Members: Avri Doria, Donna Austin, Eduardo Diaz, Elise Lindeberg, Fatima Cambronero, Graeme Bunton, Greg Shatan, Jonathan Robinson, Lise Fuhr, Paul Kane, Robert Guerra, Wanawit Ahkuputra, Seun Ojedeji
Participants: Alan Greenberg, Alissa Cooper, Allan MacGillivray, Brenden Kuerbis, Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Chuck Gomes, Gary Campbell, Guru Acharya, John Poole, Maarten Simon, Manal Ismail, Mark Carvell, Martin Boyle, Matthew Shears, Peter Van Roste, Pitinan Kooarmornpatana, Sivasubramanian, Muthusamy, Stephanie Duchesneau, Steve Crocker, Tony Holmes, Wolf-Ulrich Knoben
Staff: Berry Cobb, Brenda Brewer, Grace Abuhamad, Bernard Turcotte, Theresa Swinehart, Marika Konings
Apologies: Olivier Crepin-Leblond, Staffan Jonson; Jaap Akkerhuis
**Please let Brenda know if your name has been left off the list (attendees or apologies).**
1. Welcome & Roll Call
2. Status Updates
a. RFP Subgroups
c. Client Committee
5. Plan for ICANN 52 (Singapore)
a. Discussion Document & Slide Set
b. Expectations of outcome
i. progress to date
ii. interaction & feedback on challenging issues
6. Review of Action Items
Welcome and Roll Call
- No one on audio-only
- All action items from Meeting #19 on 22 January are complete.
- RFP3 (Greg Shatan) -- will go over an alternative proposal (proposed by John Poole) on tomorrow's call.
- RFP3b (Allan MacGillivray) -- focusing on "internal to ICANN options"; have met twice: on 24th focused on auDA proposal; on 27th looked at more generic proposal (drafted by Bernard Turcotte); awaiting feedback on what types of arrangements are possible under CA law
- RFP 4 (Robert Guerra) -- received updates from RFP3 and RFP3b; looked at improvements to working methods; looking at better categorizing stress tests list and compared to work of CCWG-Acccountability subteam
- RFP5 (Cheryl Langdon-Orr) -- group work is on hold
- CCWG-Accountability (Avri Doria) -- not much to add beyond the Joint Statement; last meeting covered a sendond reading of WS1 items; discussions are similar between both groups
- Client Committee (Greg Shatan) -- looking to engage a lawyer/law firm; client committee consits of Greg; Maarten Simon; Jonathan Robinson; Lise Fuhr. Working with ICANN Legal to establish a process; have another meeting tomorrow; this will be financially supported by ICANN (but not "blank check"); have now gone through a 3rd version of a legal scoping document; goal is to get advice on all the propositions that we have "on the table"; they may have ideas and contributions of their own
- Came to our original timeline in response to ICG RFP. Worked very hard to meet the original deadline.
- Attempted to craft a new timeline, including key dependencies such as the work of the CCWG-Accountability
- Supported by staff (Berry Cobb) who are coordinating with CCWG-Accountability
- This is an "aggressive" or "best case": there are some risks to the timeline including 21-day public comment period being sufficient time
- Possibility of GAC needing a special F2F meeting to make a decision on the proposal
- CWG and ICG Chairs have regular coordination calls
- Once shared with CWG-Stewardship today, the timeline should be public
Action: Berry to add date to timeline
Plan for ICANN 52
- Discussion document/progress report -- it's a summary of what we've done along with a description of 3 proposals currently being considered; max 10-12 pages
- Slide Deck
- Pre-Singapore webinars on 3 February
Action: will send document out to list tomorrow for feedback from group by Saturday 12:00 UTC
Action: all -- suggest pointed questions for feedback from community by Saturday 12:00 UTC
Action: circulate document more widely by Monday
Action: Grace to ensure translation of progress report
- Questions by Larry Strickling (Link to speech: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/speechtestimony/2015/remarks-assistant-secretary-strickling-state-net-conference-1272015)
- Donna Austin: perhaps NTIA is not comfortable with the road we are going down
- Would be good to try and work as effectively and efficiently as we can (not all about working hard)
- Next meeting: Wednesday 11 February at 9:15 - 11:15 UTC (during ICANN 52 meeting)
- Action: Berry to add date to timeline
- Action: will send document out to list tomorrow for feedback from group by Saturday 12:00 UTC
- Action: all -- suggest pointed questions for feedback from community by Saturday 12:00 UTC
- Action: encourage community to bring questions to Q&A session in Singapore (+remote participation) on Thursday 12 February
- Action: circulate document more widely by Monday
- Action: Grace to ensure translation of progress report
The Adobe Connect recording is available here: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p98wf4vv5z5/
The audio recording is available here: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-cwg-iana-29jan15-en.mp3
Grace Abuhamad: Hi all- as a reminder, the meeting today does not start until 16:00 UTC.
Grace Abuhamad:Meeting schedule available on Wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/Meetings
Lise Fuhr:Hi I will call in in 5 minutes
Bernard Turcotte - staff support:hello
Bernard Turcotte - staff support:someone needs to go on mute
Robert Guerra:Hello all
Steve Crocker:Hello, everyone
Eduardo Diaz:¡hola a todos!
Martin Boyle, Nominet:Lot of echo from you Grace!
Graeme Bunton - RrSG:Mute is your friend.
Greg Shatan:Good morning/afternoon/evening, all.
Robert Guerra:@gary - please mute
Robert Guerra:alan you are quite muffled
Grace Abuhamad:Allan we cannot hear you well.
Grace Abuhamad:Please speak closer to your microphone
Matthew Shears:Has the alternative prposal from John been circulated on the list?
Greg Shatan:@Matthew -- it is on the list
Greg Shatan:The subject line is "[CWG-Stewardship] Updated Legal Scoping Document (Version 3).
Matthew Shears:OK thanks
Sivasubramanian M:RFP 4: The link to the Stress Test Document including scenarios covered by the Accountability Working Group is https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QVC12Q-NuB35pyaBirUDF85DBR_oFHkEYC5vbWu04go/edit?usp=sharing
Chuck Gomes (RySG):Thanks Greg
Berry Cobb:You all now have control of the document for zoom and pan purposes.
Matthew Shears:given the widneing of the timelines between the CWG and the ICG should we be keping them more abreast of the development of the proposal so that they might be able to assess compatibility with the rest of ICG's work as it evolves rather than at an end point
Alissa Cooper:We are following it fairly closely but of course any interim updates are always welcome.
Matthew Shears:thanks Alissa
Matthew Shears:+ 1 Donna
Grace Abuhamad:Link to speech: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/speechtestimony/2015/remarks-assistant-secretary-strickling-state-net-conference-1272015
Lise Fuhr:A good idea
Berry Cobb:@Alan, its 21 days or 3 weeks.
Chuck Gomes (RySG):@ Alan: What 2-week turn-around?
Alan Greenberg:Looks like 1/2 of a month (the month of ??) from the chart.
Mark Carvell GAC - UK Govt:the earlier the GAC sees this the better. Our session in Singapore is a week Sunday. GAC turnaround as CO within 3 weeks is big challenge.
Greg Shatan:The words 21 days are above it.
Chuck Gomes (RySG):Note that risks 2 & 3 on the timeline below the SO/AC approval bar.
Berry Cobb:And also listed as Risk Factor #3 - which highlights "not enough time to approve"
Alan Greenberg:Sorry, missed that notation.
Berry Cobb:2nd Public Comment is also set as 21 Days. Bar extends over 1 month to include time for the CWG to review the comments and determine how it might change the draft proposal.
Paul Kane:Agree Lise - but also bear in mind that many ccTLDs do not attend ICANN meetings (including not attending Singapore)
Jonathan Robinson:@Paul - please do what you can to draw their attention to the webinars and discussion document
Paul Kane:Rest assured I will do but I sincerely hope the final approach will include a number of models that recognises the different models we all use today.
Bernard Turcotte - staff support:Elise is too faint
Mark Carvell GAC - UK Govt:Progress report will also be very useful for GAC as soon as possible before reps start travelling on Weds. Presumably in English only which is a pity? Could it be trnaslated over the following two weeks or so in main UN languages? Tthinking in particular of Francophonie Africa and Spanish for Latin America.
Chuck Gomes (RySG):My understanding that the questions Jonathan mentioned are questions that we would include in the discussion document for which we would like to receive feedback from the community in Singapore and otherwise.
Grace Abuhamad:We can translate the progress report as we have for the draft proposal
Donna Austin, RySG:@Jonathan -- agreed
Chuck Gomes (RySG):There will be a CWG Q&A session in Singapore (on Thursday I think) where questions from the community can be answered.
Grace Abuhamad:sure -- one inute
Lise Fuhr:Thank you
Elise Lindeberg GAC:Yes, - the high "boat constuction thing" -
Elise Lindeberg GAC:woops - wrong chat :))
Mark Carvell GAC - UK Govt:Agree with Donna - NTIA seem particualrly concerned about creating new entities and consequences of that.
Alan Greenberg:Donna is correct. It has gone beyond needing to "read between the lines" Reading the words should be sufficient.
Avri Doria:not objective, but they are the deciders.
Donna Austin, RySG:@Greg: we can't ignore these. Objective or not, they are on the record from the NTIA and must be taken seriously.
Greg Shatan:@Donna, I think I said that (maybe more than once). At the same time, we can't be blind to considering how these questions came to be.
Matthew Shears:+ 1 Chuck
Greg Shatan:I usually hate it when people rail against "lobbyists," but I think there may have been some good lobbying going on...
Matthew Shears:@Greg - absolutely
Donna Austin, RySG:@Greg: I disagree. That NTIA felt it important to go on the record now, so far into our process is sending us a message. And to me that message is: we don't like the path you're taking. My personal take of course.
Greg Shatan:Never said we should Ignore them. We need to answer them directly.
Brenda Brewer:Seun Ojedeji has joined the phone line.
Greg Shatan:@Donna, I think that's reading between the lines. I don't see that as the subtext.
Sivasubramanian M:What I liked about the NTIA statement is the part where he said "the community should proceed as if it has only one chance to get this right."
Matthew Shears:Most important is the line after the 4 questions - that they require resolution prior to approval of the plan
Sivasubramanian M:The easiest way to address all these concerns is to do away with complications as much as possible
Mark Carvell GAC - UK Govt:@ Matthew: yes I highlighted that short sharp sentence!
Sivasubramanian M:Why not use social media to collect questions in advance?
Paul Kane:Looks as if I may have (reluctantly) to travel to ICANN Singapore. Does anyone have hotel room allocation that they have reserved but not being used - please let me know off-line (thanks in advance).
Avri Doria:bye. safe travels all.
Allan MacGillivray:Au revoir!
Graeme Bunton - RrSG:thanks
Maarten Simon, SIDN:bye
Greg Shatan:Bye all and bon voyage.
Martin Boyle, Nominet:thanks Lise, thanks all
Martin Boyle, Nominet:bye