November 2007 - council - lists.icann.org

Re: [council] Draft reply Council on GNSO reform
by Greg Ruth Nov. 21, 2007

Nov. 21, 2007

Philip et al, Thanks for your quick action. The BGC report structured its recommendations under 5 main categories: 1. Adopting a WG model 2. Revising the PDP (Policy Development Process) 3. Restructuring the GNSO Council 4. Enhancing constituencies 5. Improving Coordination with ICANN structures It might be useful in supplying feedback to the BGC to follow this same structure. Thus, we might say that the GNSO generally supports reforms described in categories 2, 4 and 5? Is this a correct reading of your suggested starting point? Or do we agree only on parts of 2, 4 and 5? Greg ----- Original Message ---- From: Philip Sheppard <philip.sheppard(a)aim.be> To: Council GNSO <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 9:03:49 AM Subject: [council] Draft reply Council on GNSO reform As agreed on yesterday's Council call, I promised to draft a short paper as a "straw man" listing those recommendations on GNSO reform that may be supportable by Council as a whole. Given the deadline is submission by 30 November I thought I'd better get a move on. Not surprisingly those listed are ones seeking: - improvements in policy development and timeline flexibility, - improvements in communications, - improvements in outreach - greater support for constituencies. I have left out proposals on structural change suspecting we will have differing views. On working groups, I am proposing a partial support, suspecting we mostly feel they will work for much policy work, but that tying our hands to have ONLY working groups for EVERY issue before us would be too inflexible. I hope I have captured areas of potential agreement. Your first comments please by November 25 after which time I'll edit a proposed final version. Comments can be as simple as - "yes I/we support" or can be proposals to strike one of the proposed areas of agreement. In that case, a word of explanation would be good to share. Philip ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/sports;_ylt=At9_qDKvtAbMuh1G1SQtBI7ntAcJ

1 0

GNSO Council resolutions 20 November 2007
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG Nov. 21, 2007

Nov. 21, 2007

Dear Council Members, Ahead of the complete minutes, please find the resolutions that were passed by the GNSO Council teleconference on Tuesday 20 November 2007. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen ............................................................................ Resolution 1 Whereas, the Council has previously requested and received both the 15 June 2007 "GNSO Issues Report on Dispute Handling for IGO Names and Abbreviations" http://www.gnso.icann.org/issues/igo-names/issues-report-igo-drp-15jun07.pdf and the 28 September 2007 "Staff Report on Draft IGO Domain Name Dispute Resolution Procedure;" http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/gnso-igo-drp-report-v2-28sep07.pdf and Whereas, the Council believes that further work on the draft IGO Domain Name Dispute Resolution Procedure is appropriate before voting on whether to initiate a policy development process on this issue; and Whereas, the Intellectual Property Constituency is drafting and expects to distribute not later than 28 November a revised proposed draft dispute resolution procedure, Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Council postpones until its 20 December meeting the vote on whether to initiate a policy development process. Resolution 2 Whereas the issues report on Inter-Registrar Transfers http://gnso.icann.org/issues/transfers/issues-report-transfer-denial-clarif… has been released and discussed The GNSO council resolves to initiate a PDP to address the issues set forth in the Issues Report by the Staff. Resolution 3 failed Whereas the Council has decided to initiate a PDP on Inter-registrar Transfers, a Task Force will be created according to the By-laws, section 5 of Annex A of the GNSO Policy Development Process. Thus Pursuant to the ICANN Bylaws http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#AnnexA-8 8. Procedure if No Task Force is Formed a. If the Council decides not to convene a task force, the Council will request that, within ten (10) calendar days thereafter, each constituency appoint a representative to solicit the constituency's views on the issue. Each such representative shall be asked to submit a Constituency Statement to the Staff Manager within thirty-five (35) calendar days after initiation of the PDP. b. The Council may also pursue other options that it deems appropriate to assist in the PDP, including appointing a particular individual or organization to gather information on the issue or scheduling meetings for deliberation or briefing. All such information shall be submitted to the Staff Manager within thirty-five (35) calendar days after initiation of the PDP. c. The Staff Manager will take all Constituency Statements, Public Comment Statements, and other information and compile (and post on the Comment Site) an Initial Report within fifty (50) calendar days after initiation of the PDP. Thereafter, the PDP shall follow the provisions of Item 9 below in creating a Final Report. -- Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Statements of Interest published for new Council Members
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG Nov. 20, 2007

Nov. 20, 2007

Dear All, The statements of interest of the new GNSO Council members: Jordi Iparraguirre http://gnso.icann.org/council/soi/iparraguirre-soi-13nov07.shtml Olga Cavelli http://gnso.icann.org/council/soi/cavalli-soi-20nov07.shtml Tim Ruiz http://gnso.icann.org/council/soi/ruiz-soi-20nov07.shtml are published on page: http://gnso.icann.org/council/members.shtml 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] Personal concerns about GNSO reponse to ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Issues
by Tim Ruiz Nov. 20, 2007

Nov. 20, 2007

I share Avri concern's as well, and in fact, I thought some of these concerns were raised in LA. At least that is my recollection. Tim -------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: [council] Personal concerns about GNSO reponse to ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Issues From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes(a)verisign.com> Date: Tue, November 20, 2007 12:06 pm To: <robin(a)ipjustice.org>, "Avri Doria" <avri(a)acm.org> Cc: "Council GNSO" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> I also think that Avri raises some very important issues that need to be addressed. In my opinion, the intent of the WG was not at all inconsistent with what Avri is suggesting so I believe the wording can be clarified, but we may need to form a subgroup of the Council to do some additional work. I suggest we take steps to do that in today's meeting. I do have one gripe though. Why weren't these concerns communicated in L.A. or sooner? I firmly believe that it is perfectly acceptable and in fact needed for the chair to provide personal input as long as it is identified as personal input. Not doing that, leads to delayed completion of our work as we see in this case. I hope that we won't repeat this in the future. In my opinion it is always better to raise concerns as early as possible in the process to maximize the use of our time. Chuck Gomes "This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission." > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org > [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Robin Gross > Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 11:16 AM > To: Avri Doria > Cc: Council GNSO > Subject: Re: [council] Personal concerns about GNSO reponse > to ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Issues > > > > I share all of the concerns that Avri raises below. Obviously this > policy is no where near ready for approval. We are going to have to > spend some time fixing these recommendations and provide some > guidance on this process. > > Robin > > > Avri Doria wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Part of today's conversation involves a discussion on > whether we are > > ready to vote on our recommendations at our next meeting. > During the > > LA meeting, I pretty much kept my viewpoints out of the discussion > > because I was concerned with accurately reflecting the state of > > discussion in the council. At this point I would like to add my > > personal opinions to the discussion. > > > > I am uncomfortable with many of the proposals we are making and > > decided I should send in a note prior to the meeting on some of the > > issues that most concern me. > > > > In general I believe our answers give the governments and > the ccNSO a > > unconstrained slate on which they can designate as many > names as they > > wish as being in ccTLD space. > > > > From various conversations I have been involved in, this > could come to > > mean something as broad as: > > > > - every possible name of a country or territory's name > > - in every possible script/ language > > - including all possible variants > > > > We have also heard discussions that indicate that if one > country needs > > a certain number of ccTLDs, then obviously, for the sake of > fairness, > > every country needs the same number. > > > > As it currently stands, I cannot vote to approve our > current statement. > > > > Some of my specific issues: > > > >> /b) Could there be several IDN strings for a 'territory' > in a script? > >> If so, who would / > >> /determine the number and what are the criteria?/ > >> > >> Proposed GNSO response: If multiple scripts are used in a > territory > >> and if it is judged that those scripts will add value to the user > >> experience, then the sovereign government should make the > choice of > >> which scripts and what number of scripts will be in use for IDN > >> ccTLDs. > >> > > > > I am not sure that we actually answered the question in this one. > > > > I do not read the question as asking about multiple scripts, but > > rather read it as asking about multiple names in a single script. > > > > I think that this would be problematic, as this would give > license for > > a multitude of names might be in general use for a > territory or country. > > E.g in the US, we have US, USA, UnitedStates, > UnitedStatesofAmerica, > > TheStates, America, LandoftheFreeHomeoftheBrave etc... > > Should all of these be designated as ccTLDs. > > and should they all be designated in all scripts/languages that are > > used, and even only those officially designated in at least > one of the > > states, in the US? > > > > If we extrapolate this for all countries/territories, all > variants and > > all scripts/languages, we will find that a very large chunk of the > > name spaces been being assigned to the ccNSO and to government > > control. > > > > Is this something the GNSO is comfortable with? > > > > > >> */Should a list of IDN ccTLD strings be mandated?/* / / /In the > >> US-ASCII case, ccTLD strings are currently primfarily based on the > >> ISO 3166-1 / /Alpha 2 list. If a similar mechanism were > adopted for > >> IDN ccTLDs, this could mean that / /every ISO 3166 entry > would have > >> an equivalent IDN ccTLD string(s) to represent it./ > >> > >> /a) Is such a list necessary?/ > >> > >> Proposed GNSO response: Probably not. Would such a list > result in an > >> earlier ability to meet the needs of non-English users? If so, it > >> would seem to be a good idea. If not, then it seems like > the higher > >> priority should be to meet user needs and, if that can be done > >> without a list, that might be the better approach. If the list > >> avoided conflicts and confusion, it might be needed (e.g., in > >> situations where there are reports of conflicts and > confusion among > >> ccTLD members themselves or where there are reports of > such conflicts > >> and confusion from traditional standards bodies like the ISO). > > > > > > As was shown in the conversation we had in LA, the lack of > a list, may > > mean that an implicit definition will be used that may open up the > > possibility of an indefinitely large number of potential > names being > > designated as ccTLD space. > > > > Is this something the GNSO is comfortable with? > > > >> /e) Who would develop the criteria and relevant policies for > >> identifying IDN ccTLDs?/ > >> > >> Proposed GNSO response: The ccNSO is the policy making body for > >> ccTLDs. It seems like the appropriate body for this task with > >> appropriate input from the broader community within ICANN and with > >> input from the abovementioned non-ICANN entities to establish the > >> legitimacy of the process and the outcome. > > > > > > I read this as saying that the GSNO agrees that deciding whether a > > string belongs in ccTLD space is a decision that is made by > the ccNSO. > > > > Without pre-established constraints, there is no limit to > what might > > be deemed an appropriate IDN ccTLD. > > > > I don't see how we can agree to a formulation that is this open. > > > > a. > > > >

1 0

Updated Job Description for discussion
by Avri Doria Nov. 20, 2007

Nov. 20, 2007

Hi, I integrated the suggestions made by Chuck and Philip and tried to smooth the text somewhat. I also added some ideas of my own - notably the section on the role of the Nomcom appointee. Changes are in {}. a. -------------- GNSO Council Position: GNSO Council Number of Seats: 1 Start of Term: Conclusion of Annual Meeting 2008 End of Term: Conclusion of Annual Meeting 2010 The Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) is a policy- development body responsible for developing and recommending to the ICANN Board substantive policies relating to generic top-level domains. The GNSO consists of various Constituencies representing defined groups of stakeholders and a GNSO Council, responsible for managing the policy development and administrative processes of the GNSO. The GNSO Constituencies choose the majority of the Council members; Nominating Committee chooses three Council members with staggered terms. The GNSO also includes a liaison from the ALAC and the Governmental Advisory Committee. Liaison activities from the ASO and ccNSO are under development. GNSO Council Members receive no compensation for their services as GNSO Council Members. ICANN provides administrative and operational support necessary for the GNSO to carry out its responsibilities through the GNSO Secretariat. Most recently ICANN also provides staff support for policy development. As stated in the ICANN Bylaws, such support shall not include an obligation for ICANN to fund travel expenses incurred by GNSO participants for travel to any meeting of the GNSO or for any other purpose. However, ICANN has customarily furnished travel expenses for Nominating Committee appointed Council members to ICANN meetings. This custom is planned to continue, but is subject to the Bylaw statement. [Bylaws Article X, Section 4, see http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#X-4] Nominating Committee will use the Criteria for Selection of ICANN Directors (see above) in choosing Selected Nominees for the GNSO Council. GNSO Council members are expected to support the ICANN mission and the implementation of ICANN's Core Values. {Role of the Nomcom Appointee. As discussed above the majority of the councillors are appointed by the constituencies and represent those constituencies in the council. Nomcom appointees, on the other hand, are not the representatives of any specific group, though they may choose to represent the interests of groups that are not currently represented in council. Most importantly nomcom appointees should be people chosen from outside ICANN who bring a fresh perspective into the council and who accept the responsibility to do their best to support ICANN in its mission and core values.} {The} Nominating Committee will also take into account the following eligibility factors and additional considerations. GNSO Council Eligibility Factors No person who serves on the Nominating Committee in any capacity is eligible for selection by any means to any position on the Board or any other ICANN body having one or more membership positions that the Nominating Committee is responsible for filling, until the conclusion of an ICANN annual meeting that coincides with, or is after, the conclusion of that person's service on the Nominating Committee. [Bylaws, Article VII, Section 8, see http://www.icann.org/general/ bylaws.htm#VII-8] No more than one officer, director, or employee of any particular corporation or other organization (including its subsidiaries and affiliates) shall serve on the GNSO Council at any given time. [Bylaws, Article X, Section 3(5), see http://www.icann.org/general/ bylaws.htm#X-3.5] Additional Considerations For the GNSO Council position, specific experience related to the scope of the GNSO's work with the Domain Name System would be advantageous. The current composition of the GNSO Council is available here http:// gnso.icann.org/council/members.shtml The Bylaws do not state a limit on the number of terms GNSO Council members may serve, although it is possible that term limites may be considered in future. Time Commitment The basic responsibilities of a GNSO Council member would spend at least 20 hours per month on Council related activities, with those chairing or participating in committees or task forces spending at up to 60 hours a month. Task force members and councilors are not compensated for either time or teleconference costs. Additional GNSO criteria: During the Nom Com meeting with GNSO Council at the ICANN meeting in Lisbon, the Council provided the following outline of qualities the NomCom should consider in GNSO candidates: Baseline Criteria for anyone selected as a nomcom appointee: {* Demonstrated experience working effectively in collaborative environments involving diverse interests.} * ability to chair a multi-stakeholder group to reach consensus * basic of knowledge of DNS systems and industry structure - registries, registrars {- The goal is not to find technical DNS experts, but a minimal understanding of the DNS is needed to effectively function on the Council. for example something along the lines of "do you know what happens in the DNS when you send an email, or access a webpage". This requires not a precise technical description, but an understanding of the general process of name resolution.} * individual expertise that is not otherwise available on the Council {as represented in the variable criteria below} {Variable Criteria that are useful to the GNSO: Part of the role of Nomcom appointees it fill in gaps in the skill set of the council. Some, but not all, of the skills that are highly useful in the process of GNSO council work are listed below. The gap skills will vary year by year. Knowledge of - International Law - Competition law - Anti-trust law - Public interest - Consumer rights - Human rights - Economics especially market analysis - Intergovernmental expertise - Understanding of the special needs of financial services businesses - IDN expertise} - setting up of dispute and objection processes - enforcement {procedures and processes} - application software development - e.g multi-lingual support - online{ collaborative work and} consensus building technologies - wiki's etc - statistics and survey analysis - project management and document control processes {Additionally consideration may be given to Nomcom appointees who can help with the geographical or gender balance on the council as needed.}

3 2

Re: [council] Updated GNSO Council agenda 2O November 2007
by Greg Ruth Nov. 20, 2007

Nov. 20, 2007

Avri, Sorry for the late reply. I would like to add to AOB, if time permits, a discussion of possibly creating an email list for IDN issues. I talk with Olaf about this and he said staff would be happy to set up a list *if* so directed by the Council. Greg ----- Original Message ---- From: "GNSO.SECRETARIAT(a)GNSO.ICANN.ORG" <gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org> To: Council GNSO <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:08:58 PM Subject: [council] Updated GNSO Council agenda 2O November 2007 Dear Council Members, Please find the updated agenda for the call tomorrow: http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-20nov07.shtml The updates are as follows: Item 3: Intergovernmental Organization Dispute Resolution Process (IGO-DRP) vote (15) Vote on PDP is pending from 31 Oct. as we did not take a vote to specifically delay the PDP vote until after the ad-hoc group being led by the IPC reported back. Item 4: Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy PDP vote (15) 4a - Vote to initiate PDP pending from 31 Oct 4b - Contingent vote of forming a TF for the PDP pending from 31 Oct. 5a. Discussion of Board Motion of Interim solution WG see: Adopted Board Resolutions Los Angeles http://www.icann.org/minutes/resolutions-02nov07.htm#_Toc55609363 Update on Internationalized Domain Names Charter IDNC Working Group http://www.ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/idnc-charter.htm Item 8: Letter on behalf of Hagen Hultzsch re job description for open GNSO Council position in 2008 http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg04100.html Decision on how to proceed Item 10: AOB 10 a. Discussion of chair and vice-chair election process Agenda http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-20nov07.shtml Agenda approval Item 0: Roll call of Council members Item 1: Update any statements of interest Item 2: Approval of the draft GNSO Council minutes of 11 October 2007 - (agenda, Items 0 -2 15 mins) http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg04014.html Item 3: Intergovernmental Organization Dispute Resolution Process (IGO-DRP) vote (15) Vote on PDP is pending from 31 Oct. as we did not take a vote to specifically delay the PDP vote until after the ad-hoc group being led by the IPC reported back. Intergovernmental Organization Dispute Resolution Process (IGO-DRP) developed by staff: http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/gnso-igo-drp-report-v2-28sep07.pdf Motion that failed in LA Whereas, the Council has previously requested and received both the 15 June 2007 "GNSO Issues Report on Dispute Handling for IGO Names and Abbreviations" and the 28 September 2007 "Staff Report on Draft IGO Domain Name Dispute Resolution Procedure;" and Whereas, the Council believes that further work on the draft IGO Domain Name Dispute Resolution Procedure is appropriate before voting on whether to initiate a policy development process on this issue; and Whereas, the Intellectual Property Constituency is willing to lead a small ad hoc group to review and consider a proposed draft dispute resolution procedure, Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Council authorizes the creation of a small ad hoc group of interested informed and representative stakeholders and members of the GAC to review, consider and propose as appropriate revisions to the Draft IGO Domain Name Dispute Resolution Procedure set forth in the Staff Report, and instructs the ad hoc group to report to the Council with its recommendations not later than 15 February 2008. Item 4: Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy PDP vote (15) 4a - Vote to initiate PDP pending from 31 Oct 4b - Contingent vote of forming a TF for the PDP pending from 31 Oct. Meeting transcript from L.A.: http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/transcripts-gnso-council-transfers27oct07.pdf Issues Report: http://gnso.icann.org/issues/transfers/issues-report-transfer-denial-clarif… In the second URL above, especially note Section 2.2.e, staff recommendation for a PDP and Section 5, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE POLICY OUTCOMES Item 5: IDN ccTLD WG Discussion (15) 5a. Discussion of Board Motion of Interim solution WG see: Adopted Board Resolutions Los Angeles http://www.icann.org/minutes/resolutions-02nov07.htm#_Toc55609363 Update on Internationalized Domain Names Charter IDNC Working Group http://www.ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/idnc-charter.htm Draft GNSO comments revised in L.A: http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/ccnso-gac-issues-paper-idn-ccs-draft-gnso-comm… Item 6: GNSO response to BGC WG on GNSO Improvements (30) Draft Report of the BGC on GNSO Improvements http://icann.org/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-report-15oct07.… Item 7: Establishment of a general GNSO discussion list, similar to the ones for NANOG and IETF. (15) Item 8: Letter on behalf of Hagen Hultzsch re job description for open GNSO Council position in 2008 http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg04100.html Decision on how to proceed Item 9: Pending Work Item Review (10) http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/pending-action-list.pdf (Link to Pending Work Item Review is permanently displayed on page: http://gnso.icann.org/ below 'Master Calendar') Item 10: AOB 10 a. Discussion of chair and vice-chair election process (13:00 Los Angeles, 16:00 Washington DC, 21:00 London, 22:00 Brussels, 08:00 Melbourne, next day) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Local time between October and March, Winter in the NORTHERN hemisphere ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 21:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PST) UTC-8-0DST 13:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5+0DST 16:00 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil UTC-2+1DST 19:00 Buenos Aires, Argentina UTC-3+0DST 18:00 London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 21:00 Brussels, Belgium (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 22:00 Karlsruhe, Germany (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 22:00 Barcelona, Spain (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 22:00 Oslo, Norway (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 22:00 Amman, Jordan UTC+2+0DST 23:00 Phnom Penh, Cambodia UTC+7+0DST 04:00 Hong Kong, China UTC+8+0DST 05:00 Singapore, Singapore UTC+8+0DST 05:00 Melbourne, Australia (EST) UTC+10+1DST 08:00 (next day) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of March 2008, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. kind regards. Glen -- Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better pen pal. Text or chat with friends inside Yahoo! Mail. See how. http://overview.mail.yahoo.com/

2 1

Agenda Item - Council Comments on Draft Report of the BGC on GNSO Improvements
by Avri Doria Nov. 20, 2007

Nov. 20, 2007

Hi, At our last meting there was some opinion that it might be possible for the council to come up with a narrow statement that could be have consensus endorsement from the council. The item was, therefore, put on today's agenda. I thought that a few people were thinking of forming a ad-hoc group to put forward a statement for consideration by the council. As of this point, I have not seen such a statement. If anyone is working on one, please send it to the list as soon as possible. It may already be too late for reaching agreement on anything at today's meeting, but if we don't have any statement to discus, it may be a mote point. thanks a.

1 0

Updated GNSO Council agenda 2O November 2007
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG Nov. 20, 2007

Nov. 20, 2007

Dear Council Members, Please find the updated agenda for the call tomorrow: http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-20nov07.shtml The updates are as follows: Item 3: Intergovernmental Organization Dispute Resolution Process (IGO-DRP) vote (15) Vote on PDP is pending from 31 Oct. as we did not take a vote to specifically delay the PDP vote until after the ad-hoc group being led by the IPC reported back. Item 4: Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy PDP vote (15) 4a - Vote to initiate PDP pending from 31 Oct 4b - Contingent vote of forming a TF for the PDP pending from 31 Oct. 5a. Discussion of Board Motion of Interim solution WG see: Adopted Board Resolutions Los Angeles http://www.icann.org/minutes/resolutions-02nov07.htm#_Toc55609363 Update on Internationalized Domain Names Charter IDNC Working Group http://www.ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/idnc-charter.htm Item 8: Letter on behalf of Hagen Hultzsch re job description for open GNSO Council position in 2008 http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg04100.html Decision on how to proceed Item 10: AOB 10 a. Discussion of chair and vice-chair election process Agenda http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-20nov07.shtml Agenda approval Item 0: Roll call of Council members Item 1: Update any statements of interest Item 2: Approval of the draft GNSO Council minutes of 11 October 2007 - (agenda, Items 0 -2 15 mins) http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg04014.html Item 3: Intergovernmental Organization Dispute Resolution Process (IGO-DRP) vote (15) Vote on PDP is pending from 31 Oct. as we did not take a vote to specifically delay the PDP vote until after the ad-hoc group being led by the IPC reported back. Intergovernmental Organization Dispute Resolution Process (IGO-DRP) developed by staff: http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/gnso-igo-drp-report-v2-28sep07.pdf Motion that failed in LA Whereas, the Council has previously requested and received both the 15 June 2007 "GNSO Issues Report on Dispute Handling for IGO Names and Abbreviations" and the 28 September 2007 "Staff Report on Draft IGO Domain Name Dispute Resolution Procedure;" and Whereas, the Council believes that further work on the draft IGO Domain Name Dispute Resolution Procedure is appropriate before voting on whether to initiate a policy development process on this issue; and Whereas, the Intellectual Property Constituency is willing to lead a small ad hoc group to review and consider a proposed draft dispute resolution procedure, Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Council authorizes the creation of a small ad hoc group of interested informed and representative stakeholders and members of the GAC to review, consider and propose as appropriate revisions to the Draft IGO Domain Name Dispute Resolution Procedure set forth in the Staff Report, and instructs the ad hoc group to report to the Council with its recommendations not later than 15 February 2008. Item 4: Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy PDP vote (15) 4a - Vote to initiate PDP pending from 31 Oct 4b - Contingent vote of forming a TF for the PDP pending from 31 Oct. Meeting transcript from L.A.: http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/transcripts-gnso-council-transfers27oct07.pdf Issues Report: http://gnso.icann.org/issues/transfers/issues-report-transfer-denial-clarif… In the second URL above, especially note Section 2.2.e, staff recommendation for a PDP and Section 5, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE POLICY OUTCOMES Item 5: IDN ccTLD WG Discussion (15) 5a. Discussion of Board Motion of Interim solution WG see: Adopted Board Resolutions Los Angeles http://www.icann.org/minutes/resolutions-02nov07.htm#_Toc55609363 Update on Internationalized Domain Names Charter IDNC Working Group http://www.ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/idnc-charter.htm Draft GNSO comments revised in L.A: http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/ccnso-gac-issues-paper-idn-ccs-draft-gnso-comm… Item 6: GNSO response to BGC WG on GNSO Improvements (30) Draft Report of the BGC on GNSO Improvements http://icann.org/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-report-15oct07.… Item 7: Establishment of a general GNSO discussion list, similar to the ones for NANOG and IETF. (15) Item 8: Letter on behalf of Hagen Hultzsch re job description for open GNSO Council position in 2008 http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg04100.html Decision on how to proceed Item 9: Pending Work Item Review (10) http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/pending-action-list.pdf (Link to Pending Work Item Review is permanently displayed on page: http://gnso.icann.org/ below 'Master Calendar') Item 10: AOB 10 a. Discussion of chair and vice-chair election process (13:00 Los Angeles, 16:00 Washington DC, 21:00 London, 22:00 Brussels, 08:00 Melbourne, next day) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Local time between October and March, Winter in the NORTHERN hemisphere ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 21:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PST) UTC-8-0DST 13:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5+0DST 16:00 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil UTC-2+1DST 19:00 Buenos Aires, Argentina UTC-3+0DST 18:00 London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 21:00 Brussels, Belgium (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 22:00 Karlsruhe, Germany (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 22:00 Barcelona, Spain (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 22:00 Oslo, Norway (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 22:00 Amman, Jordan UTC+2+0DST 23:00 Phnom Penh, Cambodia UTC+7+0DST 04:00 Hong Kong, China UTC+8+0DST 05:00 Singapore, Singapore UTC+8+0DST 05:00 Melbourne, Australia (EST) UTC+10+1DST 08:00 (next day) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of March 2008, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. kind regards. Glen -- Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

3 2

Statement of Interest of Tim Ruiz
by Tim Ruiz Nov. 20, 2007

Nov. 20, 2007

I am Vice President of Corporate Development and Policy for The Go Daddy Group, Inc. The Go Daddy Group companies include eight ICANN accredited registrars including GoDaddy.com, Inc. GoDaddy.com is a member of the Registrars Constituency of the GNSO and I am its Registered Representative. GoDaddy.com is a member of the dotMOBI Advisory Group (MAG). I represent GoDaddy.com on the MAG. I am on the MAG Steering Committee and have been appointed by the Steering Committee to represent the MAG on the dotMOBI Policy Advisory Board (PAB). The MAG and PAB, among other activities, are involved in recommending policy to mTLD, the dotMOBI Registry Operator. GoDaddy.com recently acquired a small interest in Afilias Limited for investment purposes. GoDaddy.com and Afilias USA recently formed a joint venture dba Alliance Registry, in which Afilias USA is the managing member and assumes authority and responsibility for all day-to-day registry operations. GoDaddy.com is also a member of the United States Council for International Business (USCIB). The USCIB is a member of the Business Constituency of the GNSO. Our primary interest in the USCIB is the DNS and Internet Identifiers Working Group. GoDaddy.com was a founding Member of the Country Code 1 ENUM LLC. I represented GoDaddy.com on the Board of the LLC from Aug 2004 through Dec 2006, at which time GoDaddy.com withdrew from the LLC. In all my positions with the Go Daddy Group, or in the appointments noted above, my focus has been the development and promotion of registrar related business, products, and services. Tim Ruiz Vice President Corp. Development & Policy The Go Daddy Group, Inc.

1 0

Proposed election schedules for GNSO Council Chair- Vice chair
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG Nov. 20, 2007

Nov. 20, 2007

[To: council[at]gnso.icann.org] Dear Councillors, The terms for the GNSO Council Chair and Vice-chair run concurrently and expire on 31 January 2008. Pursuant to the ICANN bylaws http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#X-3.7 Section 3.7 The GNSO Council shall select the GNSO Chair, for a term the GNSO Council specifies but not longer than one year, by written ballot or by action at a meeting. Any such selection must have affirmative votes comprising a majority of the votes of all the members of the GNSO Council. There will be a total of 27 votes cast. The winning candidate must receive at least 14 affirmative votes. In case of a tie, there will be a second round of voting. The process followed in the past for the election of the GNSO Council Chair and Vice-chair, has been a call for nominations open for a period of two weeks for each position separately, Chair followed by Vice-chair. All nominations should be seconded by the end of this period, and only GNSO Council members are eligible to make nominations and second them. The voting period, is usually open for 14 days for the position of GNSO Council chair. Voting will take place by secret e-mail ballot. Ballots will be sent out individually to each GNSO Council members' e-mail address. The same procedure that has taken place for the ICANN Board seat #13 elections. All GNSO Council members are eligible to vote, that is, 3 representatives from each constituency, Registrars, gTLD registries, Commercial and Business Users (CBUC), Non Commercial Users (NCUC), Intellectual Property (IPC), and Internet Service Providers and Connectivity Providers (ISPCP) and the 3 Nominating Committee appointees. Liaisons from the ALAC and the GAC do not vote. When the e-mail vote is closed, the results will be announced for each council member to check that her/his vote was correctly registered and the results of the e-mail vote will be confirmed at a GNSO Council meeting. Given the approaching holiday season a proposed election schedule could look like this: GNSO Council chair: Call for nominations: Thursday 22 November to 6 December 2007. Voting period: Thursday 13 December 2007 to Monday 7 January 2008. (extended voting period due to holiday season) Announce the results Wednesday 9 January 2008 Confirm the vote at the scheduled GNSO Council meeting on 17 January 2008. Vice-chair : Call for nominations 9 January to 23 January 2008 Vote: by roll call vote at GNSO Council meeting 31 January 2008. Please let me have your comments. Thank you. kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0