All,
I have now discussed the proposed resolution with Bart and set it
out below. I think that it correctly reflects the discussion we had on our call
on Monday. I will formally put the resolution to the Council for a list vote tomorrow
unless anyone wishes to submit suggested amendments.
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 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 on the GNSO regarding the timing of the IDN ccTLD
Fast Track and the new IDN gTLD process, 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.
Cheers,
Chris Disspain
CEO - auDA
au Domain Administration Ltd
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: Chris Disspain [mailto:ceo@auda.org.au]
Sent: Wednesday, 18 February 2009 13:36
To: 'Bart Boswinkel'; 'ccNSO Council'
Subject: RE: [ccnso-council] Resolution Council on GNSO positions re
timing of processes.
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
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.
.