Versions Compared


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


titleNotes/Action Items

Action Items:

DRAFT Final Report:

  1. Staff to produce the DRAFT Final Report with suggested consensus designations and distribute for WG review for one week by Tuesday, 28 November.
  2. WG members to review the DRAFT Final Report and the consensus designations with their respective groups and provide any edits by Friday, 01 December.



  1. Welcome and SOIs
  2. Review final revised language for Guidance Recommendations #1, #5, and preamble text on dependencies for #7-#9.  See below and documents attached.

          a. GR#1: Implementation Guidance: "Target potential applicants from the not-for-profit sector, social enterprises and/or community organizations from under-served and developing regions and countries. This should not exclude any entities from outreach efforts, such as private sector entities [from developing/underrepresented regions], recognizing the goal is to get as many qualifying applicants as possible."

  • Staff walked through the attached document.  There were no questions or comments, but some minor edits that Roz had sent to the list were noted and will be incorporated.

          b. GR#5: Retain language, or similar, “This should be considered a floor, not a ceiling, and ICANN should strive to exceed this minimum.” In addition, add to the rationale that adequate resources should be made available if the number of qualified applicants exceeds or greatly exceeds the indicator of success, since the indicator of success should be seen as a floor, not a ceiling.

  • Staff walked through the attached document.  There were no questions or comments, but some minor edits that Roz had sent to the list were noted and will be incorporated.

         c. Preamble text for GR#7-#9:  Per the GNSO Guidance Process Manual, “…it is recommended that the GNSO Council take into account whether the GGP Team has indicated that any recommendations contained in the Final Report are interdependent.”[1]Accordingly, the GNSO working group emphasizes that the Implementation Review Team (IRT) should take into consideration potential dependencies among all the recommendations.  In particular with respect to Guidance Recommendations 7, 8, and 9 relating to recommending a methodology for allocating financial support where there is inadequate funding for all qualified applicants, the working group clarifies that these recommendations are to be interpreted as interdependent and that the objectives therein are to be balanced as a key aspect of the program’s success.”

  • Question: Is the purpose of the text to caution the GNSO Council against adopting the recommendations separately rather than as an interdependent set? Answer: The WG Guidelines and PDP Manual already caution the GNSO Council about adopting recommendations separately; this preamble provides added emphasis about the interdependency of these specific three recommendations, per the suggestion from ICANN org.
  • We should note that all of the recommendations should be considered dependent.

 3. Plan for review of draft Final Report – Consensus Designations and final Guidance Recommendations, rationale, and public comment review summary:

  • Per the GNSO Guidance Process Manual: “Each recommendation in the Final Report should be accompanied by the appropriate consensus level designation (see section 3.6 – Standard Methodology for Making Decisions in the GNSO Working Group Guidelines).” These designations will be included in Appendix C in the Final Report.
  • Send Final Report for review for non-substantive changes, if any, along with a Consensus Call confirming consensus levels in Appendix C per the Work Plan on Tuesday, 28 November  to Tuesday, 05 December.
  • Meeting on Monday, 04 December:
    • Confirm minor (non-substantive) changes, if any, to the Final Report.
    • Confirm consensus designations for each Guidance Recommendation.
  • Question: If we deliver the Final Report to the GNSO Council on 11 December that would be the document and motion deadline for the 21 December meeting. Is the Council likely to vote to adopt at that meeting? Answer: The Council is not obligated to vote at the first meeting a Final Report is submitted.  It is likely to defer the vote to January, although we can’t speak for the Council.

 4. Next Steps: Deliver Final Report to Council no later than 11 December.