- Ccnso-council - lists.icann.org

SSR team seeks community input
by Gabriella Schittek March 30, 2011

March 30, 2011

Dear all, ICANN¹s Security, Stability & Resiliency of the DNS Review Team is seeking input from the community on a set of issues (listed at http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/affirmation/ssr-rt-set-of-issues-21feb11-en. pdf) See announcement for further details: http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-9-21feb11-en.htm Public comments are welcome until 6 April 2011. Kind regards, Gabi

1 1

WHOIS Review Team seeks public comments
by Gabriella Schittek March 29, 2011

March 29, 2011

Dear all, The WHOIS Review Team is seeking input from the community on following items: Scope of Work and Roadmap Outreach Plan Action Plan List of Key Definitions See announcement for more information: http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-04mar11-en.htm Feedback can be given at the WHOIS Review Team public session on Wednesday 16 March 2011 at 11 am 12 noon in the Elizabethan A-C meeting room: http://svsf40.icann.org/node/22173. A full day face-to-face meeting will also be held on Sunday, 13 March which is public and silent observers are welcome to join: http://svsf40.icann.org/node/21983. Kind regards, Gabi

1 1

Adopted ICANN Strategic Plan Posted
by Gabriella Schittek March 29, 2011

March 29, 2011

Dear all, The ICANN Strategic Plan 2011-2014, which was adopted by the ICANN Board in San Francisco is now posted at http://icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-28mar11-en.htm Kind regards, Gabi

1 0

ccNSO Youtube clip San Francisco posted
by Gabriella Schittek March 29, 2011

March 29, 2011

Dear all, The ccNSO Youtube clip from the San Francisco is now up at http://www.youtube.com/ccnso As always, many thanks to Kristina for putting these films together! Gabi

1 0

ccNSO Meeting Survey results
by Gabriella Schittek March 28, 2011

March 28, 2011

Dear all, The results of the ccNSO meeting day 1 & 2 surveys are now available at: Day 1: http://www.zoomerang.com/Shared/SharedResultsPasswordPage.aspx?ID=L266VZZLZ… Day 2: http://www.zoomerang.com/Shared/SharedResultsPasswordPage.aspx?ID=L266V22GL… Many thanks to all of you who participated! Kind regards, Gabi

1 0

response to NOI
by Chris Disspain March 26, 2011

March 26, 2011

All, Attached is the latest version of the proposed ccNSO response taking into account comments received so far. The deadline is end March. We could usefully provide some more specifics on what actual metrics we would like to see. If you have any ideas of specific metrics please let me know asap along with any other input you may have. Cheers, Chris Disspain | Chief Executive Officer .au Domain Administration Ltd <tel:1300%20732%20929> T: 1300 732 929 | <tel:03%208341%204112> F: 03 8341 4112 E: ceo(a)auda.org.au | W: <http://www.auda.org.au/> www.auda.org.au auDA - The Australian Domain Name Administrator Important Notice - This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. Please consider the environment before printing this email.

1 1

FW: Reactions to ICANN triple x decision
by Gabriella Schittek March 26, 2011

March 26, 2011

Forwarded on behalf of Ron Sherwodd ----------------------------begin message -------------------- >From the ALAC List -- An interesting summary of pre- and post- vote comments on the ICANN board triple x decision. Dear All, the discussion by members of the [ICANN] Board, before the vote, was quite revealing. Here is a brief résumé of positions expressed (not in the order of speakers) : George S., who voted against, offered, by far, the most constructed and forward-looking position, based on 5 points: * The vote was NOT about "adult content". If dot-xxx were not approved, the amount and availability of pornography would not change much; * ICM built its "sponsored" application on what it said was wide community sponsorship. We saw this was not true (the pornography industry spoke strongly against ICM's application). George pointed out that this sponsorship claimed by ICM was a fallacy; * the vote was NOT about "freedom of speech"; * the future of the DNS might be at stake; * ICANN has a duty to uphold the global public interest. ICM can in no way be said to be promoting the global public interest. Bertrand dLC (for) made a dramatic statement, the thrust of which was that if dot-xxx were not approved now, it would find its way through other means, say in a round of new gTLDs, with added inconvenience. Erika M. said that in the current dilemma, with doubts either way, the Board should "take the risk" of saying yes. Katim T. said his position was based on one consideration alone: the Board should not go against the GAC's advice. Kuo-Wei W. supported George's position. Rita R-J (for) made a strong statement, based on one argument: the Board has the obligation to respect its own process. Failing to do so would erode confidence. Ray P. (for) defended the same position as Rita R-J. It is interesting to note that among those who abstained, 3 did so not based on conviction, but because of a conflict of interest (Sébastien B., Ram M., Bruce T.). Since the vote in San Francisco, there have been a large number of reactions and opinions on the Internet. I found the 3 following quite revealing: - George's statement attracted admiration, even from someone like Kieren McCarthy who worked (still works?) for the ICM application : http://twitter.com/kierenmccarthy/status/48812091162886144 - One of the more thoughtful pieces was written by John R. Levine in his blog. This sentence is of special interest, IMO: "I used to have more sympathy for the process argument, but now I've come around to the viewpoint that ICANN's job is to act in the public interest, and if the process conflicts with that, the process is wrong." View his article here: http://jl.ly/ICANN/xxx11.html - India has indicated it will block the whole .xxx domain when it is implemented: http://www.lemonde.fr/technologies/article/2011/03/24/l-inde-veut-bloquer-l… Regards, Jean-Jacques. ------ End of Forwarded Message

1 0

ICANN response to NTIA NOI regarding IANA
by Gabriella Schittek March 26, 2011

March 26, 2011

Dear all, This is ICANN’s response to the NTIA NOI regarding IANA: http://www.icann.org/en/correspondence/beckstrom-to-alexander-25mar11-en.pdf Kind regards, Gabi

1 0

RE: [ccnso-council] response to NOI
by Young Eum Lee March 24, 2011

March 24, 2011

1 0

FW: CENTR Issue Papers
by Gabriella Schittek March 22, 2011

March 22, 2011

Dear all, Forwarded on behalf of CENTR. ------ Forwarded Message From: Peter Van Roste <peter(a)centr.org> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 09:39:48 -0700 To: Gabriella Schittek <gabriella.schittek(a)icann.org>, 'Jian Zhang' <jian(a)aptld.org>, "'Oscar A. Robles-Garay'" <orobles(a)nic.mx>, "eric(a)aftld.org" <eric(a)aftld.org> Cc: 'Patrick Myles' <patrick(a)centr.org> Subject: CENTR Issue Papers Hi All – The CENTR Secretariat periodically produces ‘Issue Papers’ on a variety of key topics in the DNS and Internet sector for the benefit of a wide range of stakeholders. They aim to be introductory and explanatory papers on the topics to which can help the broader community better understand our sector. Please find links below to the latest 3 CENTR Issue Papers CENTR Issue Paper - WHOIS (Feb 2011) <https://www.centr.org/main/6142-CTR.html> CENTR Issue Paper - IDN Top Level Domains (Jan 2011) <https://www.centr.org/main/lib/6182-CTR.html> CENTR Issue Paper - An introduction to the Internet Governance Forum (March 2011) <https://www.centr.org/main/lib/6197-CTR.html> Regs, Peter Peter Van Roste General Manager [cid:3383667718_562481] CENTR - Belliardstraat 20, 1040 Brussels, Belgium tel +32 2 627 5550 - fax +32 2 627 5559 - www.centr.org <http://www.centr.org> ------ End of Forwarded Message

1 0