March 2005 - council - lists.icann.org

Dot net - conflict GNSO report and evaluator methodology - proposed Council resolution
by Philip Sheppard April 12, 2005

April 12, 2005

Council, I am concerned that there is a serious flaw in the methodology of the Telcordia report. Background The evaluation ranks Verisign as number one, just above Sentan but "with a numerical edge that is not statistically significant." The ICANN web site informs: "ICANN will promptly enter negotiations with the top-ranked applicant to reach a mutually acceptable registry agreement". The essence of the GNSO dot net report was: 1. All applicants must meet "absolute criteria of stability, security, technical and financial competence". The Evaluators report states: "All vendors met the absolute criteria and have been evaluated solely on the basis of the relative criteria." So far so good. In the GNSO report we stated that the number one relative criteria was: 1. Relative Criteria related to promotion of competition Maximization of choice for DNS users. Once an applicant has qualified by meeting baseline stability, technical and financial criteria, preference should be given to proposals that are evaluated to further the following goals within the ICANN mission: "Where feasible and appropriate, depending on market mechanisms to promote and sustain a competitive environment" And, "Introducing and promoting competition in the registration of domain names where practicable and beneficial in the public interest". And we then provided additional guidance: Pricing and costs Price is here defined as the registry price (currently $6.00). Once an applicant has qualified by meeting the absolute criteria, preference should be given to proposals offering lower overall costs to the registrar including the registry price.. - Preference should be given to migration and operational strategies that minimise costs. - Innovation and value. It is possible that applications will offer innovation or new services and hence effect the value proposition. An assessment based on price should be balanced with the value proposition offered. Any proposed innovation or new services: -should be described, -together with an assessment of the value of them to the effected stakeholders (typically registrants or registrars), -and applicants must demonstrate their capability to offer such services based on their prior experience in this area. Yet the evaluators report weighted this top relative criteria as "medium" and under the category of "additional relative criteria". In this category (2.7) it scores all vendors equally. The evaluators report used a scoring system which was biased towards multiple technical criteria even though the central message of the GNSO report was that competition was the most important factor once technical/financial/security criteria were of a satisfactory standard. Conclusion The methodology of the evaluator's report directly contradicts the essence of the GNSO report. Proposed resolution for the GNSO Council meeting in Mar del Plata "Given that there is a fundamental contradiction between the dot net evaluator's methodology and the GNSO dot net report, and that this contradiction has a significant commercial impact, the GNSO Council calls on the ICANN Board to delay any negotiation with any vendor until a comparison of the evaluator's report with the GNSO report can be made in particular with respect to the ICANN core value of promoting competition". Philip Sheppard GNSO Council

4 4

Agenda for Council planning meeting on Sunday afternoon 3 April 2005
by Bruce Tonkin March 29, 2005

March 29, 2005

Hello All, > > 15:00 - 18:00 GNSO Operational Plan > Agenda will include: (1) GNSO operational plan for next 12 months (ie what policy work do we envision for next 12 months) (2) GNSO strategic planning for next 3 years (what are the major policy activities for the next 3 years) (3) ICANN operational plan (discuss input into ICANN operational planning process and meeting on Monday evening) (4) ICANN strategic planning (discuss input into ICANN strategic plan and meeting on Tuesday evening) (5) ICANN planning process going forward (how should ICANN manage operational and strategic planning going forward) (6) breakfast with ICANN Board on Monday morning (discuss approach and topics for discussion) (7) GNSO public forum on Wednesday morning (discuss topics) Please let me know if you would like to add other topics to the agenda. Regards, Bruce Tonkin

1 0

GNSO Council Sunday meeting 3 April
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG March 28, 2005

March 28, 2005

[To: Council[at]gnso.icann.org] The GNSO Council meeting on Sunday 3 April will be in room "E" which is on the ground floor of the Sheraton Hotel in Mar del Plata. 9:00 --- GNSO Council meeting with GAC working group. 11:00 - 14:00 GNSO Council and Whois task force members. (a light lunch will be served in the room) 15:00 - 18:00 GNSO Operational Plan Dial up information has been sent to all the councillors and task force members who have informed me that they will not be present. There are still some Councillors' biographies outstanding, please let me have them as soon as possible. If you have any questions please let me know. Thank you very much. Kind regards, Glen -- Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

2 1

Revised draft minutes, GNSO Council teleconf. 17 March 2005
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG March 25, 2005

March 25, 2005

[To: council[at]gnso.icann.org] Please find the revised draft minutes, as requested by Marc Schneiders, for the GNSO Council call held on 17 March 2005. Please let me know if there are any further changes you would like made. Thank you very much. Kind regards Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

GNSO Council draft minutes 17 March 2005
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG March 23, 2005

March 23, 2005

[To: council[at]gnso.icann.org] Please find the draft minutes of the GNSO teleconference held on 17 March 2005. Please let me know if there are any changes that you would like made. Thank you very much. Kind regards, Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

FYI - ICANN Board approves .EU
by Ken Stubbs March 23, 2005

March 23, 2005

At a meeting on 21 March 2005, the board of ICANN approved the delegation of the new .eu top level domain and authorised their CEO, to enter into an agreement with EURid, the organisation selected by the European Commission to operate the .eu registry. Shortcut to: http://www.eurid.org/en/pdf/pressreleaseICANNdecision20050322.pdf [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.eurid.org/en/pdf/pressreleaseICANNdecision20050322.pdf Modified=1092B13BBB2FC5013E

1 0

Biographies for GNSO Council members
by Bruce Tonkin March 23, 2005

March 23, 2005

Hello All, As we begin to meet more with other committees/Boards within the ICANN community: E.g Government Advisory Committee, ICANN Board, ccNSO, etc I think it would be worth having short biographies for each of the Council members. This can save some time when introducing ourselves during face-to-face meetings. We can provide the written bios in advance and then simply identify ourselves by name. Example of existing collections of biographies are: Biographies for the ICANN Board: http://www.icann.org/general/board.html Biographies of the 2004 Nominating Committee: http://www.icann.org/committees/nom-comm/bios-2004.htm For the purposes of the GNSO, I think a biography should include: - qualifications/expertise - home base (city, country) - current employer and position held with that employer, or business type (if self employed) (links to relevant website) - geographic regions of operation for your employer, or your business - associated constituency within GNSO Council (links to constituency information) - membership of task forces etc Essentially we want to demonstrate the breadth of expertise and geographic representation on the GNSO Council. Here is an example for myself: Bruce Tonkin has a B.E and PhD in electrical and electronic engineering, and is based in Melbourne, Australia. Bruce is currently Chief Technology Officer at Melbourne IT Limited (http://www.melbourneit.com.au) which is a global domain name registrar for gtlds and cctlds with offices in Australia, New Zealand, United States of America, United Kingdom, Sweden, France, and Spain. Bruce has been elected to the GNSO Council by the GNSO's Registrars Constituency (http://www.gnso.icann.org/registrars/) which consists of ICANN accredited registrars, and is currently the chair of the GNSO Council. Please provide the GNSO Secretariat with a short biography for use in the ICANN meetings in Mar Del Plata. Regards, Bruce Tonkin

4 3

Draft Agenda for GNSO Council meeting in Mar Del Plata - Wednesday 6 April 2005
by Bruce Tonkin March 23, 2005

March 23, 2005

Draft Agenda for Council meeting Wednesday 6 April 2005 Item 1: Approval of minutes Item 2: Update on WHOIS task force Item 3: Ratify vote for ICANN Board seat #14 (currently held by Michael Palage) Item 4: Strategic plan for ICANN - consider any formal statements for the Board that result from discussions in Mar Del Plata Item 5: Operating plan for ICANN - consider any formal statements for the Board that result from discussions in Mar Del Plata Item 6: Proposed process for developing future strategic and operating plans - consider any formal statements for the Board that result from discussions in Mar Del Plata Item 7: Any other business

1 0

Council Policy Support
by Grant Forsyth March 22, 2005

March 22, 2005

Dear Bruce I understand that Olaf has now joined Maria as policy support for Council. Welcome to Olaf and my apologies for missing the call last Friday where I understand Olaf was introduced. Given that we now have two staff available to support Council policy, I think it would be good for Council to work with them and Paul Verhoef to develop and set their policy work. Towards that goal, I suggest that Maria and Olaf provide to Council an outline of the policy work that they understand Council is engaged in and likely to take up over the next 3-6 months and their involvement in that work. My thinking would also be that such an outline would include "options". This would allow me to consider their perspective of our work (not all of which I, as a single councillor, are over) and provide some feedback. Where I would like this effort to head to is a clear understanding by Council of who is supporting what and to provide guidance, direction and priority to the staff in that support. My thinking would be that such a consultation and priority setting be undertaken on a regular basis - every 6 months? I would be interested in other councillor's views on this approach. Regards Grant Forsyth Manager Industry & Regulatory Affairs TelstraClear Cnr Taharoto & Northcote Roads Private Bag 92143 AUCKLAND ph +64 9 912 5759 fx + 64 9 912 4077 Mb 029 912 5759

2 2

Council VOTE
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG March 21, 2005

March 21, 2005

[To: council[at]gnso.icann.org] REMINDER The voting period for the ICANN Board seat #14, nominated candidate Michael Palage, is open from 17 March at 00:00 UTC and closes on 31 March 2005 at 23:59 UTC. The ballots have been sent out on Thursday 17 March at 00:00 UTC. Please let me know immediately if you have not receive a ballot or if you are experiencing any e-mail problems, otherwise please vote. Thank you. Regards, Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0