June 2006 - council - lists.icann.org

Appointment of Rita Rodin to the ICANN Board
by Bruce Tonkin June 29, 2006

June 29, 2006

To: John Jeffrey, ICANN Secretary From: Bruce Tonkin, Chair, GNSO Council cc: Vint Cerf, Chair, ICANN Board I hereby advise that the GNSO Council has ratified the election result for ICANN Board seat #14 at its meeting on 28 June 2006, and confirm that Rita Rodin has been elected to take up ICANN Board seat #14. Regards, Bruce Tonkin

1 0

Marilyn Cade: announcement of interest in standing for election to the ICANN board
by Marilyn Cade June 28, 2006

June 28, 2006

Dear colleagues, I wanted to announce my resignation from the Nominating Committee as a representative from the BC, and advise fellow councilors of my interest in standing for election to the vacant Board seat now open for nomination. In order to stand for election, I have advised the Nominating Committee that I am resigning [from the Nominating Committee]and have asked to be removed from the Nominating Committee list and activities. In order to be fully transparent, I advise the Council that I am disputing an interpretation by the General Counsel regarding my eligibility to stand for election due to the Nominating Committee service. I have filed an ombudsman's appeal and am preparing a Reconsideration Request. In my view, I am fully qualified, now that I have resigned from the Nominating committee to be a candidate for election. The General Counsel has disagreed with my eligibility status, thus my appeals through the ombudsman, and possibly Reconsideration. I don't mean to clog the Council list with this topic, since that would be inappropriate, but please do let me know of any questions you may have. If nominated and seconded, then I'll have a chance to campaign, like any other candidate. At this point, the purpose of this posting is informational. Best regards, Marilyn Cade

1 0

RE: [council] Proposed motion on WHOIS
by Bruce Tonkin June 28, 2006

June 28, 2006

Hello Ute, > > Does this mean only councillors who voted FOR Formula 1 are > called on for an explanation and their understanding of what > this means? Yes. Greg Ruth noted that he did not want to add a note in support of the purpose. The intent here is not to re-open the debate, but to add clarity to the intent of Council members that voted in favour of the purpose. Regards, Bruce

1 0

RE: [council] Regarding vote during GNSO Council meeting on Wednesday 28 June 2006
by Bruce Tonkin June 28, 2006

June 28, 2006

Hello Robin, Ross, Kiyoshi, and Alistair, > > I hope that those Councillors that are not able to attend the > meeting in-person will give serious consideration to > dialling-in for the Council meeting long enough to ratify the > vote, which is the first agenda item. > I would like to thank you all for making the effort to dial-in to ratify the vote. Unfortunately we did not have a phone hook-up for the meeting (there was some problem with the delivery of equipment for the meeting). We ended up using a mobile phone and holding it up against a speaker and microphone. I note that Bret Fausett, as liaison for the ALAC, also made an effort to attending the meeting through the phone hook-up. Your patience and dedication was much appreciated. I also want to acknowledge that those few Council members that were not able to attend the meeting in-person or via phone were travelling on aircraft at the time and couldn't access a phone. Regards, Bruce Tonkin

1 0

RE: [council] Proposed motion on WHOIS
by Bruce Tonkin June 28, 2006

June 28, 2006

Hello All, and in particular those not here in Marrakech, I just wish to confirm that no action was taken. I reported the motion as a draft motion in the public forum. The motion is now open to improvement prior to the next Council teleconference. Please also note that my intent at least was that the WHOIS task force should continue its work and aim to have a complete report as per the timelines discussed by the task force on Monday morning in Marrakech. The motion does not change the current definition of purpose of the WHOIS service. Regards, Bruce

1 0

Proposed motion on WHOIS
by Bruce Tonkin June 28, 2006

June 28, 2006

Proposed Motion In response to the extensive community and Government input on the definition of the purpose of WHOIS, the GNSO Council agrees to undertake the following steps: One: Each Council member that voted in favour of the definition will provide a brief explanation of the reason for supporting the resolution and their understanding of its meaning. Two: the ICANN staff will provide a summary of the other interpretations of the definition that have been expressed by the community and Governments. Three: the Council will undertake a dialogue with the GAC and SSAC on developing a broadly understandable definition of the purposes for which the current data required in the RRA is collected. Four: The GNSO Council requests that the WHOIS task force continue with their work as specified in the terms of reference taking into account the recent input that has been provided. Five: The GNSO Council will take the final report from the WHOIS task force that addresses all terms of reference, and the definition of purpose of collecting data derived from the dialogue with the GAC and SSAC, and consider improving the wording of the WHOIS service definition so that it is broadly understandable. The GNSO Council notes that the current definition is related to the service that provides public access to some or all of the data collected, and is not a definition of the purpose of the data itself.

5 5

Re: [council] Proposed motion on WHOIS
by Ute Decker June 28, 2006

June 28, 2006

Does this mean only councillors who voted FOR Formula 1 are called on for an explanation and their understanding of what this means? -------------------------- Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Tonkin To: Council GNSO Sent: Wed Jun 28 12:49:11 2006 Subject: [council] Proposed motion on WHOIS Proposed Motion In response to the extensive community and Government input on the definition of the purpose of WHOIS, the GNSO Council agrees to undertake the following steps: One: Each Council member that voted in favour of the definition will provide a brief explanation of the reason for supporting the resolution and their understanding of its meaning. Two: the ICANN staff will provide a summary of the other interpretations of the definition that have been expressed by the community and Governments. Three: the Council will undertake a dialogue with the GAC and SSAC on developing a broadly understandable definition of the purposes for which the current data required in the RRA is collected. Four: The GNSO Council requests that the WHOIS task force continue with their work as specified in the terms of reference taking into account the recent input that has been provided. Five: The GNSO Council will take the final report from the WHOIS task force that addresses all terms of reference, and the definition of purpose of collecting data derived from the dialogue with the GAC and SSAC, and consider improving the wording of the WHOIS service definition so that it is broadly understandable. The GNSO Council notes that the current definition is related to the service that provides public access to some or all of the data collected, and is not a definition of the purpose of the data itself.

1 0

WHOIS motion in today's meeting in Marrakech
by Mawaki Chango June 28, 2006

June 28, 2006

Bruce, could you please post your complete motion in plain text to the list? thanks, Mawaki

1 0

GNSO working group of volunteers IDN issues update
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG June 28, 2006

June 28, 2006

[To council[at]gnso.icann.org] Dear Council Members, Please note the added volunteers to the GNSO working group: The registrar members are: - Bruce Tonkin, Melbourne IT - Werner Staub, CORE (registrar) and .cat - Yoav Keren, Domain The Net Technologies (registrar) - Paul Diaz, Network Solutions Sophia Bekele, CBS International, and Nominating Committee appointee to the GNSO Council Avri Doria, Nominating Committee appointee to the GNSO Council Ram Mohan, Afilias (operator for .info, .org, .mobi, and .in) Cary Karp, gTLD Registries representative to the GNSO Council June Seo, gTLD Registries representative to the GNSO Council Alistair Dixon, Telstra Clear Ltd., and CBUC representative to the GNSO Council + other CBUC participants not yet named. Marilyn Cade, CBUC representative to the GNSO Council Mawaki Chango, NCUC representative to the GNSO Council Charles Shaban, TALAL ABU-GHAZALEH & CO.International (TAGI) IPC representative. Please contact me if there are still names to add. We would like to confirm the list as soon as possible. Thank you very much, Kind regards. Glen Decision 4: That the GNSO Council forms a GNSO working group of volunteers, conversant with the IDN issues raised in the IDN issues report. The purpose of the working group would be to: (1) review the Issues Report, (2) prioritise the policy issues in the Issues Report for further work, (3) develop the terms of reference for an initial policy development process in the area of IDNs within the GNSO, (4) propose ways of interacting with ICANN groups such as the President's Advisory Committee on IDNs, the GAC, ALAC, SSAC and other related groups in ICANN, and (5) select three representatives to interact with the three ccNSO representatives to form a separate joint GNSO/ccNSO working group to: (5.1) agree on the priority issues and determine whether to examine the issues as a single "joint" PDP, or as two separate PDPs (5.2) provide a report to the GNSO and ccNSO Councils with recommendations for terms of reference of one or more PDPs, and the mechanisms for coordination with other parts of ICANN The group would aim to have recommendations completed by the end of July 2006. -- Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

4 5

Options for WHOIS purpose
by Bruce Tonkin June 28, 2006

June 28, 2006

Hello All, In light of the extensive feedback we have received this week, I believe we have the following options: (1) Revise definition of purpose (2) Keep current definition, but expand on what that definition means (3) Leave definition as is for now, until the task force completes its work on recommending any changes to WHOIS (e.g changes to what is made public, and how data that is not public can be accessed by legitimate users). Then re-evaluate the definition. Lets discuss this further in the Council meeting tomorrow. In any case, I recommend that the task force continue its current work program. Any work on purpose should be done at the Council level. Note that in cases where the task force decides to remove certain data elements from public access, the mechanism to access those elements may or may not be called part of the WHOIS service in future, and may or may not use the current port-43 protocol. E.g We may end up with a revised "WHOIS service", and a separate "Dealing with bad people" service, or maybe a "Standard WHOIS service" and "Advanced WHOIS service". Rather than worrying about what it is called for now, or worrying about the technical protocols, lets focus on the functional aspects. Regards, Bruce Tonkin

3 3