June 2014 - Ccnso-council - lists.icann.org

ccNSO Council Comments on ICANN Accountablity Process Enhancement
by Gabriella Schittek June 18, 2014

June 18, 2014

Dear all, The ccNSO Council has commented on Enhancing ICANN's Accountability Process: http://ccnso.icann.org/node/45522 Kind regards, Gabi

1 0

Council Draft Agenda 25 June 2014
by Gabriella Schittek June 18, 2014

June 18, 2014

Dear all, Please, find the draft agenda for the upcoming Council meeting in London below. Please, let me know as soon as possible in case you wish to add any topics. Thanks, Gabi Draft Agenda ccNSO Council Meeting London, UK 25 June 2014 1) Apologies 2) Minutes and Actions 3) .RO (Romania) Membership Application 4) Contact Repository Implementation (CRI) Working Group Final Report and Recommendations 5) Quorum Interpretation Study Group Final Report and Recommendation 6) Name Collision Study Group 7) Internet Governance Fora 7.1 Update · 1 Net initiative (Mathieu Weill) · I* activities (Regional Organisations) · 5th Panel (Byron Holland) · ccWG Internet Governance (Jordan Carter) 7.2 Discussion 8) ICANN¹s IANA Oversight Transition Process and Enhancing Accountability 8.1 Update Coordination Committee (Byron Holland) 8.2 What have we heard 8.3 Volunteers for the ICANN Working Group and Coordination Committee 9) ccWorking Group on IANA Oversight Transition 10) Charter ccWorking Group on Internet Governance 11) Use of Names of Country and Territories as TLDs 11.1 Appointment of co-Chair 11.2 Letter to the Board on Extension of Current Rule in Applicant Guidebook 12) Council Updates 12.1 Chair Update 12.2 Vice-Chair Update 12.3 Councillors Update 12.4 Regional Organisations Update 12.5 Staff Update 13) Working Group Updates 13.1 SOP Working Group (written update) 13.2 FoI Working Group (Keith Davidson) 13.3 ccWorking Group drafting charter (Becky Burr) 13.4 ccWorking Group on Use of names of Country and territories (written update) 14) Liaison Updates 14.1 GNSO Liaison (Patrick Myles) 14.2 ALAC Liaison (Ron Sherwood) 15) Update Work Plan 16) Date of Next Meetings 21 August 12.00 UTC 25 September 12.00 UTC 15 October 15.00 Local Los Angeles Time 17) AOB

1 0

RE: [ccnso-members] RE: [ccTLDcommunity] Introduction of Two-Character Domain Names in the New gTLD Namespace
by Katrina Sataki June 18, 2014

June 18, 2014

Dear Jörg, Thank you for brining up this issue! We should definitely talk about it in London. We are currently trying to find a suitable slot and will come back to you later. However, to start the discussion we need somebody who could present the issue to the community. Any ideas? Jörg, you yourself perhaps? Kind regards, ]{atrina From: owner-ccnso-members(a)icann.org [mailto:owner-ccnso-members@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jörg Schweiger Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 11:18 AM To: Gabriella Schittek; ccnso-council(a)icann.org; ccnso-members(a)icann.org; cctldcommunity(a)cctld-managers.org; cctldcommunity-bounces(a)cctld-managers.org Subject: [ccnso-members] RE: [ccTLDcommunity] Introduction of Two-Character Domain Names in the New gTLD Namespace cctldcommunity-bounces(a)cctld-managers.org <mailto:cctldcommunity-bounces@cctld-managers.org> schrieb am 13.06.2014 08:55:43: > Von: Gabriella Schittek <gabriella.schittek(a)icann.org <mailto:gabriella.schittek@icann.org> > > An: "ccnso-members(a)icann.org <mailto:ccnso-members@icann.org> " <ccnso-members(a)icann.org <mailto:ccnso-members@icann.org> >, "cctldcommunity(a)cctld-managers.org <mailto:cctldcommunity@cctld-managers.org> " <cctldcommunity(a)cctld-managers.org <mailto:cctldcommunity@cctld-managers.org> > > Kopie: "ccnso-council(a)icann.org <mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org> " <ccnso-council(a)icann.org <mailto:ccnso-council@icann.org> > > Datum: 13.06.2014 08:56 > Betreff: [ccTLDcommunity] Introduction of Two-Character Domain Names in the New gTLD Namespace > Gesendet von: cctldcommunity-bounces(a)cctld-managers.org <mailto:cctldcommunity-bounces@cctld-managers.org> > > Dear all, > > Several registries have applied for amendments to the Registry Agreements to > implement a new registry service, which would permit the introduction of > two-character domain names for registration in the new gTLD namespace. In > total, the requests concern 148 New gTLDs: If my recollection isn't wrong DNS stability considerations were at least one reason for the exclusion. I haven't seen a re-evalution, especially not in the light of 1000+ new gTLDs (in the first place stability contemplations for Two-character Domain Names were raised even in the context of the 250+ cc's and the established gTLDS,+- 10 ). Two-character Domain Names will - among other aspects - contribute significantly to the revenue preposition of the new gTLDs. It's up to the respective ccTLD managers to digest the impact on their name space. .de has already been approached by some nTLDs to agree to the usage of strings like "de.nTLD" (as possible under the current ICANN policy ruling). Most certainly the request above will lead to a general decision and not only one for those 148 gTLDS. Should we discuss the matter at ICANN50? > > <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/two-char-new-gtld-2014-06-12-en> https://www.icann.org/public-comments/two-char-new-gtld-2014-06-12-en > > Public comments are welcome until 10 July 2014. > > Kind regards, > > Gabi > > > [Anhang "smime.p7s" gelöscht von Jörg Schweiger/Denic] _______________________________________________ > ccTLDcommunity mailing list > ccTLDcommunity(a)cctld-managers.org <mailto:ccTLDcommunity@cctld-managers.org> > <http://www.lists.cctld-managers.org/mailman/listinfo/cctldcommunity> http://www.lists.cctld-managers.org/mailman/listinfo/cctldcommunity > > To unsubscribe please send a blank email to ccTLDcommunity-unsubscribe(a)lists.cctld-managers.org <mailto:ccTLDcommunity-unsubscribe@lists.cctld-managers.org>

1 0

FW: URGENT: CALL FOR VOLUNTEERS TO FORM A DRAFTING TEAM (IANA STEWARDSHIP TRANSITION)
by Byron Holland June 17, 2014

June 17, 2014

Dear Colleagues, You may recall from our discussions at ccNSO Council and at the IANA Transfer Coordination Committee that there have been discussions in the community about establishing a cross community Working Group on IANA Stewardship transition. I believe there is a need for such a group to provide true bottom-up input to the Coordination Group on IANA Stewardship that ICANN is setting up. Given the tight timelines that ICANN has set for the overall IANA transition process, Jonathan Robinson and I have sent the email below to other SO/AC chairs seeking volunteers for a drafting team for a charter for such a ccWG. Of course, creating the ccWG itself would require the approval of the SO/ACs involved including the ccNSO. Having a close to final charter for the ccWG would facilitate these discussions. I appreciate that such a step is a bit out of the ordinary, but these are extraordinary times. This is why I want us to talk about ccNSO participation in the DT at our Sunday meeting, and I am asking that Bart put it on our agenda. If this is approved, we would immediately issue a call for volunteers with a view to approving specific names at our meeting the following Wednesday. Approval of an actual ccWG charter and ccNSO participation in the ccWG would come later, likely in July or August. Byron From: Byron Holland Sent: June-17-14 4:12 PM To: 'soac-chairs(a)icann.org' Cc: Jonathan Robinson Subject: URGENT: CALL FOR VOLUNTEERS TO FORM A DRAFTING TEAM (IANA STEWARDSHIP TRANSITION) Dear SO/AC Chairs, We, the Chairs of the ccNSO and GNSO Council, would hereby like to invite your organization to join a drafting team, tasked with drafting the charter for a Cross-Community Working Group to develop a Transfer Process for the IANA Stewardship Role. Based on conversations to date, we anticipate that the ALAC and SSAC will join this effort and we sincerely hope that the ICANN's other supporting organizations and advisory committees will also respond positively to this initiative. The final draft charter will be presented to at least each of the organizations participating in this effort for their adoption, according to each organization's own rules and procedures. Taking into account the principles outlined by the NTIA in its announcement, we believe such a cross community working group, with participation from and supported by the ICANN community as well as other organizations, is the most appropriate way to develop a proposal for a transition plan. Initial work by some members of the community resulted in a first draft straw-man document, which is included here as an annex. We believe this may help the drafting team in its efforts, but it is by no means intended to prescribe, limit or restrict conversations, though it is worth noting that some elements contained in the document align with the current thinking of some ccNSO and GNSO members. We anticipate that any final draft should address at a minimum: - Purpose and Scope (what is in and what is out of scope) - Goals and objectives - Deliverables - Timeline - Proposed approach (how is the WG expected to conduct its work, reporting to chartering organizations) - Relationship with Coordination Group as proposed by ICANN (see https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/process-next-steps-2014-06-06-en) - Membership / sponsorship (should membership be limited, open to anyone interested?) - Sponsorship / chartering organizations (should sponsorship be restricted to ICANN structures or also extend to external organizations?) - Staffing / support needed - Rules of engagement - Decision-making methodology (how are decisions made in the WG and how are these reflected in the recommendations) - Process for review / adoption of proposal by chartering organizations (also addressing what would happen if one of the chartering organizations would not adopt the proposal) - Closure of the WG In order to be able to complete the drafting of the charter and share it with the different organizations for consideration in a timely manner, we would ask that each participating organization assign a maximum of 4 representatives to the drafting team. To facilitate the work of the drafting team at its initial stages, we are both available to serve as interim chairs of the charter drafting team, if that is deemed to be helpful, and for as long as the drafting team would like us to. Although the ICANN London meeting is very close, we recognize the value of meeting face-to-face. Therefore we would like to organize an informal meeting of the drafting team during the London ICANN meeting and as such have identified Monday 23 June 2014, 17h00 UTC (18h00 London) as a possible option to do so. We hope and would appreciate if you could provide us with your feedback and the names of volunteers (even it that would be on an interim basis until your organization has formally assigned a representative to this drafting effort in accordance with your own rules and procedures) by Sunday 22 June at the latest. We look forward to receiving your feedback. Byron Holland & Jonathan Robinson ccNSO Council Chair GNSO Council Chair

1 0

ccNSO Comments on ICANN Public Consultation Process
by Byron Holland June 17, 2014

June 17, 2014

Dear Steve and Fadi, On 6 May 2014 ICANN announced a twenty-one day "opportunity for public dialogue and community input" on ICANN accountability. While the ccNSO Council has provided comments on this matter, I am writing to express serious concern about the manner in which ICANN appears to be driving this process: by setting a twenty-one day deadline, ICANN has made it virtually impossible for the ccTLD community to articulate a consensus view on an extremely important issue. As part of the 6 May announcement, ICANN proposed creation of a working group including the composition of that group, catalogued - and characterized - ICANN's existing accountability mechanisms, and defined the "mandate" of the proposed working group. As the first step in a multistakeholder process, ICANN should be coming to the table with an open mind, seeking thoughtful input on all of those items. Is a working group the right approach? Who should be on the working group? Can an "AoC" approach scale, and is it enough to enhance "existing mechanisms" or should new mechanisms be considered? Who should decide what subject matter expertise is needed, and how should required experts be selected? A twenty-one day comment period is hard to reconcile with meaningful community participation in an important bottom-up process. It is not respectful of the rules and processes that ICANN supporting organizations rely on to develop and express thoughtful consensus views on important issues. And it is hard to believe that ICANN has an open mind or is seriously interested in "dialogue" - let alone a true multistakeholder process when the ccNSO Council has already been asked to identify ccNSO representatives for the proposed working group. The NTIA announcement calls on ICANN to convene a multistakeholder process - not to drive the community relentlessly to a predetermined outcome. As the strong and uniformly negative response to ICANN's transition proposal and scoping document for the IANA transition demonstrates, ICANN does not appear to be listening to the community's call a genuine multistakeholder process. We therefore strongly urge ICANN (again) to improve scoping, planning and scheduling of this and other processes, including the related public consultations. We note that important processes, such as the Strategic Planning Process, consultation by the Strategic Panels, IANA Stewardship Transition Process and this process are staggered. We also note that without due advance notice public consultations are announced, sometimes changed and/or their duration is very limited. For example the comment period for this process was extended on 30 May, 3 days after the originally envisioned closure. As a result the ability of the ccNSO Council, ccNSO membership and the ccTLD community at large to provide timely, considered and coordinated feed-back and input to this and the other aforementioned, related processes is frustrated. It is the belief of the ccNSO Council that this ability is at the heart of the multi-stakeholder model, and as it is frustrated, the model itself is undermined. It's time to listen to and respect the stakeholder community. Sincerely, Byron Holland ccNSO Chair

1 0

ccNSO Comments on Enhancing ICANN Accountability
by Byron Holland June 17, 2014

June 17, 2014

Please find attached the ccNSO comments on enhancing ICANN accountability. Regards, Byron ccNSO Chair

1 0

Fwd: Re: ccNSO Application for Membership (Romania (.ro))
by Nigel Roberts June 17, 2014

June 17, 2014

Dear Fellow Councilmembers I'm pleased to note the below application from Romania .RO for Membership of the ccNSO. As you can see from the IANA response, there are no pending requests, and therefore the National Institute for Informatics has been confirmed to be the ccTLD manager as recorded by the IANA in their database of top-level domains. I would therefore suggest that the formal consideration of this welcome application take place at the Council meeting at ICANN London, and that request your forbearance in respect of the relatively short notice. Kind regards Nigel -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: ccNSO Application for Membership (Romania (.ro)) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 08:12:31 -0700 From: Kim Davies <kim.davies(a)icann.org> To: Gabriella Schittek <gabriella.schittek(a)icann.org> CC: Nigel Roberts <nigel(a)channelisles.net> Hi Gabi, There are no pending IANA requests for .RO. kim On Jun 17, 2014, at 7:23 AM, Gabriella Schittek <gabriella.schittek(a)icann.org> wrote: > Kim, > > Does IANA have any outstanding issues with .ro? > > Thanks, > > Gabi > > > On 17/06/14 14:43, "ICANN" <no-reply(a)icann.org> wrote: > >> Application for Membership >> Country Code Names Supporting Organization (ccNSO) >> >> Confirmation E-mail: eugenie(a)staicut.eu >> cctld: Romania (.ro) >> >> To: ccNSO Membership >> c/o ICANN Secretary >> Date: 17 June 2014 >> Regarding: ccNSO Membership >> ------------ >> >> With this letter, I, Eugenie Staicut declare that National Institute for >> R&D >> in Informatics is the ccTLD manager (as defined in the ICANN bylaws, >> (Article >> IX Section (4)(1)) for the Romania (.ro) and wishes to apply for >> membership >> of the ccNSO and that I am duly authorized to make and sign this >> application >> for membership on behalf of National Institute for R&D in Informatics. >> >> National Institute for R&D in Informatics hereby recognizes the role of >> the >> ccNSO within the ICANN >> structure, and agrees, for the duration of its membership in the ccNSO to: >> >> (a) adhere to the rules of the ccNSO, including membership rules; >> and >> (b) adhere to ICANN Bylaws as they apply to ccTLDs (Article IX and >> Annexes B and C of the ICANN bylaws. >> >> National Institute for R&D in Informatics understands that: >> >> (i) membership in the ccNSO is independent of any individual >> relationship a ccTLD manager has with ICANN or the ccTLD manager's receipt >> of IANA services. (Article IX Section (4)(3)); and >> >> (ii) currently there are no fees payable for ccNSO membership. >> However, >> under the ICANN bylaws (Article IX Section (7) (3)), the ccNSO could in >> the >> future, subject to members approval, establish membership fees. >> >> Signed by Eugenie Staicut for and on behalf of National Institute for R&D >> in >> Informatics: >> >> Name of ccTLD Manager: National Institute for R&D in Informatics >> Name of Representative: Eugenie Staicut >> Name of Primary Contact: Eugenie Staicut >> Primary Contact Address: >> National Institute for R&D in Informatics >> Bd. Averescu 8-10 >> Sector 1 >> Bucharest 011454 >> Romania >> Primary Contact Telephone Number: +40.213160762 >> Primary Contact E-Mail: eugenie(a)staicut.eu >> >> *DEFINITION: >> >> 1) A ccTLD Manager is the person or organisation referred to in the >> IANA >> database entry for a ccTLD under the current heading "Sponsoring >> Organisation". >> >> 2) Where the Sponsoring Organisation is listed in the IANA database >> as >> an >> individual person then that person is the Representative. Where the >> Sponsoring Organisation is listed in the IANA database as an organisation >> then the Representative is the individual person who is completing the >> application form for the organisation and is authorised to do so by the >> organisation. >> >> 3) The Primary Contact is the main contact for the member and >> should be >> either the Administrative Contact or Technical Contact listed in the IANA >> database for the ccTLD. >>

1 0

Invitation to ccTLD Cocktail Event 24 June in London
by Kristina Nordstrom June 17, 2014

June 17, 2014

Dear all, On behalf of our local host Nominet and our generous sponsors (.au, .pr, .cn, .uk, .kr, .ni, .nl, .no) I would like to invite you all to the ccTLD Cocktail on Tuesday evening 24 June in London. The event will take place from 19:00-21:00 at the Lancaster, Lancaster Terrace, London W2 2TY (a 15 minute walk from London Metropole). Invitations with the address and directions will be handed out during the ccNSO members meeting, but as usual you do not need a ticket to enter. A special thanks to our sponsors and to Nominet who all helped make this event possible! I hope to see you there! Kind regards, Kristina

1 0

39-2014: Introduction of Two-Character Domain Names in the New gTLD Namespace
by Gabriella Schittek June 17, 2014

June 17, 2014

Dear Councillors, Please, let me know by 19 June in case you do not agree with the Triage recommendation on 39-2014: Introduction of Two-Character Domain Names in the New gTLD Namespace Thanks, Gabi == Topic: Introduction of Two-Character Domain Names in the New gTLD Namespace Originator: ICANN Summary of request: Several registries have applied for amendments to the Registry Agreements to implement a new registry service, which would permit the introduction of two-character domain names for registration in the new gTLD namespace: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/two-char-new-gtld-2014-06-12-en Date received: 12 June 2014 Last day for Comments/input/response, if any: 10 July 2014 Recommended action, if any: Post to email list for information (done) Expertise needed, if any: Various Date of submission to Council: 17 June 2014 Last date of Council decision: 19 June 2014 Impact on ccNSO/ccTLDs: Low

1 0

38-2014: .PARIS - Introduction of Approved Launch Program
by Gabriella Schittek June 17, 2014

June 17, 2014

Dear Councillors, Please, let me know by 19 June in case you do not agree with the Triage recommendation on 38-2014: .PARIS - Introduction of Approved Launch Program Thanks, Gabi == Topic: .PARIS - Introduction of Approved Launch Program Originator: ICANN Summary of request: The City of Paris has applied for an Approved Launch Program pursuant of the Trademark Clearinghouse Rights Protection Mechanism Requirements. The TMCH Requirements provides that Registry Operators may, prior to the start date of its Sunrise Period, apply to ICANN to conduct an "Approved Launch Program" not otherwise permitted by the TMCH Requirements. An Approved Launch Program may allow the Registry Operator to register certain domain names prior to the completion of the Sunrise Period for the TLD. ICANN is seeking public comment on all aspects of the City of Paris' Launch Application: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/paris-alp-application-2014-06-12-en Date received: 12 June 2014 Last day for Comments/input/response, if any: 10 July 2014 Recommended action, if any: No Action Expertise needed, if any: Legal Date of submission to Council: 17 June 2014 Last date of Council decision: 19 June 2014 Impact on ccNSO/ccTLDs: Low

1 0