- Ccnso-council - lists.icann.org

Breakfast with the ICANN Board cancelled
by Gabriella Schittek March 2, 2009

March 2, 2009

Dear Councillors, Due to a scheduling conflict the breakfast with the ICANN board on Wednesday morning needs to be cancelled. The ICANN board sends their apologies about this. Gabi

1 0

FW: AFTLD Liaison to the ccNSO Council
by Gabriella Schittek March 2, 2009

March 2, 2009

Dear Councillors, AfTLD has appointed a general manager which they are now nominating to become a ccNSO Council observer. This item will be discussed during the Council meeting on Wednesday. An updated version of the agenda will be posted at ccnso.icann.org/calendar later today. Kind regards, Gabi -----Original Message----- From: Michuki Mwangi [mailto:michuki@swiftkenya.com] Sent: Friday, February 27, 2009 7:39 PM To: Gabriella Schittek Cc: Chris Disspain; president(a)aftld.org; AfTLD Excom Subject: AFTLD Liaison to the ccNSO Council Dear Gabi, Chris, In reference to the unoccupied position of the regional Laision for the AFTLD region to the ccNSO, kindly find attached a formal nomination letter from AfTLD for Mr. Eric Akumiah to the position. We look forward to your positive response. Best regards, Michuki Mwangi President AfTLD.

1 0

lunch today
by Gabriella Schittek March 1, 2009

March 1, 2009

Dear Councillors, The meeting will start at 12.00 today and there will be lunch boxes provided in the room. Gabi

1 0

briefing on IDNS
by Chris Disspain Feb. 28, 2009

Feb. 28, 2009

All, As you know we are due to start our council workshop on Sunday at 13.00. I would like to have an opportunity to brief you on IDN ccTLDs if at all possible and would appreciate it if we could gather at Noon rather than 13.00. I shall confirm that the same room is available or provide details of another one as soon as possible. Please confirm you can make it. Cheers, Chris Disspain CEO - auDA au Domain Administration Ltd <mailto:ceo@auda.org.au> ceo(a)auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/> www.auda.org.au 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

Minutes from Council call 16 February 2009
by Gabriella Schittek Feb. 28, 2009

Feb. 28, 2009

Dear Councillors, The minutes from the last Council call are attached. Please, can I have your comments/corrections by Wednesday, 4th March. Thanks, Gabi

1 0

Israel has joined the ccNSO
by Chris Disspain Feb. 27, 2009

Feb. 27, 2009

barux haba! בָּרוּךְ הַבָּא! Cheers, Chris Disspain Chair – ccNSO Council.

1 0

Resolution Council on GNSO positions re timing of processes.
by Gabriella Schittek Feb. 27, 2009

Feb. 27, 2009

Dear all, This is just to inform you that the resolution on the GNSO position regarding the timing of processes was passed. All votes received until the 26th February 00.00 UTC were taken into account. 13 votes were received in total, 11 in favour, 2 abstentions. In favour: .au, .cl, .cz, ,jp, .kr, .pr, .sd, .tt, .uk, .us, Becky Burr. Abstentions: .fr, .mx The resolution will be sent to Avri Doria later today and posted on our website. Many thanks, Gabi From: owner-ccnso-council(a)icann.org [mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org] On Behalf Of Chris Disspain Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 1:45 AM To: ccNSO Council Subject: [ccnso-council] Resolution Council on GNSO positions re timing of processes. All, Here is the slightly amended resolution. Please now vote on the list. Councillors may vote in favour, against or may abstain. "Resolution ccNSO Council 19 February 2009 on timing of the launch of the IDN ccTLD Fast Track and new IDN gTLD process. Background In 2007 the ccNSO, and the ICANN community generally, discussed the possibility of using an interim approach to IDN ccTLDs associated with the ISO 3166-1 two-letter codes to meet near-term demands and to gain experience with mechanisms for the selection and delegation of IDN ccTLDs that would also inform a policy development process aimed at creating an overall policy on IDN ccTLDs. To that end in November 2007 the ICANN Board requested the chairs of the ALAC, ccNSO , GAC, GNSO and SSAC to establish a working group (the IDNC Working Group) to develop and report on feasible methods, if any, that would enable the introduction, in a timely manner and in a manner that ensures the continued security and stability of the Internet, of a limited number of IDN ccTLDs while the overall policy is being developed. After extensive community comment, the IDNC Working Group submitted its final report to the ICANN Board. In May 2008 the Board directed ICANN staff to post the IDNC WG final report for public comments, commence work on implementation issues in consultation with relevant stakeholders and submit a detailed implementation plan including a list of any outstanding issues to the Board in advance of the ICANN Cairo meeting in November 2008. Resolution The ccNSO Council notes that the GNSO Council submitted substantive comments on the IDNC WG final report. Included in those comments was a statement that "the introduction of IDN gTLDs or IDN ccTLDs should not be delayed because of lack of readiness of one category, but if they are not introduced at the same time, steps should be taken so that neither category is advantaged or disadvantaged, and procedures should be developed to avoid possible conflicts" (GNSO Council submission, 15 August 2008). The ccNSO Council also notes the GNSO Council resolution of 8 January 2009, which states that the GNSO Council strongly believes that neither the new gTLD nor ccTLD fast track process should result in IDN TLDs being entered into the root before the other unless both the GNSO and ccNSO so agree. The ccNSO Council notes the apparent change in the view of the GNSO regarding the timing of the IDN ccTLD Fast Track and the new IDN gTLD process. 'Prior to stating the ccNSO Council position, we would welcome a discussion with the GNSO Council to gain a better understanding of the apparent change in view." Cheers, Chris Disspain CEO - auDA au Domain Administration Ltd ceo(a)auda.org.au www.auda.org.au 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. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-ccnso-council(a)icann.org [mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org] On > Behalf Of lesley(a)nominet.org.uk > Sent: Thursday, 19 February 2009 02:09 > To: Chris Disspain > Cc: 'Bart Boswinkel'; 'ccNSO Council'; owner-ccnso-council(a)icann.org > Subject: RE: [ccnso-council] Resolution Council on GNSO positions re timing of > processes. > > > Hi Chris, > > 3 very minor amendments proposed: > > owner-ccnso-council(a)icann.org wrote on 18/02/2009 09:13:08: > <...> > > Resolution > > The ccNSO Council notes that the GNSO Council submitted substantive > > comments on the IDNC WG final report. Included in those comments > > add 'was' > > > a > > statement that ?the introduction of IDN gTLDs or IDN ccTLDs should > > not be delayed because of lack of readiness of one category, > > <....> > > > The ccNSO Council notes the apparent change in the view on > > Should be 'of' > > > the GNSO > > regarding the timing of the IDN ccTLD Fast Track and the new IDN > > gTLD process, > > Suggest full stop here. > > > and prior to stating its position, would welcome a > > discussion with the GNSO Council to gain a better understanding of > > the apparent change in view. > > Suggest replace with: > 'Prior to stating the ccNSO Council position, we .... > > (Apologies if I'm being picky). > > Kind regards, > Lesley >

1 0

Re: [ccnso-council] Resolution Council on GNSO positions re timing of processes.
by ceo＠auda.org.au Feb. 27, 2009

Feb. 27, 2009

Olivier, You may have misunderstood. There is nothing in the resolution to indicate that we support delaying the process. Perhaps you could explain why you think it does. Cheers, Chris Disspain CEO - auDA Sent from my phone On 27/02/2009, at 0:10, Olivier Guillard / AFNIC <Olivier.Guillard(a)nic.fr > wrote: > Considering the hudge energy deployed by ccs in the area > and in particular the IDNc Working Group : > > http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/ccnso-minutes-council-call-25jun08.pdf > > Considering the process that was implemented for consultation > and the path that the fast track report has followed. > > Adding that I don't beleive that it would be a good signal to send > that the ccNSO supports delaying the process of introducing IDN TLD. > > I abstain on this resolution. > > > Best > > --- > Olivier > > > le lundi 23 février à 09 H 42 , Olivier Guillard / AFNIC a ecrit : >> Hi Chris, >> >> before casting a ballot I'll look at this more in depth. >> >> I'm just wondering about two things on that : >> >> 1/ First, this is the board that has [directed the staff to] >> organise the consultation : >> >> "In May 2008 the Board directed ICANN staff to post the >> IDNC WG final...." >> >> Therefore, I don't see why it should be to the ccNSO Council >> to "notes the apparent change in the view of the GNSO". >> >> A priori, it's in the board hands now, and I'm not very sure >> that's it's a good idea to bypass the ICANN board competence. >> now. >> >> 2/ I'm a bit surprised to see that the ccNSO needs now a formal >> resolution to say that the ccNSO is happy to talk with the >> GNSO : "we would welcome a discussion with the GNSO Council >> to gain a better understanding of the apparent change in view." >> >> Not sure that passing a formal resolution for that is the >> right signal to send. >> >> Any input/view from the board on that ? Any additional element ? >> >> Best, >> >> --- >> Olivier >> >> >> >> >> >> le jeudi 19 février à 11 H 45 , Chris Disspain a ecrit : >>> All, >>> >>> Here is the slightly amended resolution. Please now vote on the >>> list. >>> Councillors may vote in favour, against or may abstain. >>> >>> "Resolution ccNSO Council 19 February 2009 on timing of the >>> launch of the >>> IDN ccTLD Fast Track and new IDN gTLD process. >>> Background >>> >>> In 2007 the ccNSO, and the ICANN community generally, discussed the >>> possibility of using an interim approach to IDN ccTLDs associated >>> with the >>> ISO 3166-1 two-letter codes to meet near-term demands and to gain >>> experience with mechanisms for the selection and delegation of IDN >>> ccTLDs >>> that would also inform a policy development process aimed at >>> creating an >>> overall policy on IDN ccTLDs. >>> >>> To that end in November 2007 the ICANN Board requested the chairs >>> of the >>> ALAC, ccNSO , GAC, GNSO and SSAC to establish a working group (the >>> IDNC >>> Working Group) to develop and report on feasible methods, if any, >>> that >>> would enable the introduction, in a timely manner and in a manner >>> that >>> ensures the continued security and stability of the Internet, of a >>> limited >>> number of IDN ccTLDs while the overall policy is being developed. >>> >>> After extensive community comment, the IDNC Working Group >>> submitted its >>> final report to the ICANN Board. >>> >>> In May 2008 the Board directed ICANN staff to post the IDNC WG final >>> report for public comments, commence work on implementation issues >>> in >>> consultation with relevant stakeholders and submit a detailed >>> implementation plan including a list of any outstanding issues to >>> the >>> Board in advance of the ICANN Cairo meeting in November 2008. >>> >>> Resolution >>> The ccNSO Council notes that the GNSO Council submitted substantive >>> comments on the IDNC WG final report. Included in those comments >>> was a >>> statement that the introduction of IDN gTLDs or IDN ccTLDs shou >>> ld not be >>> delayed because of lack of readiness of one category, but if they >>> are not >>> introduced at the same time, steps should be taken so that neither >>> category is advantaged or disadvantaged, and procedures should be >>> developed to avoid possible conflicts (GNSO Council submission, >>> 15 August >>> 2008). >>> >>> The ccNSO Council also notes the GNSO Council resolution of 8 >>> January >>> 2009, which states that the GNSO Council strongly believes that >>> neither >>> the new gTLD nor ccTLD fast track process should result in IDN >>> TLDs being >>> entered into the root before the other unless both the GNSO and >>> ccNSO so >>> agree. >>> >>> The ccNSO Council notes the apparent change in the view of the GNSO >>> regarding the timing of the IDN ccTLD Fast Track and the new IDN >>> gTLD >>> process. 'Prior to stating the ccNSO Council position, we would >>> welcome a >>> discussion with the GNSO Council to gain a better understanding of >>> the >>> apparent change in view." >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> >>> Chris Disspain >>> CEO - auDA >>> au Domain Administration Ltd >>> ceo(a)auda.org.au >>> www.auda.org.au >>> >>> 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. >>> >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: owner-ccnso-council(a)icann.org >>> [mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org] On >>>> Behalf Of lesley(a)nominet.org.uk >>>> Sent: Thursday, 19 February 2009 02:09 >>>> To: Chris Disspain >>>> Cc: 'Bart Boswinkel'; 'ccNSO Council'; owner-ccnso- >>>> council(a)icann.org >>>> Subject: RE: [ccnso-council] Resolution Council on GNSO positions >>>> re >>> timing of >>>> processes. >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi Chris, >>>> >>>> 3 very minor amendments proposed: >>>> >>>> owner-ccnso-council(a)icann.org wrote on 18/02/2009 09:13:08: >>>> <...> >>>>> Resolution >>>>> The ccNSO Council notes that the GNSO Council submitted >>>>> substantive >>>>> comments on the IDNC WG final report. Included in those comments >>>> >>>> add 'was' >>>> >>>>> a >>>>> statement that ?the introduction of IDN gTLDs or IDN ccTLDs should >>>>> not be delayed because of lack of readiness of one category, >>>> >>>> <....> >>>> >>>>> The ccNSO Council notes the apparent change in the view on >>>> >>>> Should be 'of' >>>> >>>>> the GNSO >>>>> regarding the timing of the IDN ccTLD Fast Track and the new IDN >>>>> gTLD process, >>>> >>>> Suggest full stop here. >>>> >>>>> and prior to stating its position, would welcome a >>>>> discussion with the GNSO Council to gain a better understanding of >>>>> the apparent change in view. >>>> >>>> Suggest replace with: >>>> 'Prior to stating the ccNSO Council position, we .... >>>> >>>> (Apologies if I'm being picky). >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> Lesley >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> Olivier > > -- > Olivier

4 3

Participation WG Final Report
by lesley＠nominet.org.uk Feb. 26, 2009

Feb. 26, 2009

Hi Chris, The final report of the Participation working group is attached and it would be appreciated if this could be added to the Council agenda for Mexico. I do hope that the Council will be able to agree with the recommendations in sections 4.1-4.5 and the closure of the WG recommended in the final section. If there are any questions, I will be happy to try to answer them. Regards, Lesley

1 0

[[dns-operations] Interim Trust Anchor Repository]
by Olivier Guillard / AFNIC Feb. 26, 2009

Feb. 26, 2009

FYI ----- Forwarded message from David Conrad <drc(a)virtualized.org> ----- From: David Conrad <drc(a)virtualized.org> Subject: Re: [dns-operations] Interim Trust Anchor Repository Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 07:24:37 -1000 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Hi, I'm no longer an IANA staff member (sad but true). Speaking personally, I'd think it would probably be appropriate for Kim (as Root Zone Services Manager) and Barbara (as IANA GM) to sign the key. Regards, -drc ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Olivier

1 0