Bart,

 

I think this needs a little work before we vote on it. I’ll call you this morning your time to discuss. Meanwhile would Council members please not send in a vote.

 

Cheers,

 

Chris Disspain

CEO - auDA

au Domain Administration Ltd

ceo@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.

 

From: owner-ccnso-council@icann.org [mailto:owner-ccnso-council@icann.org] On Behalf Of Bart Boswinkel
Sent: Wednesday, 18 February 2009 06:52
To: ccNSO Council
Subject: [ccnso-council] Resolution Council on GNSO positions re timing of processes.

 

Dear all,
Per Council call yesterday a proposed resolution of the ccNSO Council regarding the position of the GNSO on the launch of the Fast Track and new IDN gTLD process.

In order to inform the GNSO and others in time, could you be so kind to vote ( in favour, abstain, or against) by Friday 20 November 2009,  noon UTC.
Thanks, and kind regards,
Bart

Resolution
----------------
Resolution ccNSO Council  16 February 2009 on timing of the launch of the IDN ccTLD Fast Track and new IDN gTLD process.

Background
In June 2007 the ICANN Board considered that the ICANN community is discussing the details involved in 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 selection and authorization of such TLDs that can inform a policy development process aimed at creating an overall policy.  
To that end the Board requested the chairs of the ALAC, ccNSO , GAC, GNSO and SSAC in November 2007 to establish a 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 non-contentious IDN ccTLDs while the overall policy is being developed.
The "IDNC Working Group" developed, after extensive community consultation, a final report on feasible methods for timely (fast-track) introduction of a limited number of IDN ccTLDs associated with ISO 3166-1 two-letter codes.  
At the ICANN meeting in Paris (May 2008), the Board directed 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 report 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 the GNSO Council comment  ( submitted 15 August 2008) on the IDNC WG final report, which, among others, includes the statement that (paraphrased) in principle the introduction of IDN-labeled gTLDs or ccTLDs should not be delayed because of lack of readiness of one category.

The ccNSO Council also notes the GNSO Council resolution of 8 January 2009, which, among others, states that the GNSO Council strongly believes that neither the new gTLD or ccTLD fast track process should result in IDN TLDs in the root before the other unless both the GNSO and ccNSO so agree.

 The ccNSO Council notes the change in the statements regarding the timing of the Fast Track and the new IDN gTLD process, and would welcome a meeting with the GNSO Council at the ICANN meeting in Mexico to gain a better understanding of the changed position, before the ccNSO Council will state its views on the matter itself.

.