Preliminary Report | Regular Meeting of the ICANN Board | 7 March 2024

Rationale for Resolution 2024.03.07.01

Why is the Board addressing the issue?

The Board is addressing the issue to ensure that the RZERC operates with a clear, effective charter that enables it to fulfill its responsibilities in reviewing significant architectural and operational changes to the Root Zone environment.

What is the proposal being considered?

RZERC proposes amending its Charter to enhance the clarity, effectiveness, and operational efficiency of the RZERC Charter while ensuring its alignment with the committee's foundational goals and responsibilities. Specific amendments include:

• The suggestion to eliminate the Background section from the Charter, as it's deemed unnecessary for an established committee.
• A requirement for all future charter reviews to assess previous charters and the historical context of RZERC's inception, aiming to prevent mission creep and maintain purpose clarity.
• The term "proposed architectural changes" in the purpose section is proposed to be updated to "proposed significant architectural or operational changes" to align with the Charter's Scope of Responsibilities section and the original CWG-Stewardship recommendation.
• The introduction of language to navigate the challenge of defining what changes are considered "significant" and warrant RZERC review, acknowledging the difficulty in formally defining the term but emphasizing prudence in raising issues.
• A recommendation to enhance readability and clarity in the Purpose section by using numerals to delineate focus areas.
• An addition to the Charter specifying that meetings require a quorum, to be defined in the RZERC operational procedures, to set expectations for member attendance and establish quorum rules.
• A suggestion to clarify the decision-making process through an online comprehensive poll of members, allowing for a noticed meeting for discussion before the poll, with provisions for urgency.
• An explanation that charter reviews can be initiated by either the RZERC or the ICANN Board, providing clear guidance on the process.
• An adjustment to the language to clearly align charter reviews with ICANN's public comment processes.

Which stakeholders or others were consulted?

The proposed amendments were drafted by the RZERC, which has representatives from many of the stakeholders in the root server system. In February 2023, the RZERC shared a draft of the Initial Report with its appointing community-based organizations and invited the organizations to schedule a feedback session with the RZERC to provide feedback on the draft Initial Report of the RZERC Charter Review. Feedback sessions were optional and appointing organizations could always submit feedback through their appointed representative to the RZERC. The RZERC also presented the findings of its initial report during an informational session during ICANN76.

What concerns or issues were raised by the community?

The main issues raised were about the potential for ambiguity in the Charter's language, potential for scope overlaps with existing advisory committees, and the importance of maintaining historical context. The RZERC addressed these concerns by clarifying the definition of "significant" changes and including a provision for the review of historical context in future Charter reviews. The full contents of the public comments received and the RZERC's responses to these comments are available in Annex C of the RZERC Charter Review Final Report.

What significant materials did the Board review?

• Final Report of the RZERC Charter Review
• Public Comments
• Summary and analysis of public comments, included in Annex C of the Final Report
• https://www.ianacg.org/icg-files/documents/IANA-transition-proposal-final.pdf
• The RZERC charter as modified in response to public comment

What factors did the Board find to be significant?

Significant factors included the need for consistency with the ICG Proposal and maintaining the RZERC's effectiveness without expanding its scope unnecessarily.

Are there positive or negative community impacts?

The amendments are expected to have a positive impact on the community by fostering an effective RZERC.

Are there fiscal impacts or ramifications on ICANN (strategic plan, operating plan, budget); the community; and/or the public?

The action is not expected to have a fiscal impact on ICANN org.

Are there any security, stability or resiliency issues relating to the DNS?

Security, stability, or resiliency issues relating to the DNS have been carefully considered, ensuring that the RZERC remains a prudent advisory body. The RZERC's scope of responsibility will be to provide the ICANN Board with recommendations regarding proposed significant architectural or operational changes to the content of the DNS root zone, the systems including both hardware and software components used in executing changes to the DNS root zone, and the mechanisms used for distribution of the DNS root zone.

Is this decision in the public interest and within ICANN's mission?

Implementation is in alignment with ICANN's strategic goals and mission to ensure the stable and secure operation of the Internet's unique identifier systems.

Is this either a defined policy process within ICANN's Supporting Organizations or ICANN's Organizational Administrative Function decision requiring public comment or not requiring public comment?

This action requires Public Comment. A Public Comment proceeding was held from 27 March - 08 May 2023, receiving three comment submissions by both individuals and organizations/groups. Upon review of these comments, the RZERC made additional amendments for clarity and justification without withdrawing any of its original proposed changes.

Rationale for Resolution 2024.03.07.02

The Board is addressing this matter to ensure that Board committee charters are up-to-date and reflect the most current governance requirements and the actual practices of each committee.

As part of its responsibilities, the BGC is tasked with "periodically review[ing] the charters of the Board Committees, including its own charter and work with the members of the Board Committees to develop recommendations to the Board for any charter adjustments deemed advisable." (BGC Charter, Sec. II.C.2.) In this role, the BGC asked each committee to review its charter for the BGC's consideration.  Accordingly, the BGC has recommended, and the Board has approved, revisions to the charters to update the relevant sections of the charters to current practices.

Specifically, the Board Strategic Planning Committee (SPC) charter, Section II (Scope of Responsibilities) has been updated to reflect the SPC's role in reassessing the importance, urgency, and importance of the strategic priorities set out in the ICANN Five-Year Strategic Plan on an annual basis to support the Board in confirming that they are appropriately addressed and prioritized within the Board's work.  The Board Technical Committee (BTC) charter has been updated to reflect the BTC's purpose (Section I) and scope of responsibilities (Section II) in its oversight of technical work necessary to meet ICANN's mission of ensuring the stable, secure, and resilient operation of the Internet's unique identifier systems, including ensuring that the ICANN Strategy covers necessary technical elements.  Section III (Composition) of the BTC charter has also been updated to reflect that the Committee's membership may be comprised of Board Liaisons.

This action is consistent with ICANN's Mission and is in the public interest as it is important to ensure that the Board Committees are properly tasked with responsibilities, and to ensure oversight over the ICANN organization, as the Board deems appropriate.

This action is not expected to have a direct fiscal impact on ICANN or on the security, stability or resiliency of the domain name system.

This decision is an Organizational Administrative Function that does not require public comment.

All members of the Board voted in favor of Resolutions 2024.03.07.01 and 2024.03.07.02. The Resolutions carried.

Rationale for Resolution 2024.03.07.03

Why is the Board addressing the issue?

The ICANN Board is authorizing the commitment of up to USD 10 million dollars from the auction proceeds generated in the 2012 round of the New gTLD Program to be used to fund projects applied for within the ICANN Grant Program's first cycle of applications that will be included in the final slate of successful applications to be presented for Board approval.

ICANN org has progressed on the implementation design of the Grant Program as communicated in regular updates shared with the Board and community. As ICANN org confirms it is operationally ready to receive applications for the ICANN Grant Program, today's Board action will enable ICANN org to complete the actions needed to implement the Board-approved CCWG-AP recommendations and open the application window for the ICANN Grant Program first cycle through which the auction proceeds will be disbursed to eligible applicants and projects.

The ICANN Board looks forward to receiving from ICANN org a proposed slate of recommended applications, totaling not more than USD 10 million dollars in the aggregate, to be achieved through the designed processes as described in the documentation that will accompany the proposed slate.

What is the proposal being considered?

The Board is being asked to take action allocating up to USD 10 million from the auction proceeds generated in the 2012 round of the New gTLD Program for funding projects applied for within the ICANN Grant Program's first cycle application window, expected to open on 25 March 2024, through which ICANN org will signal that it is prepared and committed to perform all processes as described within the ICANN Grant Program Applicant Guide, and to fund those projects described within the successful applications up to the aggregate amount of USD 10 million.

The proposed action is in furtherance of Board resolutions 2022.06.12.14 – 2022.06.12.16 to implement a Grant Program that is aligned with ICANN's mission and based on sound governance practices, and the work developed by ICANN org to design the program and launch the first grant cycle.

The Board notes that any future Board decision on a approving a slate of successful applications is dependent upon the successful completion of: (1) the Chartering Organizations' updating of the CCWG-AP Recommendation 7 to limit ICANN accountability mechanism usage for all decisions on individual applications, as opposed to just decisions taken by the third party assessment panel; and (2) successful completion of the Fundamental Bylaws Amendment process that was initiated on 21 January 2024, to incorporate into the Bylaws the mechanism and threshold through which Cross-Community Working Groups can limit access to ICANN's accountability mechanisms. Both of those processes are in motion, and each has the possibility of concluding prior to December 2024, which is the earliest time that the Board is anticipated to be presented with a slate of successful applicants from the first application cycle of the ICANN Grant Program. The Board acknowledges that this is a change in direction from the Board's October 2023 resolution on the implementation of CCWG-AP's Recommendation 7, which narrowed application of the limitation on access to ICANN's accountability mechanisms only to Grant Program applicants through application terms and conditions. If both processes successfully conclude, the Board intends to take a further resolution accepting updated Recommendation 7 and directing full implementation as made possible through the Fundamental Bylaws Amendment. That full implementation is expected to result in restricting any person or entity (whether an applicant or third party) from using an ICANN accountability mechanism to challenge a decision on an individual grant application, and embracing the CCWG-AP's original intent to preserve the auction proceeds for grants, as opposed to funding challenges to decisions on individual applications within the ICANN Grant Program.

Which stakeholders or others were consulted?

The community was extensively involved in the development of the CCWG-AP recommendations that supported the Board's June 2022 action. Throughout the implementation phase of the ICANN Grant Program, ICANN org has provided regular updates to the ICANN Board and community on the progress of implementation.

ICANN org's dedicated web space and the engagement sessions it conducted to date allowed for updates to be delivered, and input to be collected, during the program implementation design. The key elements of the first cycle of ICANN Grant Program were notably shared with all stakeholders during an ICANN77 prep-week webinar and a public session at ICANN78.

What significant materials did the Board review?

The Board considered various materials and documents, including the recently published ICANN Grant Program Applicant Guide. The Board also reviewed ICANN org's representation that it is operationally ready to deliver the ICANN Grant Program in line with the processes set forth within the Applicant Guide.

Are there positive or negative community impacts?

Approving the funds for successful applications of the first cycle of the Grant Program contributes to further the implementation of the program, specifically supporting the opening of the application window for the first cycle.

By funding projects that encourage, facilitate, and support ICANN's mission and its vision of a single, open, and globally interoperable Internet, ICANN has the exceptional opportunity to make a difference in the Internet ecosystem, and positively impact people across the globe in furtherance of ICANN's mission.

Are there fiscal impacts or ramifications on ICANN (strategic plan, operating plan, budget), the community, and/or the public?

This is a commitment to distribute a portion of the 2012 round of the New gTLD Program Auction Proceeds, which have been segregated for a use consistent with the ICANN community's direction. The USD 10 million allocated here today is the first of many such allocations that are expected to be made in furtherance of the ICANN community's recommendations on the use of the 2012 round of the New gTLD Program Auction Proceeds. ICANN org has already contemplated the resource needs to support the first application cycle.

The future distribution of this significant amount of funding is an exceptional opportunity to make a difference in the Internet ecosystem, in furtherance of ICANN's mission.

Are there any security, stability or resiliency issues relating to the DNS?

This action does not have a direct impact on the security, stability, or resiliency of the Internet's DNS. It is possible that some projects eventually supported by the ICANN Grant Program may have a positive impact on the security, stability, and resiliency of the Internet's DNS.

Is this decision in the public interest and within ICANN's mission?

This decision supports both the public interest and ICANN's mission as it furthers the implementation of the Grant Program whereby significant amounts of funds entrusted to ICANN's care will be distributed in alignment with ICANN's mission to projects around the world.

Is this either a defined policy process within ICANN's Supporting Organizations or ICANN's Organizational Administrative Function decision requiring public comment or not requiring public comment?

There is no defined policy process guiding this specific Board action.