- Bc-gnso - lists.icann.org

NTIA says ICANN does not meet requirements for IANA renewal
by Steve DelBianco March 10, 2012

March 10, 2012

This just in… http://domainincite.com/ntia-says-icann-does-not-meet-the-requirements-for-… NTIA says ICANN “does not meet the requirements” for IANA renewal<http://domainincite.com/ntia-says-icann-does-not-meet-the-requirements-for-…> Kevin Murphy<http://domainincite.com/about>, March 10, 2012, 15:21:51 (UTC), Domain Policy<http://domainincite.com/category/domain-policy/> The National Telecommunications and Information Administration has dealt a stunning blow to ICANN in its bid to carry on running the internet’s critical IANA functions. The NTIA said this hour that it has canceled the RFP for the new IANA contract “because we received no proposals that met the requirements requested by the global community” NTIA thinks that ICANN’s bid was unsatisfactory, in other words. The NTIA said<http://ntia.doc.gov/other-publication/2012/notice-internet-assigned-numbers…>: Based on the input received from stakeholders around the world, NTIA added new requirements to the IANA functions’ statement of work, including the need for structural separation of policymaking from implementation, a robust companywide conflict of interest policy, provisions reflecting heightened respect for local country laws, and a series of consultation and reporting requirements to increase transparency and accountability to the international community. The government may cancel any solicitation that does not meet the requirements. Accordingly, we are cancelling this RFP because we received no proposals that met the requirements requested by the global community. The Department intends to reissue the RFP at a future date to be determined (TBD) so that the requirements of the global internet community can be served. However, it has extended<http://ntia.doc.gov/other-publication/2012/notice-extension-internet-assign…> ICANN’s current IANA contract until September 30, 2012. This means ICANN still has its IANA powers over the DNS root zone, at least for another six months. While the NTIA has not yet revealed where ICANN’s bid for the contract fell short, it is known that the NTIA and ICANN’s senior management did not exactly see eye to eye on certain issues. One of the key sticking points is the NTIA’s demand that the IANA contractor – ICANN – must document that all new gTLD delegations are in “the global public interest”. This demand is a way to prevent another controversy such as the approval of .xxx a year ago, which the Governmental Advisory Committee objected to on the grounds that it was not the “the global public interest”. Coupled with newly strengthened<http://domainincite.com/gac-gets-more-power-to-block-controversial-gtlds/> Applicant Guidebook powers for the GAC to object to new gTLD application, the IANA language could be described as “if the GAC objects, you must reject”. If the GAC were to declare .gay or .catholic “not in the global public interest”, it would be pretty tough for ICANN to prove otherwise. But ICANN CEO Rod Beckstrom has previously stated that he believed such rules imposed by the US government would undermine the multistakeholder process. He told the NTIA<http://domainincite.com/icann-fights-government-gtld-power-grab/> last June that the draft IANA contract language stood to “rewrite” ICANN’s own process when it came to approving new gTLDs. The IANA functions contract should not be used to rewrite the policy and implementation process adopted through the bottom-up decision-making process. Not only would this undermine the very principle of the multi-stakeholder model, it would be inconsistent with the objective of more clearly distinguishing policy development from operational implementation by the IANA functions operator. Since then, language requiring ICANN to prove “consensus” on new gTLD delegations was removed, but language requiring it to demonstrate the “global public interest” remains. The game is bigger than petty squabbling about new gTLDs, however. The US government is worried about International Telecommunications Union treaty talks later this year, which many countries want to use to push for government-led internet governance. A strong GAC, backed by an enforceable IANA contract, is one way to field concerns that ICANN is not responsive enough to government interests. It’s tempting to view the deferral of the IANA renewal as an attempt to wait out Beckstrom’s tenure as CEO – he’s set to leave at the end of June – and deal with a more compliant replacement instead. UPDATE: Shortly after this story was published the NTIA belatedly released its rationale for the decision. Read about it here.<http://domainincite.com/ntia-says-icann-does-not-meet-the-requirements-for-…>

1 0

ICANN 43 Public Forum Agenda Building
by Marilyn Cade March 10, 2012

March 10, 2012

Dear BC members Public Forum agenda is now built based on input received and published at: http://costarica43.icann.org/node/29713 Remember we have a huddle Wed for prep. we will finalize the time slot [no remote participation is provided for that]. We may have a guest speaker, though, from the senior staff in that time slot. Am working on scheduling someone we haven't otherwise met with. So would be 20 minutes for prep, and possible guest speaker. Marilyn CadeBC Chair

3 2

Thefts of Laptops and bags in conference rooms in Costa Rica
by Zahid Jamil March 9, 2012

March 9, 2012

> > FYI. > > My bag was stolen. It had my passport, laptop, phones, credit cards and cash. Only left with my IPAD. Will be making it over to Doubletree. Have spent time with police, courts and immigration department. Apparently there is an organised group of some colombians here that are coming into conference rooms posing to be participants and drop their bag and walk out with bags belonging to others. So a warning to all to beware. > The Minister of Science and Technology here has been an angel getting me assistance with replacement travel documents etc. Their cooperation was unbelievably wonderful and efficient. Owe him a lot! > > > Best regards, > > Zahid Jamil > Barrister-at-law > Jamil & Jamil > Barristers-at-law > 219-221 Central Hotel Annexe > Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan > Cell: +923008238230 > Tel: +92 21 5680760 / 5685276 / 5655025 > Fax: +92 21 5655026 > www.jamilandjamil.com > > Notice / Disclaimer > This message contains confidential information and its contents are being communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this message by mistake and delete it from your system. The contents above may contain/are the intellectual property of Jamil & Jamil, Barristers-at-Law, and constitute privileged information protected by attorney client privilege. The reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification of any kind whatsoever of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing it in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently or incidentally or some other use of this communication) without prior written permission and consent of Jamil & Jamil is prohibited. > > Sent from my iPad

1 0

ICANN Stakeholder Satisfaction Survey Results to be Presented: Preview
by Marilyn Cade March 9, 2012

March 9, 2012

I would like to invite a few BC members to join me and Chris in attending this session. Again, thanks to those of youwho did participate. I heard back from Ayesha that she can participate, and we could use a couple more. Again, we will all be interacting as individuals, but I will probably ask Chris to set up and help me organize a follow up discussion with members about the impilcations of the survey, after we hear staff's overviews. Marilyn CadeBC Chair De : Kurt Pritz <kurt.pritz(a)icann.org> Thank you for your recent efforts to circulate the initial ICANN Stakeholder Satisfaction Survey to your respective communities. We have tabulated the results and have produced a package of materials for interested community members. I have attached an executive summary of the survey results for your information that you may forward to members of your communities. We have posted the full survey administrator report (including much of the raw survey response data) on a special new page on the ICANN Community Wiki at https://community.icann.org/x/IaXbAQ. The ICANN staff will be reviewing the survey results on a department-by-department basis to identify opportunities for short-term and longer-term improvements. There is no need to read and digest this material now, we will be presenting the material in a workshop created as the first opportunity for community input at the upcoming Public Meeting in San Jose, Costa Rica. The session will "unveil" the survey results as well as launch a community feedback on the process, design and logistics of future survey efforts (see http://costarica43.icann.org/node/29733) We wanted to provide you a preview. This initial survey effort has been a learning experience. We would like the next survey effort to incorporate feedback and advice from your communities so that we can expand participation in future surveys, focus questions on the areas that need attention and address productive and meaningful changes in areas where it is warranted. Thank you for your support of this effort. See you shortly in San Jose. Best regards, Kurt Pritz

1 0

Updated BC Schedule for Costa Rica + GNSO Weekend Working Sessions
by Benedetta Rossi March 9, 2012

March 9, 2012

Dear BC Members, Following the changes made to the ICANN schedule for the Costa Rica meeting, please find attached the following documents: 1. BC Schedule for Costa Rica with meetings of relevance to the BC & BC social events - updated using ICANN schedule on Friday March 9th 2012 2. GNSO Weekend Working Sessions' Schedule - with BC attendees - updated on Friday March 9th 2012 Thank you, -- Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home www.bizconst.org bc-secretariat(a)icann.org

1 0

GNSO weekend working schedule links
by Benedetta Rossi March 9, 2012

March 9, 2012

Dear BC Members, Please find below the links to the GNSO working schedules for this weekend in Costa Rica: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/GNSO+Working+Sessio… https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/GNSO+Working+Sessio… Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home www.bizconst.org bc-secretariat(a)icann.org

1 0

FYI: ICANN is making several changes in the Schedule/introducing new workshops/
by Marilyn Cade March 9, 2012

March 9, 2012

Dear members I know we are all feeling a little buffetted by the lateness in the ICANN agenda and availability of agendas for various workshops. I wanted to call your attention to two rather major changes on Monday: a new workshop that was given 2 hours, which is a considerable amount of time, has resulted in other agenda changes which are problemmatic to the BC's ability to fully participate in two important workshops: WHOIS RT and ICANN and the Internet Governance Landscape. It is regrettable that ICANN is struggling with the details of the agenda and the materials. There are also now late publication of some other materials, so we will all have some on site work to do to get caught up on new details. I do appreciate your flexibility and the good will that the BC members always show in dealing with such challenges. I know we are all once again drowning in last minute stuff, but that means that the staff is probably also feeling a bit buffetted. We will do our best, but I think we may have some discussions by email over the Sat/Sun on substance topics. Travel safely, and just a heads up: it is lovely and warm here during day, but I think a light jacket may be needed [or for men, your suit jacket may feel good!] I just got here and I can tell I'll be a bit chilly during the evenings. Ayesha has been here a day more so may have an insight... I will ask Bene to do a new version of our marked up BC meeting schedule [the one with the orange codes] and publish it on Sunday. that way, she can catch any further changes that happen. M

2 1

OFF TOPIC: Two rooms avaiable at Conference Hotel
by Ron Andruff March 7, 2012

March 7, 2012

Dear all, Apologies for going off topic, but thought I would let anyone who needs one know that we have two rooms available at the Conference hotel from Friday, March 9th to Friday, March 16th. If anyone would like them, please contact me off list. Thanks and kind regards, RA Ronald N. Andruff RNA Partners, Inc.

1 0

Re: [bc-gnso] Kieren's summary of the status of RAA discussions
by Marilyn Cade March 7, 2012

March 7, 2012

Most of us in the BC sully supported your analysis, Phil. I know that a former member of ours felt otherwise because of the double voting, but this compromise hasn't worked well. Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T -----Original Message----- From: Phil Corwin <psc(a)vlaw-dc.com> Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 16:14:55 To: <james.f.baskin(a)verizon.com>; <bc-gnso(a)icann.org> Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] Kieren's summary of the status of RAA discussions I hardly ever say anything in the "I told you so" vein, but I do recall expressing substantial reservations at the time the GNSO reform plan was unveiled that splitting it between contracted and non-contracted parties would institutionalize existing divisions and make consensus even more difficult to achieve. Unfortunately time and experience seem to have borne that out. Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey -----Original Message----- From: owner-bc-gnso(a)icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@icann.org] On Behalf Of Baskin, James F (Jim) Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 10:59 AM To: bc - GNSO list Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] Kieren's summary of the status of RAA discussions Mikey - Thanks for the URI. Kieren's analysis on the RAA negotiations appears, sadly, right on target. Relating to the BC discussions on the topic, his paragraph on the PDP option explains exactly why we should be concerned: "ICANN's formal policy development process (PDP) is supposed to be where big policy issues are decided, and registrars have been arguing for some time that this is the best and most effective route to revise the RAA. The reality however is that due to the shoddy restructuring of ICANN's policy body, the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) and its main Council, that there is currently very little confidence in the process. Despite planned revisions to the PDP process, the reality remains that registrars are effectively able to veto any changes - and have done so repeatedly. On top of that, there is significantly bad blood created over the past three years due to manipulations of the process, especially surrounding the RAA. It may be the most appropriate route, but it is unlikely to be the most smooth of effective. Likelihood of happening: Medium to High Likely effectiveness: Low to Medium" Jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-bc-gnso(a)icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@icann.org] On Behalf Of Mike O'Connor Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 10:18 AM To: bc - GNSO list Subject: [bc-gnso] Kieren's summary of the status of RAA discussions the topic came up on the Monday call -- Kieren just published his view here; http://news.dot-nxt.com/2012/03/07/raa-talks-what-now mikey - - - - - - - - - phone 651-647-6109 fax 866-280-2356 web http://www.haven2.com handle OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.) ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com> Version: 10.0.1424 / Virus Database: 2113/4856 - Release Date: 03/07/12

1 0

Kieren's summary of the status of RAA discussions
by Mike O'Connor March 7, 2012

March 7, 2012

the topic came up on the Monday call -- Kieren just published his view here; http://news.dot-nxt.com/2012/03/07/raa-talks-what-now mikey - - - - - - - - - phone 651-647-6109 fax 866-280-2356 web http://www.haven2.com handle OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)

3 2