the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Final Report and it provides detailed guidance on how the SPIRT should operate.
  • Council received a presentation on the draft charter from its liaison to the Charter Drafting Team which touched on several key aspects being discussed by the Drafting Team working group: composition of the SPIRT, how issues are raised to the SPIRT procedurally, the operating principles and decision-making of the SPIRT, etc, while considering the Predictability Framework.
  • Work continues at the Drafting Team working group level.

4. Deferral of Policy Status Report Request - Expiration Policies

  • Council had previously considered when to request a Policy Status Report (“PSR”) for the purpose of conducting a review of the two Expiration Policies, the Expired Domain Name Deletion Policy (“EDDP”) and the Expired Registration Recovery Policy (“ERRP”). In November 2020, given concerns about its capacity and no known issues with the policies, the Council agreed to delay the request for the Policy Status Report (PSR) for a period of 24 months. After 24 months had passed, Council reconsidered whether it was an appropriate time to request a PSR.
  • In July 2022, Council agreed that it would be helpful to consult with both registrars and ICANN org to help determine if there are any known issues or concerns with either of the two Expiration Policies which could warrant requesting a PSR. 

  • In making its decision whether to request to a PSR at this time, Council consulted: 

    1. Registrars, who were asked to flag substantial issues with the policies that would warrant a near-term request for PSR and did not note any issues
    2. ICANN Compliance, who provided a write-up, noting confusion with key terms in the policy and persistent registrant confusion with the auto-renew grace period and aftermarket activities, et al.
    3. ICANN org Registrant Program, which provided a catalog of the available educational resources on domain name expiration and renewal (Brian Gutterman’s update at Council)
  • Council then determined that the EDDP and ERRP seem to have been implemented as intended and imminent policy work is not needed at this time, and so, considered to pursue a PSR on the Expiration Policies in two years' time, or earlier, if a need is determined and it is requested.
  • Primarily at the request of IPC, this decision for a deferral of the PSR was deferred yet again, to Council's Jun 2024 meeting. IPC's belief that the request for a PSR should proceed now since it would take some time for it to be actioned by ICANN org staff, and IPC had wanted a bit more time to shore up its representation on this issue.
  • After much deliberation, Council has now resolved to request ICANN org to deliver a PSR in one (1) year or to confirm that work on the PSR has begun and deliver an updated estimate on when the PSR should be delivered, in one (1) year. 

5. Internet Governance Forum Support Association (“IGFSA”)

  • Council received a presentation on the mission and work of the Internet Governance Forum Support Association which is an independent membership association established in September 2014 to support the United Nations Internet Governance Forum (IGF) and to provide financial and other support for National and Regional IGFs (NRIs) around the world. 
  • This is an outreach by the IGFSA, asking for Councilors to help create awareness of IGFSA to garner support for its activities and to grow IGFSA's organisational and individual membership.
  • Note: The At-Large will receive a similar outreach presentation at the ICANN80 At-Large Leadership Wrap Up Session.


...