September 2005 - council - lists.icann.org

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

Sept. 2, 2005

Hello All, I note the four focus areas in the TOR are currently: - Representativeness - Authority - Effectiveness - Transparency I don't believe that "authority" is the right term for one of the four areas. Much of the material presently listed under the area of Authority could be included under the area "effectiveness". Perhaps "Compliance" could be considered instead as one of the four areas for review. Compliance would deal with issues of whether the Council and constituencies are following the bylaws, and also whether they are following their own rules and procedures. Note however that an ICANN body may be complying with its rules and procedures, and still not be "effective". Thus I like the distinction between conforming to rules and procedures, and whether these rules and procedures are helping produce good outcomes. The review may well recommend changes to bylaws, rules and procedures if necessary. Regards, Bruce Tonkin (speaking as an individual member of Council)

2 1

RE: [council] FW: [DNS] Current Policy Reviews: WHOIS and IP protection
by Niklas_Lagergren＠mpaa.org Sept. 2, 2005

Sept. 2, 2005

Liz, Always happy to read or hear anyone's views but, out of curiosity, who exactly is this Michael Purse...? Attached is btw a copy of the submission referred to at the end of this gentleman's message. It was made by the COA (note that the "C" stands for "coalition", not "council"...) in the context of the .au public consultation. Enjoy your weekend! Niklas -----Original Message----- From: Liz Williams [mailto:liz.williams@icann.org] Sent: vendredi 2 septembre 2005 8:48 To: council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: [council] FW: [DNS] Current Policy Reviews: WHOIS and IP protection Colleagues Some of you may find these current .au discussions on WHOIS policy of interest. Liz -----Original Message----- From: dns-bounces+lizwilliams=lizwilliams.net(a)dotau.org [mailto:dns-bounces+lizwilliams=lizwilliams.net@dotau.org] On Behalf Of Michael Purse Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2005 5:46 PM To: .au DNS Discussion List Subject: [DNS] Current Policy Reviews Hello, I've just read over the submissions for the WHOIS Policy and Domain Name Password Policy Reviews. There's ten submissions in total for the WHOIS Policy Review, and four for the Domain Name Password Policy. For the Domain Name Password Policy, I believe in general the submissions were very positive suggestions which would benefit the .au Namespace. Bennett Oprysa's submission recommending instant password retrieval be mandatory most certainly would benefit the entirety of the industry if implemented. Bruce Tonkin, Brett Fenton, and myself all made submissions which included the recommendation that "written authorisation" be defined as being notarized originals in an effort to reduce fraud. For the WHOIS Policy Review, I'm very impressed in general with the responses. The vast majority of the submissions supported the removal of email addresses from public view. One of the exceptions was the submission from the Council of Online Accountability, representing groups such as the RIAA, MPAA, Time Warner, and Walt Disney, asking that the WHOIS system in .au provide full contact information inclusive of physical address and contact numbers. I think the WHOIS system should be used as a tool for the information of consumers, suppliers, and Internet Service Providers with a need for the information that is displayed, all of which have no requirement to see physical addresses and contact numbers. The WHOIS system is not designed to be used for hunting and prosecuting people for piracy to benefit an American council representing major music and movie companies. These organisations have other channels available to them if they wish to do this. Regards, Michael Purse ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --- List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://dotau.org/

1 0

Council - Staff Admin Call - Change of time
by Grant FORSYTH Sept. 2, 2005

Sept. 2, 2005

Hi all I have been asked to reconsider the time for the admin call and have changed the time to better accommodate the USA. The new time will be: UTC 21.00 Monday 5 September which equals Melbourne 7am Tuesday 6 September New Zealand 9am Tuesday 6 September Los Angeles 2pm Monday 5 September Washington DC 5pm Monday 5 September Sorry for changing things on people, but hopefully this accommodate more people who might want to participate on the call Glen, sorry, but this will necessitate your rescheduling the bridge. I am developing an agenda with Olof and will circulate it about 24 hours ahead of the call. If you have any suggested inclusions, please forward them to Olof and I off-list (just to keep this traffic off the normal Council list). Thanks 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 1

FW: [DNS] Current Policy Reviews: WHOIS and IP protection
by Liz Williams Sept. 2, 2005

Sept. 2, 2005

Colleagues Some of you may find these current .au discussions on WHOIS policy of interest. Liz -----Original Message----- From: dns-bounces+lizwilliams=lizwilliams.net(a)dotau.org [mailto:dns-bounces+lizwilliams=lizwilliams.net@dotau.org] On Behalf Of Michael Purse Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2005 5:46 PM To: .au DNS Discussion List Subject: [DNS] Current Policy Reviews Hello, I've just read over the submissions for the WHOIS Policy and Domain Name Password Policy Reviews. There's ten submissions in total for the WHOIS Policy Review, and four for the Domain Name Password Policy. For the Domain Name Password Policy, I believe in general the submissions were very positive suggestions which would benefit the .au Namespace. Bennett Oprysa's submission recommending instant password retrieval be mandatory most certainly would benefit the entirety of the industry if implemented. Bruce Tonkin, Brett Fenton, and myself all made submissions which included the recommendation that "written authorisation" be defined as being notarized originals in an effort to reduce fraud. For the WHOIS Policy Review, I'm very impressed in general with the responses. The vast majority of the submissions supported the removal of email addresses from public view. One of the exceptions was the submission from the Council of Online Accountability, representing groups such as the RIAA, MPAA, Time Warner, and Walt Disney, asking that the WHOIS system in .au provide full contact information inclusive of physical address and contact numbers. I think the WHOIS system should be used as a tool for the information of consumers, suppliers, and Internet Service Providers with a need for the information that is displayed, all of which have no requirement to see physical addresses and contact numbers. The WHOIS system is not designed to be used for hunting and prosecuting people for piracy to benefit an American council representing major music and movie companies. These organisations have other channels available to them if they wish to do this. Regards, Michael Purse --------------------------------------------------------------------------- List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://dotau.org/

1 0

Table of GNSO Council review recommendations
by Maria Farrell Sept. 1, 2005

Sept. 1, 2005

Dear all, To assist the discussion on the implementation of the GNSO Council review recommendations, I attach an updated table of those recommendations which details work already done and tries to identify where further Council or staff action is needed. This table is intended as input to the Council planning call next week and your input on the actions needed and next steps would be appreciated. All the best, Maria

1 0

GNSO Council teleconference MP3 recording 1 September 2005
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG Sept. 1, 2005

Sept. 1, 2005

[To: ga[at]gnso.icann.org; announce[at]gnso.icann.org] [To: liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org; council[at]gnso.icann.org] Please find the MP3 recording of the GNSO Council teleconference, held on September 1, 2005 at: http://gnso-audio.icann.org/GNSO-Council-20050109.mp3 http://www.gnso.icann.org/calendar/#sep Happy listening! -- Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Upcoming & Outstanding Action Items
by Michael D. Palage Sept. 1, 2005

Sept. 1, 2005

Dear Council Members : I just wanted to comment on the thread about 17 out of 20 recommendations from last year's independent review regarding improving the effectiveness of the GNSO Council (and thus the GNSO) which have not yet been implemented. I have been going through the independent review recommendations (http://gnso.icann.org/reviews/gnso-review-sec4-22dec04.pdf) and I fully agree that not all the recommendations have been implemented. However, I believe that things are perhaps a little better than the 3 out of 20 (15%) figures that have been referenced to date. I spoke with Olof just a couple of hours ago and he mentioned that staff would be providing Council with a mapping of these 20 recommendations shortly . I look forward to reviewing this document as I am sure Council does as well. I think it is important to acknowledge the contributions that Olof, Glen and Maria are making in trying to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of Council. There is a lot of heavy lifting over the next couple of months heading into Vancouver, however, I am confident that by everyone pulling in the same direction we will be able to achieve the collective goal we all seek. Looking forward to the upcoming Council call tomorrow (Sept 1) as well as the Terms of Reference Call with the Board on Sept 8th. Although I have had a number of positive replies from some board members regarding their availability for this call, some Board members have existing conflicts that will prevent them from participating. One other final inquiry, does any constituency or individual representative have any intention of submitting any comment to the Strat Plan. Unfortunately Sept 2 is the deadline for both the GNSO terms of reference and responses to the additional Strat Plan questions. Best regards, Michael D. Palage

3 3

Update of New gTLD page
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG Sept. 1, 2005

Sept. 1, 2005

[To: council[at]gnso.icann.org] Dear Council members, Please note that the page http://www.gnso.icann.org/issues/new-gtlds/index.html has been updated with Bruce Tonkin's table: Progress on new gTLDs. Thank you, Kind regards, Glen -- Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

RE: [council] GNSO Review TOR + Background Information
by Bruce Tonkin Sept. 1, 2005

Sept. 1, 2005

Hello Ross, > > 3.2. The GNSO Review is designed to determine: > > o whether that organization has a continuing purpose in the ICANN > structure, > o and, if so, whether any change in structure or > operations is desirable > to improve its effectiveness. Actually that text is straight out of the bylaws. See: Article IV, Section 4, clause 1. It is just standard text that applies as the goal for reviews of all parts of ICANN. To make clear that the GNSO is not being singled out in some way, perhaps a short sentence in front could say: As for all reviews of ICANN structures required by Article IV, Section 4, clause 1 of the bylaws, the GNSO review is ..... Regards, Bruce

2 1

RE: [council] Council planning call
by Grant FORSYTH Sept. 1, 2005

Sept. 1, 2005

Bruce and fellow Councillors I have raised the matter of working with the staff to achieve more effective outcomes from the GNSO Council and welcome the support of the Chair and others to expedite this. As one who advocated strongly during the Evolution and Reform Review for the need for professional support of Council, I am happy to volunteer to work with Olof and his staff. I look forward to having a productive discussion with staff and other interested Council members next Tuesday. 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: Bruce Tonkin [mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au] Sent: Wednesday, 31 August, 2005 18:46 To: council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: [council] Council planning call Hello All, Several Council members have suggested setting up a regular administrative/planning call. The purpose of the call would be to plan the work of the GNSO Council, and work with the ICANN staff manager (Olof Nordling) to allocate appropriate staff resources to this Council work. I would like to work towards: - a 4 month plan of projects that have GNSO and staff resources allocated to them - a 12 month plan that includes projects that are not able to be resourced in the current 4 month period, plus an estimate of possible work items that may arise in the next 12 months - a 3 year plan that identifies major policy issues that may arise in the next 3 years The 12 month and 3 year plans will help provide input into ICANN overall operational and strategic planning process. The 4 month plan will also prioritise projects in order of importance. We need to incorporate recommendations from the GNSO Council review into the planning process. Once we have a clearer planning framework, we can then consistently report progress against that framework. The reporting can be used to report activities to the Board and wider community (perhaps we can work towards a newsletter every 4 months for the GNSO community, as well as an annual report on projects). As Grant has raised this issue several times, and also carried out a detailed review of the ICANN operational plan, I hope that Grant will volunteer to chair a series of planning meetings. Hopefully by the Vancouver meeting we will have a document that has details for a 4 month plan, and then some short descriptions of 12 month and 3 month views. Note the planning process will not be creating any new policies, but merely planning work on policies that have been discussed within regular council meetings. The outputs of the planning process would be shared with the full Council. I recommend an initial call next week for those Councillors that wish to be involved: E.g Tuesday 6 September, Coordinated Universal Time UTC 10:00 (6:00 Washington DC, 12:00 Brussels, 20:00 Melbourne, 22:00 Auckland) Regards, Bruce Tonkin

1 0