Action Items

Action Item / Request	Entry Date	Target Date	Responsible Council Member (if applicable)	Responsible Staff member (if applicable)	Additional Notes	Status
Buenos Aires Meeting Planning: Invite SG/C Chairs for weekend session Consider adding working session at the end of Tuesday Inform SG/C chairs that no formal updates are expected at the start of Council meeting, but written report would be welcomed Consider new format for ccNSO - GNSO Council meeting	18/7		Wolf	Glen de Saint Gery / Marika Konings	Action items follow from discussions during GNSO wrap up session as well as GNSO - ccNSO Council meeting.
GNSO Review Request extension of initial public comment forum to at least 21 days after the Durban meeting. Form small committee to consider issues and possible next steps in relation to the GNSO review - reconfirm volunteers on existing mailing list	18/7	8/8 5/9	Jonathan Jen Wolfe	Rob Hoggarth	During the Durban meeting, a public comment forum was opened to request community input on whether the GNSO review should be delayed. It was agreed to form a small committee that would look at issues related to the GNSO review and possible GNSO Council action in further detail. Jennifer Wolfe has agreed to lead this group.
Form Proxy and Privacy Accreditation Charter Drafting Team	14/3	5/9	Jeff Neuman	Marika Konings	One of the items that may need to be addressed as part of the RAA PDP appears to be the creation of a privacy / proxy accreditation program. In order to move this process forward, the Council is considering forming a drafting team to develop a charter for the PDP WG.	Staff will prepare a briefing paper on this topic to help inform the development of the charter. Expected publication - prior to September GNSO Council meeting.
Board request for input / advice on IDN Variant TLD Root LGR Procedure and User Experience Study Recommendations	11/4	5/9	Ching Chiao	Steve Sheng	The Board requests that, by 1 July 2013, interested Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees provide staff with any input and guidance they may have to be factored into implementation of the Recommendations from the Report on User Experience Implications of Active Variant TLDs (see http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/prelim-report-11apr13-en.htm#2.a for further details)	The JIG prepared a response letter that was approved by the GNSO Council in Durban. Awaiting ccNSO consideration of the letter at its August meeting, following which (if approved) the letter would be sent as a joint ccNSO - GNSO Council letter to the Board. The Board was alerted to the fact that additional time was needed to formulate a position.
BGC Recommendation on Reconsideration Request 13-3 1. The Chair, on behalf of the GNSO Council, writes to the Board Governance Committee (copying the New gTLD Programme Committee). 2. The Chair, on behalf of the GNSO Council, writes to the ATRT2. 3. The Chair, on behalf of the GNSO Council, writes to the ICANN Board.	13/6	5/9	Jonathan Robinson	Marika Konings	The objective of each of the above 3 can be summarised as follows: 1. The Board Governance Committee – Drafted by [Jeff]. a. To highlight and describe the key concerns with output of the committee i.e. with the rationalisation for the reconsideration decision. b. To make it clear that the desired outcome is to remove the current rationalisation from the record (and not to overturn the outcome of the reconsideration). c. To recognise that the Council’s intervention in these processes is for very specific reasons and because of the perceived potential impact on the GNSO and indeed the MS Model. 2. The ATRT2 – Drafted by [Volunteer]. a. To highlight concerns with the reconsideration process as a mechanism for ensuring accountability and transparency. b. To not propose a specific remedy but rather to leave that to the ATRT. 3. The ICANN Board – Drafted by [Jonathan]. a. To summarise and refer to both 1 & 2 above b. To highlight on-going concerns about the issue of accountability for actions (implementation or policy) which are not in agreement with GNSO policy or policy advice. c. To propose solutions such as: i. Agreement to effectively communicate with the GNSO in the event that a decision goes against such policy or policy advice (something we have already agreed to on the back of our Beijing / recent discussions) ii. Possible change/s to the ICANN bylaws	Request sent to BGC to 'thoroughly review the rationale of the Reconsideration Request and consider deferral of the publication of the rationale until such time that a more complete discussion on this matter can take place with the community in July at the ICANN meeting in Durban' on 19/6. In response, the BGC noted that the current plan is for the Board Governance Committee to meet again on 25 June 2013 to review the rationale and has proposed to have a discussion around GNSO advice, and involvement of the GNSO in the implementation of policies, outside of the context of the wording of the rationale in Durban. The rationale was subsequently modified and adopted by the BGC and NGPC. Further discussion on this topic took place in Durban and an informal commitment was made by the Board that a more robust system needs to be put in place for the Board to be able to acknowledge and respond to input that is received that are not PDP recommendations. GNSO Council to further consider whether the initial action items are still relevant.
PDP Improvements Provide further details on proposed enhancements to PDP process as discussed during the GNSO weekend session Confirm whether funding is available for Council liaison to the GAC per the existing travel guidelines	18/7	5/9		Marika Konings Glen de Saint Gery
SCI Charter Summarise history of SCI to Council mailing list as discussed during wrap up session Encourage Council members to share views with the mailing list - especially on the item of full consensus Pass items discussed during GNSO wrap up session on to SCI	18/7	5/9	Jeff Neuman All Jonathan	Julie Hedlund	During its wrap up session in Durban, the GNSO Council discussed possible changes to the charter of the SCI to confirm that it is to serve as a standing committee as well as possible changes to the methodology for decision-making. In addition, two further items were identified for the SCI to consider (voting by email and the possible inclusion of a waiver in the GNSO Operating Procedures).
Metrics & Reporting WG Provide proposal for proposed way forward for GNSO Council consideration	18/7	5/9		Berry Cobb	The call for volunteers failed to attracted sufficient members to start the activities of this WG. As this concerns a non-PDP effort, staff has suggested to explore an alternative approach to address this issue which will be put forward for GNSO Council consideration at its next meeting.

Content

Space Tools