November 2010 - ALAC - lists.icann.org

Fwd: [jcdwg] Announcement - Final version of draft DSSA charter posted
by Cheryl Langdon-Orr Nov. 15, 2010

Nov. 15, 2010

This will need to be discussed further in preparation for action at Catargena at the ALAC Meeting later this month... Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Kristina Nordstrom <kristina.nordstrom(a)icann.org> Date: 16 November 2010 08:04 Subject: [jcdwg] Announcement - Final version of draft DSSA charter posted To: "jcdwg(a)icann.org" <jcdwg(a)icann.org> Cc: Bart(a)mm.icann.org, Gisella Gruber-White <Gisella.Gruber-White(a)icann.org>, Glen de Saint Géry <Glen(a)icann.org> Dear all, Following announcement has now been posted on the ccNSO website ( http://ccnso.icann.org/announcements/announcement-15nov10-en.htm) “Date: 15 Nov 2010 *The informal joint ALAC, ccNSO, GNSO and NRO charter drafting working group has submitted the final version of the draft charter to ICANN's Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committee's for adoption according to their own rules and procedures. The final draft can be viewed here:* http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/dssa-draft-charter-12nov10-en.pdf” Kind regards, Kristina / ccNSO Secretariat _______________________________________________ jcdwg mailing list jcdwg(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/jcdwg

1 0

Re: [ALAC] ATRT Cartagena schedule
by Cheryl Langdon-Orr Nov. 15, 2010

Nov. 15, 2010

Thank you Brian The ALAC / At-Large Leaders schedule at this stage has allocated time for discussion on ATRT recommendations on Tue see excerpt below from our full schedule at https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Cartagena+2010+-+Meeti… any or all available members of the ATRT would be most welcome for discussions then ( all our meetings are open any way) and/or perhaps a joint AC/SO opportunity might be arranged, if so we would be most interested... Tuesday, 7 December 2010 *ALAC: Policy Discussion - Part II* *Time:* 10:30-12:30 *Meeting Room:* Pegasus Mardi, 7 décembre 2010 *ALAC: Discussion sur les politiques - 2ème Partie* *Horaire:* 10:30-12:30 *Salle de réunion*: Pegasus Martes, 7 de diciembre de 2010 *ALAC: discusión sobre las políticas - 2a parte* *Horario:* 10:30-12:30 *Sala de reunión:* Pegasus *Agenda:* - ATRT - Next Steps and Development of ALAC Statement (10:30-11:30) Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) On 16 November 2010 07:29, Brian Cute <briancute(a)afilias.info> wrote: > Dear Cheryl, > > > > This serves as a reminder that the Accountability and Transparency Review > Team (ATRT) posted draft proposed recommendations for public comment on > November 3, 2010 > http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/affirmation/atrt-proposed-recommendations-2…. > The comment period closes on December 3, 2010. > > > > At the ICANN meeting in Cartagena, the ATRT will hold an open meeting with > the ICANN Board from 4:00p.m. to 5:30p.m. and will hold a public session on > Monday, December 6, 2010 from 2:00p.m. to 3:30p.m. The ATRT has been asked > by the GAC to meet with them in Cartagena. The ATRT has not scheduled any > additional meetings for the Cartagena ICANN meeting. If your organization > desires to meet with the ATRT in Cartagena, please indicate so that > scheduling can be addressed. > > > > Sincerely, > > Brian Cute > > Chairman, ATRT > > >

1 0

The Proposed Final New gTLD Applicant Guidebook is Available for Public Comment
by Alan Greenberg Nov. 13, 2010

Nov. 13, 2010

Just released! Great weekend reading. ;-) Alan >From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen(a)icann.org> >To: liaison6c <liaison6c(a)gnso.icann.org> >Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2010 04:27:56 -0500 >Subject: [liaison6c] The Proposed Final New gTLD Applicant Guidebook is > Available for Public Comment > > >http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-12nov10-en.htm > >The Proposed Final New gTLD Applicant Guidebook >is Available for Public Comment >http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/comments-5-en.htm > >12 November 2010 >Guidebook and Public Comment Forum > >ICANN is pleased to publish the Proposed Final >New gTLD Applicant Guidebook that describes the >process of applying for new generic top-level >domains. The Guidebook was released today along >with explanatory memoranda and detailed analysis >of comments received on version 4 of the >Applicant Guidebook. This Proposed Final version >of the Guidebook is the result of a tremendous >amount of participation and thoughtful feedback >from the ICANN stakeholder community. Their >contribution is evidenced through the product of >several working groups - bringing key issues to resolution. > >During the 10 December Board Meeting in >Cartagena the ICANN Board will take into account >this work and comments received to make a >decision regarding the timing of the launch of >the New gTLD Program. The Board can approve the >Guidebook or direct that changes be made. > >Upon approval of the final version of the >Guidebook, a four-month global communications >campaign will be undertaken. The aim of this >campaign is to ensure potential participants in >all regions of the world are aware of program details and how to apply. >The Proposed Final Applicant Guidebook - What changed from version 4? >Module 1 > > * Eliminated most restrictions on Registrar > cross-ownership - based on recent Board > decision - see > http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-09nov10-en.htm > * Added information on application > batching, delegation rates, dependencies for root scaling > * Refocused background screening criteria > only on business, criminal background, and cybersquatting > * Added placeholder for outcomes on > Applicant Support Working Group - see this > Working Group milestone report here: > http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-11nov10-en.htm > >Module 2 > > * Updated string requirements section per > anticipated RFC 1123 revisions, which addresses the use of numbers in TLDs > * Added UNESCO list as reference for continent/region names > >Module 3 > > * Incorporated Intergovernmental > Organizations (IGOs) into Legal Rights Objection > * Eliminated the complete defense to > Community Objections in favor of elevated standard for successful objection > * Included several recommendations from the > "Rec 6 Working Group" dealing with the morality and public order objection > >Module 4 - no significant changes >Module 5 > > * Added explanation of ICANN Board's role > in the new gTLD process in accordance with > Board Resolution 2.7 - Sept 26 2010 See: > http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-25sep10-en.htm#2.7 > >Other Documents to be finalized and posted soon include: > > * The Economic Analysis of program costs and benefits > >We continue to incorporate work done by cross >stakeholder working groups in the areas of: >morality and public order objections; and >recommendations suggested by the Applicant Support Working Group. >Upcoming Program Events > >During the December ICANN Meeting in Cartagena, >Colombia there will be several program sessions, including: > > * New gTLD Program Status Update > * New gTLD Basics - in Spanish and English > * Developing Economies and the New gTLD Program > * Sessions with updates on "overarching > issues" including: Economic Analysis; Trademark > Protections, Mitigation of Malicious Conduct; and Root Zone Scaling > >For final schedule and remote participation >access information see: http://cartagena39.icann.org/sched-overview > > >Glen de Saint Géry >GNSO Secretariat >gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org >http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Candidate Statement and CV
by Alan Greenberg Nov. 12, 2010

Nov. 12, 2010

Prior to the tomorrow's (or today for some) community call with the three candidates for the At-Large Director, I have posted my CV and a Candidate Statement. They can be found at https://community.icann.org/display/DirCan/Alan+Greenberg+-+At-Large+Board+…. For your convenience, the Candidate Statement follows this message. Alan ================================ I am honoured to have been selected as a candidate for the first seating of a voting Board Director selected by the At-Large Community. I would like to take this opportunity to briefly discuss my overall history, my involvement in ICANN, and what I would like to accomplish as your Director. History ======= I have spent the majority of my career in a variety of technology and technology-management positions. Although I no longer consider myself to be a technical expert, I have maintained my interest and overall level of knowledge in many computer and networking areas, and can still quickly get up to speed on specific areas where required. I have successfully managed large groups of people and budgets, and survived in an environment where you could only succeed by working cooperatively with others. Much of my career was in the not-for-profit sector, but I also ran successful businesses and spent too much of my time negotiating contracts. I have been on a number of not-for-profit Boards over the last 25 years. All together, I believe that I will function well in the ICANN Board environment. In the mid 1990s, I began volunteer work with the Internet Society running the Network Training Workshops that trained much of the local staff that allowed 140 developing countries to connect to the Internet. Since my retirement from full-time employment, I have taken on a number of assignments related to the effective use of Information and Communications Technologies (ICT) in developing countries, and how donor countries and international agencies can improve their ICT support. Focus areas have been education, health care and overall poverty alleviation. ICANN ===== Although I participated in the 2000 At-Large director selection as an individual voter, my substantive involvement in ICANN began when I was appointed to the ALAC by the Nominating Committee in 2006. From discussions held prior to and at my first ICANN meeting, it was obvious that despite a number of superb people sitting on the ALAC (the Interim ALAC at that time, since it was prior to the creation of any RALOs), the group as a whole had a very poor reputation in ICANN. I was determined to do what I could to change that. At this meeting, the Liaison from the ALAC to the GNSO was stepping down, and I volunteered to fill that role - a role that I have held since then. Through my participation in the GNSO Council and gTLD issues in general, I believe that I have helped us gain credibility within ICANN. To quote Avri Doria in a recent message (http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/na-discuss/2010-November/004131.ht…) >"At-Large/ALAC has achieved a good start with its use of the by-laws >capability of introducing issue report requests in GNSO. And Alan's >job as not only a liaison to the GNSO council, but often as a >virtual council member, including as a chair of a GNSO WG, has gone >a long way to increasing ALAC visibility." During the last two years, I have served as the ALAC Rapporteur and then Vice-Chair. In those roles as well as that of a regular ALAC member, I have contributed heavily to both policy and administrative matters. As referred to above, I took responsibility for the issue of Domain Tasting. This was an issue that had been discussed within ICANN for a number of years, but with no concrete action taken. My actions led to the initiation of a GNSO Policy Development Process (PDP) which ultimately eliminated Domain Tasting. The Bylaws had always allowed the ALAC to initiate such action, but this was the first time it was exercised. I followed this with a PDP on ensuring that registrants could recover gTLD domain names if they inadvertently let them expire, a PDP which is still ongoing. As indicated by these and other actions, I believe strongly in collaborative efforts. I have participated in a number of them within ICANN, including the groups that, against all odds, found a way to satisfactorily reorganize the GNSO and the group that addressed the gTLD Intellectual Property issues following the extreme dissatisfaction with the IRT Report. ALAC and At-Large are in a MUCH better position now than four years ago. The fact that we have this voting seat on the Board is clear evidence. This change was the result of a lot of people working really hard, but I take some comfort in knowing that I played a significant part in it. ICANN Board =========== If I am selected to be the first At-Large Director, I will have a number of specific targets. Several of these were discussed in my Statement of Interest (http://tinyurl.com/AlanGreenberg-SoI) 1. I will do my best to make sure that ICANN staff and Board not be as focused on developed countries only. Not everyone in the world has wideband 24 hr Internet access, and if ICANN wants to be considered a world organization, it must be receptive to norms other that those typical in western developed countries. 2. Transparency is not just about telling people how transparent you are, it is about them believing it. The Accountability and Transparency Review Team is addressing some of those issues, but there are more that were not within their scope. The fact that we are making some progress is encouraging. 3. The Affirmation of Commitments talks about "public interest" and "the interests of global Internet users". These issues need to be considered in every ICANN decision. Part of that is certainly soliciting and then listening to the opinions of the formal At-Large Community. But it is also making sure that the really load voices of the ICANN contracted parties and other business interests do not drown out the less powerful and less well-funded voices. I do, however, have one overriding goal. That is to do all within my power to make the Board and the ICANN Community see the unique value in having a voting Director selected by At-Large. If that can be achieved, then At-Large will have passed another test on our way to being a full partner in ICANN's multi-stakeholder environment.

1 0

Election Call for ALAC Officers to serve from Dec 2010 to ICANN AGM 2011
by Cheryl Langdon-Orr Nov. 12, 2010

Nov. 12, 2010

Election Call for ALAC Officers to serve from Dec 2010 to ICANN AGM 2011 *ALAC Officers Election Schedule November December 2010* *12 November 2010 Election Call (sent to lists.)* *26 November 2010 Deadline for Officer Nominations (to be sent to lists.)* *28 November 2010 Chair to post to the public ALAC list an “election summary” message (sent to lists.)* *28 November – 10 December 2010 Nominations are discussed * *3 December 2010 Deadline for Nominees to Accept their Nomination (sent to lists and or as notified and recorded on the relevant Election Pages of th At-Large Wiki.)* *5 December 2010 Start of AGM * *10-11 December 2010 Election of ALAC Officers* *13 December 2010 Election Results announced* *13 December 2010 New ALAC Officers take their seats * *Election Schedule with ROP Explanations* *12 November 2010 Election Call is sent by ALAC Chair * ROP Article 9.1: No earlier than one calendar month and no later than three weeks before the beginning of an ICANN Meeting where an ALAC officer has to be elected, the current Chair Chair of the ALAC will send to the public ALAC list an “election call” message, listing the officers that are to be elected at that ICANN Meeting, asking for nominations, and stating the deadline according to the following paragraph 9.2. *26 November 2010 Deadline for Officer Nominations* ROP Article 9.2: The deadline for nominations for all open officer positions shall be 14 (fourteen) days after the date of the “election call”. Only delegates can nominate or self-nominate, by posting a message to the public ALAC list. Anyone who will or has a chance to meet eligibility requirements after the next ICANN Annual General Meeting can be nominated; it is not necessary for nominees to meet eligibility requirements at the moment of the nomination, but, if elected, they will have to meet them before taking their seat. Nominations of individuals who will not meet the eligibility requirements after the closure of the next Annual General Meeting are invalid. *28 November 2010 Chair to post to the public ALAC list an “election summary” message* ROP 9.4 9.4 After the deadline for nomination acceptance has passed and either: 9.4.1 not less than seven (7) days before the opening of the ICANN Meeting, if a regular election, or; 9.4.2 within seven (7) days from the end of the nomination acceptance period, if a vacancy is being filled between Annual General Meetings the Chair will post to the public ALAC list an “election summary” message. This message will contain a summary of all valid nominations for any open position. In the message, the Chair will also notify the day and time in which the actual vote will happen; such day and time must be either: 9.4.3 For regular elections: between the beginning and the closure of the ICANN Meeting, except when the Meeting is also the Annual General Meeting. In this latter case, the date and time of the vote shall be within the first 48 (forty-eight) hours after the closure of the Annual General Meeting; thus, the electorate will include the delegates whose term starts at the closure of that Annual General Meeting, and will not include the former ALAC members whose term ends at the closure of that Annual General Meeting, or: 9.4.4 Where a vacancy arises in mid-year: the electorate shall consist of those delegates who are currently serving ALAC Members *28 November – 10 December 2010 Nominations are discussed * ROP Article 9.5: Nominations shall then be discussed on the public ALAC list, via instant messaging services or by telephone, and/or at the physical ALAC meetings during the ICANN Meetings, as applicable. *3 December 2010 Deadline for Nominees to Accept their Nomination* ROP Article 9.3: Nominations must be accepted by the nominee by sending a message of acceptance to the public ALAC list (or to the person who nominated them, who will then forward it to the public ALAC list, if they do not have posting privileges to the public ALAC list at the time) by the deadline of 7 (seven) days after the deadline for nominations. Nominations that are not accepted are invalid. *5 December 2010 Start of AGM * *10-11 December 2010 Election of ALAC Officers* ROP 9.4: 9.4.3 For regular elections: between the beginning and the closure of the ICANN Meeting, except when the Meeting is also the Annual General Meeting. In this latter case, the date and time of the vote shall be within the first 48 (forty-eight) hours after the closure of the Annual General Meeting; thus, the electorate will include the delegates whose term starts at the closure of that Annual General Meeting, and will not include the former ALAC members whose term ends at the closure of that Annual General Meeting, or: 9.4.4 Where a vacancy arises in mid-year: the electorate shall consist of those delegates who are currently serving ALAC Members ROP 9.6: At the day and time of the vote, delegates will be provided (by staff or a delegated disinterested third party) with a mechanism for voting that meets the following requirements: 9.6.1 It allows for each delegate to cast their vote in a confidential manner, so that no other delegate or officer shall know it; 9.6.2 It allows for delegates who are not physically present to cast their vote remotely (also in advance of the day and time of the vote, if they are unavailable at that moment 9.6.3 Each delegate can cast up to one preference for each open position, picking among the list of validly nominated individuals published at rule 9.4. Votes for other individuals are considered equivalent to abstention. *13 December 2010 Election Results announced* *13 December 2010 New ALAC Officers take their seats at the end of the AGM* Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) ALAC Chair 2007-2010

1 0

Registrars: The Internet's Travel Agents? (was Re: [GTLD-WG] ICANN Board Votes to Enhance New gTLDs Competition)
by Evan Leibovitch Nov. 12, 2010

Nov. 12, 2010

On 12 November 2010 04:50, Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien(a)bachollet.com>wrote: > > > > And what are the consumer/end-user implications? > > As domain name registrant in a new gTLD you will have just one provider and > it will be able to do what it want with no balanced power. > I've never understood this. Purely from a registrant or end-user point of view, what is "balanced power"? If a TLD allows and encourages name speculation or domain tasting, how much does it matter to the end-user if the speculators are from the manufacturers (registrars) or resellers (registries)? In the previous situation, if there is a current imbalance it appears to favour registrars. Registries are forced to go through them and have no option to sell directly to the public. Registrars do not have to prove their value, they are forced upon TLD operators. And since registries cannot go direct, they are dependent on registrars' willingness to market them. There is the argument, that without competition between registrars prices would be higher than they could be. But that is offset by the fact that registrars introduce a new level of indirection that by design is more complex -- and more costly -- than a system without registrars needs to be. The status quo makes sense when there is a practical monopoly of the TLD that most people want -- .com -- so that almost all of the current competition is between registrars all selling the same TLD. But that is essentially an artificial scarcity. In a world with many gTLDs, the competition will be amongst the TLDs -- which should each be free to decide whether to use resellers or not. Now, registrars can and do provide services that are useful to some registrants, such as management of domain portfolios, automated renewals, etc. And they may call attention to TLD options of which registrants may not be aware. But I see registrars in much the same way as I see travel agents -- they are useful for some, but not all consumers (and not all suppliers) need them. Once travel agents were a mandatory middle step while airline competition was minimal. But as the regulations have been lifted and there are more airlines, the marketplace has benefited from travel agents becoming optional, as airlines are able to act as their own booking agents. And nobody complains about the ability of airlines to change fares -- from minute to minute -- as specific routes become more or less scarce. > The only power to balance those real monopolies is a well organized > At-Large > voice (or voices) - from the ALS to the ALAC and even to the Board. > The most basic answer to this is that ICANN has the power to _eliminate_ the monopolies. Certainly there is some need for regulation, to ensure that handling of issues such as renewals and expiries are not predatory, but that can be done by advancing user rights into all ICANN contracts. User rights can be asserted universally whether registrars exist or not. A vigilant At-Large *and* a truly competitive TLD landscape is most desirable. - Evan

1 0

Re: [ALAC] [GTLD-WG] ICANN Board Votes to Enhance New gTLDs Competition
by Sébastien Bachollet Nov. 12, 2010

Nov. 12, 2010

Sébastien Bachollet sebastien(a)bachollet.com +33 6 07 66 89 33 > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Michele Neylon :: Blacknight [mailto:michele@blacknight.ie] > Envoyé : mercredi 10 novembre 2010 18:21 > À : Evan Leibovitch > Cc : Sébastien Bachollet; <gtld-wg(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>; ALAC > Working List > Objet : Re: [GTLD-WG] [ALAC] ICANN Board Votes to Enhance New gTLDs > Competition > > > On 10 Nov 2010, at 17:17, Evan Leibovitch wrote: > > > On 10 November 2010 11:00, Sébastien Bachollet > <sebastien(a)bachollet.com>wrote: > > > >> http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-09nov10-en.htm > >> > >> > >> > > So... as someone who was interested in the vertical integration issue > but > > didn't have the time to participate, I'd like to find out... does > this > > resolve the issue > > Yes - unless someone decides to try and persuade the board to backtrack [SBT] I am not sure it solve the problem. But yes it is A decision by the Board and by the way the total opposite from the one taken by the same Board few months ago. Did the working group change opinion ? I haven't see that. Did the Board base his decisions on expert advices (maybe the Board change experts). It is easier than to change the participants of the working group ;) Yes it will be interesting to know the bases of the decision. > > > (of course, not to everyone's liking)? > > > > And what are the consumer/end-user implications? > > Depends who you ask :) [SBT] And it depends also from what perspective If you are a small community willing to start a gTLD for the community and no registrar willing to serve their needs then it is great. For Brand TLDs it will allow them to stay really closed and it is not specially benefic for the customer of those companies. As domain name registrant in a new gTLD you will have just one provider and it will be able to do what it want with no balanced power. The only power to balance those real monopolies is a well organized At-Large voice (or voices) - from the ALS to the ALAC and even to the Board. > > > > Mr Michele Neylon > Blacknight Solutions > Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection > ICANN Accredited Registrar > http://www.blacknight.com/ > http://blog.blacknight.com/ > http://blacknight.mobi/ > http://mneylon.tel > Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 > US: 213-233-1612 > UK: 0844 484 9361 > Locall: 1850 929 929 > Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 > Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon > > PS: Check out our latest offers on domains & hosting: > http://domainoffers.me/ > ------------------------------- > Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business > Park,Sleaty > Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845

1 0

Re: [ALAC] [board-09georegionswg] Final Interim Report Document Complete and on to Translation
by Cheryl Langdon-Orr Nov. 10, 2010

Nov. 10, 2010

Thank YOU Rob... Look forward to the call and w'shop plans... re the PC as each of our At-Large Regions will be meeting separately during Cartagena, *if* any of the Regional Leaders wish to have discussion on this in their meeting (ad knowing the translations will be available by then will also assist ;-) I'm forwarding the Working list the PDF in EN as an *advance copy* to assist in their 'pre PC review', and for consideration on adding it to their future Agendas, at Cartagena or in January... Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) On 11 November 2010 16:29, Robert Hoggarth <robert.hoggarth(a)icann.org>wrote: > Dear Working Group members: > > Receiving no additional edits to the Final version of the Interim Report > document by COB today, moments ago I transmitted the report to our Language > Services team for translation. For your files, I have attached a copies of > the report in both .doc and .pdf format. I will now work with our web > services team to set up a Public Comment Forum that will be open through 30 > January 2011. > > Thank you, again, for all your efforts on the document. I look forward to > talking with you all next week as you develop plans for the public workshop > in Cartagena. > > Best regards, > > RobH >

1 0

ICANN Board Votes to Enhance New gTLDs Competition
by Sébastien Bachollet Nov. 10, 2010

Nov. 10, 2010

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-09nov10-en.htm Sébastien Bachollet <mailto:sebastien@bachollet.com> sebastien(a)bachollet.com +33 6 07 66 89 33

2 1

Fwd: 5 November 2010 - ICANN Board of Directors Special Board Meeting - Adopted Resolutions Posted
by Cheryl Langdon-Orr Nov. 10, 2010

Nov. 10, 2010

Thank you John, with this reply to you I am beginning distribution to our relevant lists... Just received this notice from General Council, Staff can we pass this on through our usual announcement to relevant lists please... Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: John Jeffrey <john.jeffrey(a)icann.org> Date: 10 November 2010 18:54 Subject: 5 November 2010 - ICANN Board of Directors Special Board Meeting - Adopted Resolutions Posted To: "Chuck Gomes (cgomes(a)verisign.com)" <cgomes(a)verisign.com>, " louie(a)louie.net" <louie(a)louie.net>, "ceo(a)auda.au" <ceo(a)auda.au>, " langdonorr(a)gmail.com" <langdonorr(a)gmail.com>, "Steve Crocker ( steve(a)shinkuro.com)" <steve(a)shinkuro.com>, "Heather.Dryden(a)ic.gc.ca" < Heather.Dryden(a)ic.gc.ca>, "junsec(a)wide.ad.jp" <junsec(a)wide.ad.jp> Cc: "Peter.dengatethrush(a)icann.org" <Peter.dengatethrush(a)icann.org>, Rod Beckstrom <rod.beckstrom(a)icann.org> SO and AC Chairs, Please note that we have posted the adopted resolutions from a Special Board Meeting that was held on 5 November 2010. We have also posted an announcement regarding a decision that was taken by the Board of Directors regarding New gTLDs on Cross Ownership by Registries and Registrars. Below are the links: http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-05nov10-en.htm http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-09nov10-en.htm best regards, John Jeffrey General Counsel & Secretary ICANN 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330 Marina del Rey, CA USA 90292 direct dial - +1.310.301.5834 mobile - +1.310.404.6001

1 0