January 2008 - council - lists.icann.org

Nominations for GNSO Council vice chair
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG Jan. 22, 2008

Jan. 22, 2008

[To: council[at]gnso.icann.org] Dear Council members, Chuck Gomes has been duly nominated by Avri Doria, a Nominating Committee appointee, and seconded by Olga Cavalli, also a a Nominating Committee appointee, to the position of GNSO Council vice chair which runs concurrently with the GNSO Council chair, from 1 February 2008 to 31 January 2009 . http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg04468.html http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg04485.html Chuck has accepted his nomination. Nominations for the position of GNSO Council vice chair close on 23 January at 12:00 UTC noon. VOTING PROCEDURE The voting will be by a roll call vote at the GNSO Council meeting on 31 January 2008. The winning candidate must receive at least 14 affirmative votes. GNSO COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 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. Please note this as an important date because there must be quorum for the vote. Please let me know if you have any questions. 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

New-Look Meeting Participation Website Goes Live in Conjunction with New Delhi Schedule of Events
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG Jan. 20, 2008

Jan. 20, 2008

[To: council[at]gnso.icann.org; liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org] [To: ga[at]gnso.icann.org; announce[at]gnso.icann.org] [To: regional-liaisons[at]icann.org] http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-2-18jan08.htm New-Look Meeting Participation Website Goes Live in Conjunction with New Delhi Schedule of Events 18 January 2008 Colorful graphics and a modern design outfit this new-look website with improved functionality and usability for visitors. The site is not only an important resource for on-site meeting participants, but also an essential element for those who wish to participate remotely. The site, found at http://public.icann.org, went live today in conjunction with the schedule for next month's meeting in New Delhi in order to provide an estimated 700 physical attendees and several hundred virtual visitors with all the information they need to participate in the event. The meeting will take place from 10-15 February 2008. The new design, which includes the use of graphics for improved site navigation, also provides easy access to meeting agendas, presentations, and transcripts; as well as links to chatrooms and audiocasts for remote users who want to listen in. So whether it's in person, or in one of our meeting chatrooms - we hope to see you in New Delhi. The new home for everything you need to know about how to participate in ICANN, is found at http://public.icann.org. The New Delhi Meeting page and schedule are available at http://del.icann.org. Please send any questions or comments to meeting(a)icann.org. -- Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

ICANN Seeks Expressions of Interest from Auction Design Experts
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG Jan. 20, 2008

Jan. 20, 2008

[To: council[at]gnso.icann.org; liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org] [To: ga[at]gnso.icann.org; announce[at]gnso.icann.org] [To: regional-liaisons[at]icann.org] http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-18jan08.htm. Can you ICANN Seeks Expressions of Interest from Auction Design Experts 18 January 2008 ICANN is seeking expressions of interest from entities experienced in developing and managing auction processes. ICANN has identified several areas where auctions might be an appropriate tool, such as the efficient disposition of data from terminated registrars and registries, the allocation of single-character second-level domain names, and perhaps, resolution of contention between competing commercial applicants for identical strings in the application process for new generic Top Level Domains. A number of commenters and academics have recommended auctions as the preferred method of objectively allocating scarce resources such as popular second-level domain names or gTLD strings. Also, ICANN received substantial public comment in the discussion on allocation of single-character second-level names that the names should be allocated through an auction model. ICANN is an internationally organized non-profit public benefit organization that administers certain features of the Internet's unique identifiers. As a private-public partnership, ICANN is dedicated to preserving the operational stability of the Internet; to promoting competition; to achieving broad representation of global Internet communities; and to developing policy appropriate to its mission through bottom-up, consensus-based processes. A general description of ICANN is available at http://icann.org/tr/english.html. Background As recommended by the GNSO Council, ICANN commenced a Forum on Allocation Methods for Single-Letter and Single-Digit Domain Names in gTLD registries. ICANN conducted the public forum from 16 October to 15 December 2007. The Forum on Allocation Methods identified support from members of the ICANN community and described several auction models of single-letter and single-digit domain names at the second-level (see 16 October 2007 announcement at http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-16oct07.htm, and Summary of Comments located at http://www.icann.org/public_comment/single-letter-summary-comments-23dec07.… [PDF, 61K]. If these models are pursued, ICANN staff has determined that the additional knowledge and expertise on auctions is necessary to further work in this area. Although implementation plans are still in development, ICANN staff has also identified auctions as a possibility of final resort for addressing string contention among multiple applicants for popular new generic TLDs. Additional guidance on auctions will be beneficial as staff moves toward the introduction of new gTLDs in the near future. In furtherance of the protection of registrants, auctions also provide a mechanism for addressing the termination or failure of accredited registrars and gTLD registries and the efficient transfer of names to a competent, on-going registrar or registry. Qualifications Entities interested in submitting Expressions of Interest should be experienced in areas of auction design, management and implementation. Prior experience with telecommunications, Internet or domain name, energy/utility or other asset auctions would be particularly relevant. Expressions of Interest Expressions of interest should be sent to Patrick Jones, at patrick.jones(a)icann.org by 23:59 UTC on 18 February 2008. ICANN is hoping to select a qualified entity or entities to assist with auctions in 2008. Accordingly, ICANN is eager to commence a dialogue to determine whether your service is interested and would be capable of assisting ICANN with the development and management of auction processes. ICANN requests Expressions of Interest from potential entities that include information showing that your organization can fulfill the requirements set forth above, as well as background information about your organization, appropriate experience and additional qualifications you believe would be relevant, but that are not addressed above. -- Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Meetings in ND
by Avri Doria Jan. 19, 2008

Jan. 19, 2008

Hi, When we spoke of the meeting yesterday I fogot to mention the meeting on Thursday afternoon, though we have spoken of it before and it is becoming a regular meeting. This agenda for this meeting is the discussion of the information we have received from the open forum and other meetings and to plan for the period between ND and Paris. additionally, Nomcom chair Hagen Hultzch has asked to meet with the council I believe this is being arranged for Thursday lunch, after which we would go into our review and planning meeting. We have also been invited to an evening cocktail social meeting with the ALAC. So the whole schedule of council meetings looks like this: (Glen will send the official schedule once it is ready, but I wanted to give people the picture i have at the moment.) - Saturday DT IRT GNSO Improvements - Sunday IDN ccTLD responses Prep for meeting with ccNSO council Prep for public meeting Board Diner Meeting - Maybe Monday but needs confirmation Meeting with ccNSO Council - Tuesday - Constituency Day - Wednesday Public Meeting IDN with a decision/vote DT with a decision/vote AOB Open Mike ALAC is inviting the council to a social 'get together' cocktail in the evening - Thursday Lunch with Nomcom chair and other nomcom members Post public meeting review and planning

1 0

RE: [council] Domain Tasting - Follow up on possibility of fee application through interim or special budget process
by Tim Ruiz Jan. 18, 2008

Jan. 18, 2008

True, I'm not that optimistic about a shorter PDP on this. But I am certainly willing to contribute to that goal to the extent possible. Tim -------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: [council] Domain Tasting - Follow up on possibility of fee application through interim or special budget process From: "Rosette, Kristina" <krosette(a)cov.com> Date: Fri, January 18, 2008 8:36 am To: "Tim Ruiz" <tim(a)godaddy.com>, <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Tim, I don't doubt that you're right about having to have registrars vote as to how to pay. That said, I'm not willing to accept that we have to have a built-in six-month delay. The interim/special budgeting process alternative was affirmatively raised by staff, and I'd like to know where it stands. If I missed the follow up, that's my fault and I ask that someone point me in the right direction. If a decision was made by staff that it couldn't or shouldn't be pursued, then I believe that conclusion should be formally stated and the reasoning be provided. If it fell off the radar screen, I've asked that it be put back on. Call me an optimist, but we'll have to agree to disagree that a policy recommendation can't be developed and voted on before June. Kristina -----Original Message----- From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 8:00 AM To: council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: RE: [council] Domain Tasting - Follow up on possibility of fee application through interim or special budget process Kristina, I don't know about the interim measures, but I believe that modifying the budget mid-year would still require the Staff to go back to registrars and allow them to vote again on how they want to pay - ICANN directly or ICANN through Registry invoicing. That would take additional time and could run up against the end of the FY anyway. Also, for the design team discussion, we should keep in mind the likely timing of any consensus policy that may come out of the Tasting PDP. I don't see how any such policy could be developed, recommended, commented on, and approved before the Paris meeting in June. Then allowing for implementation time I don't think it would become policy until sometime after the new budget goes into affect. Tim -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [council] Domain Tasting - Follow up on possibility of fee application through interim or special budget process From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> Date: Thu, January 17, 2008 10:21 pm To: <council(a)gnso.icann.org> My understanding of what Denise said was that ICANN is proposing to levy the per-domain fee as part of the standard budget cycle which would put it in place starting July 2008. I heard nothing today about any interim measures. Alan At 17/01/2008 10:55 PM, Rosette, Kristina wrote: All, Our discussion today of application of the ICANN fee to names deleted during AGP focused on the regular ICANN budget cycle. I had understood from our 31 October meeting that it may be possible to pursue levying the fee through an interim or special budgeting process, and that we would receive from staff further information about that possibility and a potential timetable. I don't recall receiving any further information. Did we receive it? If so, would someone please point it out for me? If we didn't, I believe it would be helpful to have before Delhi. To the extent it can be provided quickly, it would be especially helpful for the design team to have before Delhi. Thanks. Kristina

1 0

RE: [council] Domain Tasting - Follow up on possibility of fee application through interim or special budget process
by Tim Ruiz Jan. 18, 2008

Jan. 18, 2008

Kristina, I don't know about the interim measures, but I believe that modifying the budget mid-year would still require the Staff to go back to registrars and allow them to vote again on how they want to pay - ICANN directly or ICANN through Registry invoicing. That would take additional time and could run up against the end of the FY anyway. Also, for the design team discussion, we should keep in mind the likely timing of any consensus policy that may come out of the Tasting PDP. I don't see how any such policy could be developed, recommended, commented on, and approved before the Paris meeting in June. Then allowing for implementation time I don't think it would become policy until sometime after the new budget goes into affect. Tim -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [council] Domain Tasting - Follow up on possibility of fee application through interim or special budget process From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> Date: Thu, January 17, 2008 10:21 pm To: <council(a)gnso.icann.org> My understanding of what Denise said was that ICANN is proposing to levy the per-domain fee as part of the standard budget cycle which would put it in place starting July 2008. I heard nothing today about any interim measures. Alan At 17/01/2008 10:55 PM, Rosette, Kristina wrote: All, Our discussion today of application of the ICANN fee to names deleted during AGP focused on the regular ICANN budget cycle. I had understood from our 31 October meeting that it may be possible to pursue levying the fee through an interim or special budgeting process, and that we would receive from staff further information about that possibility and a potential timetable. I don't recall receiving any further information. Did we receive it? If so, would someone please point it out for me? If we didn't, I believe it would be helpful to have before Delhi. To the extent it can be provided quickly, it would be especially helpful for the design team to have before Delhi. Thanks. Kristina

2 1

RE: AW: [council] Enfranchising absent voters
by Tim Ruiz Jan. 18, 2008

Jan. 18, 2008

I like what Chuck is proposing, or trying to accomplish. In the short time I've been on the Council I have already been chastized once by my constituents (and rightfully so). However, I would prefer not to make the proposed change and keep the process as simple as possible. Let's get Board approval and solve the major issue for now. We can consider tweaking later if necessary. Tim -------- Original Message -------- Subject: AW: [council] Enfranchising absent voters From: "Thomas Keller" <tom(a)1und1.de> Date: Fri, January 18, 2008 6:42 am To: "'Avri Doria'" <avri(a)psg.com>, "'Council GNSO'" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> I guess I would rather like to vote whether to initiate a vote or not ;) instead of this very complicated setup which will cause alot of confusion. tom -----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht----- Von: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] Im Auftrag von Avri Doria Gesendet: Freitag, 18. Januar 2008 10:08 An: Council GNSO Betreff: Re: [council] Enfranchising absent voters Hi, While anything can be gamed, including absenting oneself right before the vote, I believe that the text is better as it stands. I tried to think of a couple of ways of tightening it, e.g. - absent as of the time the role call is taken - but people arrive late, and some have to leave early - absent when the agenda item first comes under discussion, but this is still subject to the condition above and, the person who can game it by leaving just before the vote cold also game it by leaving just before the discussion. which is a sense is even more counter productive. and while it is true that people could game it, by coming to fewer meetings or by always leaving just before a critical vote, I think that this sort of behavior would: a. be unlikely in anyone wiling to serve on the council b. be noticed in such a way that some one would eventually take action I think Philip's point in the his PS. is well taken, by and large, whenever someone has said, I need more time, or I need to consult, we have delayed the vote until the next meeting. a. On 18 Jan 2008, at 09:49, Philip Sheppard wrote: > > > I argued against this new change in the group as it gets too complex. > It would mean a council member chooses to vote then or later. > But would only vote later if the trigger for an e-vote that the > outcome may be affected applies. > But that choice itself (to vote later or not) itself may affect the > trigger. > This means the vote is open to gaming and the choice is thus > unethical. > > Moreover, presenting such a complex proposal to the Board would likely > kill it. > > Philip > > PS Our current practise is to delay a vote until we are all ready, so > the benefit of the addition seems to be small in comparison to the > cost in complexity / ethics. > >

1 0

Nomination for Vice-Chair
by Avri Doria Jan. 18, 2008

Jan. 18, 2008

Hi, I would like to nominate Chuck Gomes for the role of GNSO council Vice- chair. I think the work he has done over the last half year to organize the council efforts has been exemplary and invaluable. Thanks a.

3 2

Re: [council] Domain Tasting - Follow up on possibility of fee application through interim or special budget process
by Alan Greenberg Jan. 18, 2008

Jan. 18, 2008

My understanding of what Denise said was that ICANN is proposing to levy the per-domain fee as part of the standard budget cycle which would put it in place starting July 2008. I heard nothing today about any interim measures. Alan At 17/01/2008 10:55 PM, Rosette, Kristina wrote: >All, >Our discussion today of application of the ICANN fee to names >deleted during AGP focused on the regular ICANN budget cycle. I had >understood from our 31 October meeting that it may be possible to >pursue levying the fee through an interim or special budgeting >process, and that we would receive from staff further information >about that possibility and a potential timetable. > >I don't recall receiving any further information. Did we receive >it? If so, would someone please point it out for me? If we didn't, >I believe it would be helpful to have before Delhi. To the extent >it can be provided quickly, it would be especially helpful for the >design team to have before Delhi. > >Thanks. >Kristina

1 0

Domain Tasting - Follow up on possibility of fee application through interim or special budget process
by Rosette, Kristina Jan. 18, 2008

Jan. 18, 2008

All, Our discussion today of application of the ICANN fee to names deleted during AGP focused on the regular ICANN budget cycle. I had understood from our 31 October meeting that it may be possible to pursue levying the fee through an interim or special budgeting process, and that we would receive from staff further information about that possibility and a potential timetable. I don't recall receiving any further information. Did we receive it? If so, would someone please point it out for me? If we didn't, I believe it would be helpful to have before Delhi. To the extent it can be provided quickly, it would be especially helpful for the design team to have before Delhi. Thanks. Kristina

1 0