September 2005 - council - lists.icann.org

An idea to progress work on PDP
by Marilyn Cade Sept. 6, 2005

Sept. 6, 2005

I have been thinking that the 20 recommendationns from GNSO review do indeed deserve some dev. Of priority and Mariajs very helpful materials are providing much of the organization to see the full scope of work ahead of us on administrative side. For today's Planning call, I plan to propose a suggested way to advance work in this area, taking a "leaf" from the CCNSO last meeting, and repeating something we have done as Council when wkg as a committee of the whole. I believe a subgroup of Former TF chairs, present TF chairs, Council chair, and representatves from CCNSO could spend a productive set of modifications to the PDP, based on lessons learned. The group should be inclusive of the ALAC liaison to both SOs, of course. Its purpose would be to work in a very rapid process of brainstorming possible changes, with a short term view and a longer term view, and presenting a draft/straw proposal for changes which would then need to become part of a formal change process. And could support the staff preparation of an issues report. Recognizing that the expertise today lies with the TF chairs, and Our Secretariat, and with the implementation staff-- Tim, Tina, etc, from the past experience in policy development, using a sesion of actual work dedicated to thid in VC could advance the process. But avoid dragging this segment of the analysis out or burdening staff with ind. Interviews to dig out historical information to develop an issues report. I'd suggest possibly the afternoon session while the board is "retreating" forms a good 4 hour working segment. Just an idea to advance this work item. As the Council will note I have raised concern with trying to do a second review of the PDP within the ToR for the GNSO review. Having decided that modification of the PDP is needed in the Council Review, it seems more useful to do the process of making the needed changes, than to again review the need for changes. If there sems merit in this approach to advancing the work, then we would need to get scheduled time for VC, which is why I'm mentioning it on today's call. But primarily I'd like to hear from fellow councilors about this approach. Remember we have access to our colleagues from CCNSO in VC. Would take outreach to them of course to invite their participation. Comments very welcomed. Marilyn Regards, Marilyn Cade

2 1

Draft agenda for GNSO teleconference on terms of reference for the GNSO review - 8 Sept 2005
by Bruce Tonkin Sept. 6, 2005

Sept. 6, 2005

Hello All, I have invited members of the ICANN Board to attend our teleconference on 8 September 2005. I believe we may only get a few Board members, but I propose we dedicate the first part of the call to getting feedback from these Board members. We can then discuss further more detailed input to the current draft. The Draft agenda is as follows: (1) Review the background, goals and expected outcomes of the GNSO review, at both the Council and constituency level - respond to any questions on background from ICANN Board members present - receive input on expected outcomes from ICANN Board members present (2) Discuss the current draft document - receive input from ICANN Board members present that have read the terms of reference - receive input from GNSO Council members Regards, Bruce

1 0

FW: Draft version 1.1 Terms of Reference for the GNSO Review
by Bruce Tonkin Sept. 6, 2005

Sept. 6, 2005

-----Original Message----- From: Bruce Tonkin Sent: Tuesday, 6 September 2005 10:04 AM To: 'Vinton G. Cerf' Cc: 'John Jeffrey'; Subject: Terms of Reference for the GNSO Review To: Chair, ICANN Board Cc: ICANN Secretary Dear Vint, Please forward the following to the ICANN Board mailing list. Attached is a draft terms of reference (Version 1.1) for the GNSO Review, which has been prepared with the support of Dr Liz Williams, Senior Policy Counselor. This terms of reference has been produced following an initial background paper prepared by Liz, a GNSO Council teleconference with officers of the GNSO constituencies, and contributions via the GNSO Council mailing list. The draft is still evolving in response to contributions from the GNSO Council members. The process for developing the terms of reference can be followed by reviewing postings to the GNSO Council mailing list. The archives are public. See: http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/ Attached is also a background paper, that provides links to relevant background documents, and also summarises the output from the GNSO Council review held at the end of 2004. Regards, Bruce Tonkin

1 0

Council Staff Admin Call - Agenda
by Grant FORSYTH Sept. 5, 2005

Sept. 5, 2005

Fellow Councillors Below is a draft agenda and other notes for those wishing to join the Council-Staff Admin call Timing of Call 21.00 UTC Tuesday 6 September (Glen has sent out the meeting notice and please confirm your intention to join the call if you plan to do so). Duration: 1.0 - 1.5 hours Proposed agenda 1. General discussion and agreement as to more effective working relationship with staff 2. Staff reporting to, and papers for, monthly Council meeting. - agenda (time boxed?) - work plan (Maria's table) - report from each task force/working group - papers for each item on the agenda 3. Framework for the development and maintenance of a Council work plan- 4m 1 & 3yr (see Maria's contribution) 4 . Production of comprehensive project reporting [see Alick's contributions] 5 . Review of staff roles, relationships and time availability 6 . Establishment of staff staff SLA (Recommendation 10 from GNSO Council review) 7. Question of "posting protocol" to the Council list of information specific to a current task force work (see Marilyn's email discussion with Liz) 8. ?? Approach My thinking for the first call is to agree the scope and make sure that people understand and agree the context within which pieces of work fit - eg a) the need for improved/comprehensive reporting/papers for Council call, b) the benefit of having a work plan (past, current (4m), immediate (1yr) and longer term (3yr)) - that also forms part of the regular reporting. And then to identify some immediate improvements/deliverables that can be delivered and also some things (such as the workplan - working from Maria's recent contribution) that we should at least start (I talk about a framework) so that there is something for Council to reflect on and contribute to by and at Vancouver. So - all over lightly, then a couple of quick wins, and others left to future calls to flesh out. Contribution (5 & 6 on Agenda, from Olof) The GNSO has a staff manager, Maria, and a secretary, Glen, as guaranteed support, in conformity with the Bylaws Art X sect 4. Depending on the foreseen workload, further staff resources can be allocated, as part of tasking agreed between ICANN management and the GNSO Chair. We certainly strive to accommodate the needs of the GNSO in a timely and flexible manner and to assign extra resources on a task by task basis, with clear responsibilities for each individual to act as owner of the respective issue from the staff side. Just to mention some examples, we have realized that more resources were needed for the preparation of the "GNSO Review", handled by Liz from the staff side, and for "registry services changes PDP" and "new TLDs", with me taking on those from the staff side. Furthermore, just to make it clear, both I, as acting head of the policy development team, and Liz, as contracted, do have other responsibilities to fulfil, outside the GNSO sphere.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> Regarding the recommendation to establish an SLA - I take that in a figurative sense, as a way to synchronize expectations, rather than to establish an <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />SLA in a strict sense, as frequently and formally used in contractual relationships. I suppose areas where such synchronization of expectations is desirable may cover staff attendance to meetings, conference call arrangements, drafting of minutes, responses to requests etc., and I suggest that we start by bringing up such expectations for discussion under item 6 (while also realizing that some may flow from item 1 and others). I look forward to being joined by other Councillors on the call, and please feel free to post any contributions to Olof and I (rather than the Council list as this is becoming quite crowded) prior to the call. 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

1 0

Changing date of Council meeting
by Marilyn Cade Sept. 5, 2005

Sept. 5, 2005

I understand that Olaf is on vacation during our next council call. Is it possible to change the meeting by one week? Regards, Marilyn Cade

1 0

GNSO Council approach to new gtld policy
by Bruce Tonkin Sept. 5, 2005

Sept. 5, 2005

To: Chair, ICANN Board CC: ICANN Secretary Hello Vint, The GNSO Council in its meeting of 1 September 2005, made the following decision with respect to an approach for considering the development of a comprehensive policy for new gTLDs. I have attached a draft paper under development within the GNSO that outlines the GNSO approach to addressing new gtld policy issues. The Council decided to handle the work on new gtlds as three parallel work streams: (1) Complete the evaluation of the introduction of the limited number of new gTLDS, including considering the process and introduction of the most recent new gTLDS (e.g .travel, .mobi, and .jobs). (2) A single policy development process which would look at issues including * whether to continue to introduce new gTLDs * the criteria for approving applications for new gTLDs * the allocation method, assuming that there was a limit to how many gTLDs could be introduced at once * the key contractual conditions for those gTLDs which might include conditions such as : escrow policies, obligation to use an ICANN accredited registrar etc. (3) A policy development process to be undertaken in collaboration with the ccNSO for the introduction of new TLDs that use an internationalized domain name string The GNSO will be seeking a budget to obtain expert advice to assist in these policy development initiatives. The GNSO will be fleshing out the draft approach in consultation with ICANN staff, and will keep the Board informed of developments. Once the GNSO Council has a clear work program with timelines, the GNSO Council will request a meeting with the ICANN Board to discuss in more detail. Regards, Bruce Tonkin Chair, GNSO Council

2 1

RE: [council] GNSO Council extract from draft minutes 1 September 2005- suggested changes/expansion
by Bruce Tonkin Sept. 5, 2005

Sept. 5, 2005

Hello Marilyn, Just to clarify, the draft minutes posted by Glen are not the full minutes - which will capture more of the discussion. During the teleconference I asked Glen to initially capture the vote/final motion - the more detailed minutes should be available shortly. Regards, Bruce Tonkin

2 1

FW: [council] GNSO Council extract from draft minutes 1 September 2005- suggested changes/expansion
by Marilyn Cade Sept. 4, 2005

Sept. 4, 2005

Hi, someone let me know that my attachment with changes to the minutes to make them more detailed and capture the nature of the discussion and thoughtfulness with which the Council approached this topicI didnt see that in the original very short version Here it is again I made many changes. As noted, I hadnt read Bruces document at the time. Ill look at the two of them now together. They need to be consistent, of course. _____ From: Marilyn Cade [mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, September 02, 2005 11:50 PM To: 'GNSO.SECRETARIAT(a)GNSO.ICANN.ORG'; 'council(a)gnso.icann.org' Subject: RE: [council] GNSO Council extract from draft minutes 1 September 2005- suggested changes/expansion Dear Glen, thanks for the great turn around. The minutes, however, are a bit too terse to provide a full sense of the nature and scope of the discussion. It is important for the reader to understand that the Council was fully engaged, and considered several alternatives before finalizing a recommendation. Ive added in some elaboration that moves this into that direction. The Board wont listen to the MP3/the minutes need to have enough detail to note that the Councilors were fully engaged, and considering all the relevant aspects, etc. Hope this is helpful of course, feel free to reject anything not useful. I did this from memory/rough notes so may have missed/or even misunderstood something. Marilyn _____ From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of GNSO.SECRETARIAT(a)GNSO.ICANN.ORG Sent: Friday, September 02, 2005 9:09 AM To: council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: [council] GNSO Council extract from draft minutes 1 September 2005 GNSO COUNCIL TELECONFERENCE 1 SEPTEMBER 2005 - EXTRACT FROM THE DRAFT MINUTES 1 September 2005 Proposed agenda and <http://www.gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-gnso-1sep05.htm> related documents List of attendees: Philip Sheppard - Commercial & Business Users C. - absent - apologies Marilyn Cade - Commercial & Business Users C. Grant Forsyth - Commercial & Business Users C Greg Ruth - ISCPC Antonio Harris - ISCPC Tony Holmes - ISCPC Thomas Keller- Registrars - absent - apologies proxy to Ross Rader/Bruce Tonkin Ross Rader - Registrars Bruce Tonkin - Registrars Ken Stubbs - gTLD registries Philip Colebrook - gTLD registries Cary Karp - gTLD registries Lucy Nichols - Intellectual Property Interests C - absent - apologies - proxy to Niklas Lagergren/Kiyoshi Tsuru Niklas Lagergren - Intellectual Property Interests C Kiyoshi Tsuru - Intellectual Property Interests C. - absent Robin Gross - Non Commercial Users C. - absent Norbert Klein - Non Commercial Users C. - absent Alick Wilson - Nominating Committee appointee - absent - apologies - proxy to Bruce Tonkin Maureen Cubberley - Nominating Committee appointee - absent - apologies Avri Doria - Nominating Committee appointee 12 Council Members ICANN Staff Olof Nordling - Manager, Policy Development Coordination Maria Farrell - ICANN GNSO Policy Support Officer - absent Liz Williams - Senior Policy Counsellor Glen de Saint Géry - GNSO Secretariat GNSO Council Liaisons Suzanne Sene - GAC Liaison Bret Fausett - acting ALAC Liaison - absent Michael Palage - ICANN Board member I MP3 Recording <http://gnso-audio.icann.org/GNSO-Council-20050109.mp3> Quorum present at 14:05 CET. Bruce Tonkin chaired this teleconference. Bruce Tonkin clarified that the outcome of the GNSO teleconference would be conveyed, as a response that had been requested via the CEO, Dr. Paul Twomey, to the ICANN Board. The following step would be to work on the detail of the proposed approach to moving forward with the development of policy for new gtlds and report the Council's progress to the Board. Bruce Tonkin proposed seeking a high level decision that the GNSO Council would develop two policy development processes with the need to engage outside experts to assist in the two separate processes. 1. A policy development process which would look at the issues including - whether to introduce gTLDs, - the criteria for approving applications for new gTLDs - the allocation method, assuming that there was a limit to how many gTLDs could be introduced at once - the key contractual conditions for those TLDs which might include conditions such as: escrow policies, obligation to use an ICANN accredited registrar etc. 2. A policy development process to be undertaken in collaboration with the ccNSO for the introduction of IDNs at the root level. 3. The expectation that the evaluation of the previous round of new gTLDs would continue and the remaining work would be completed. 4. The GNSO will be seeking a budget to obtain expert advice to assist in these policy development initiatives. Bruce Tonkin called for a decision and council unanimously decided, by voice to support the decision. In discussion: Marilyn Cade supported the approach with the caveat to the Board that additional resources, in the nature of expert advice, were needed. Cary Karp cautioned in responding with regard to developments in the IDN components relating to the cc development. It should be emphasised that it was not only issues specific to the gTLD situation and thus a clear platform would be required as reference to provide advice to the entire situation as it would unfold across the TLD space in IDNs in a global situation. Ross Rader suggested that a compilation of work on IDNs, similar to that which was done on new gTLDs should be undertaken. Bruce Tonkin declared the GNSO meeting closed and thanked everybody for participating. The meeting ended: 16: 00 CET. * Next GNSO Council Teleconference Thursday 8 September 2005 at 12:00 UTC. see: Calendar <http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/>

1 0

GNSO Council extract from draft minutes 1 September 2005
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG Sept. 3, 2005

Sept. 3, 2005

[To: council[at]gnso.icann.org] Dear Council Members, Please find an extract of the draft GNSO Council minutes of the teleconference held on 1 September 2005 which notes the decision taken by Council with respect to an approach for considering the development of a comprehensive policy for new gTLDs. Please let me know if there are any changes you would like made. 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

RE: [council] GNSO Review TOR + Background Information
by Grant FORSYTH Sept. 2, 2005

Sept. 2, 2005

Liz et al Attached is a marked up version of your TOR Besides the specific comments marked up I provide the following additional comments: Formatting 1 It would be desirable if all GNSO staff reports/papers etc conformed to an agreed standard layout with a minimum set of information (which I have provided here as mark ups) 2 please ensure all paragraphs and bullets are numbered 3. Given that ICANN is an international body, I recommend that dates be provided in full to avoid confusion. IE 1 September 2005, not 1/9/05 or 9/1/05. Dates of documents (unless it is explicitly noted as the "print" date) should not use the MS Word "insert date option", but rather be typed in. This avoids the original date of the document changing. 4 I personally don't think the moving of the questions/analysis to footers works. My preference is that they be moved to an annex I look forward advancing the development of the TOR on the call. 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 -----Original Message----- From: Liz Williams [mailto:liz.williams@icann.org] Sent: Thursday, 01 September, 2005 00:56 To: council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: [council] GNSO Review TOR + Background Information Colleagues Thank you to everyone who has provided comments so far. Please find attached two documents. As per input from the conference call last week, I have separated out the background information and devised another document which looks more like a more formal TOR. Could I ask you to review it - the Chair has asked for comments to be in by Friday 2 Sept Brussels COB. He will then forward an updated document to the Board for 8 Sept once any additional comments are taken into account. On the current timeframe, this means that the Board will not receive the document seven days prior to any meeting. Any questions, come back to me. Kind regards. Liz Liz Williams Senior Policy Counselor ICANN - Brussels Tel: +32 2 234 7874 Fax: +32 2 234 7848 Mob: +61 414 26 9000

3 3