March 2008 - council - lists.icann.org

Change of Council meeting time from 19:00 UTC to 15:00 UTC ??
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG 20 Mar '08

20 Mar '08

Dear Council Members, Would a change in meeting time on 27 March 2008 work for everyone? The change being from the scheduled 19:00 UTC to 15:00 UTC? 15:00 UTC gives a time spread of: 08:00 PDT, 11:00 EDT, Buenos Aires/Rio 12:00 noon, 16:00 CET, 18:00 Amman, 19:00 Dubai, 22:00 Phnom Penh, 23:00 Singapore/HongKong Please let me know off the council mailing list. Thank you very much. Kind regards, Glen -- Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

3 2

RE: [council] Motion for absentee voting
by Gomes, Chuck 20 Mar '08

20 Mar '08

Philip, My apologies Philip; after going back and looking at what Liz sent, I see that the wording you sent is exactly what Liz sent for the new paragraph c. But I believe your motion just covers Bylaws Article X, Section 3.8.c, the proposed new paragraph; I wonder whether the motion should include the entire Section 3.8 because there are appear to be some minor edits in other parts of Section 8. It may be a minor point that we don't need to worry about but I raise it for consideration. Chuck -----Original Message----- From: Gomes, Chuck Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 12:00 PM To: 'Philip Sheppard'; 'GNSO Council' Subject: RE: [council] Motion for absentee voting What new wording from the GC? My understanding was that the wording Liz sent was from the GC and it is different than what you sent. Did I miss a communication somewhere? I will forward to you Liz's message that I am referring to. Maybe it is not the latest. Chuck -----Original Message----- From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 11:12 AM To: 'GNSO Council' Subject: RE: [council] Motion for absentee voting Chuck, this is the proposal for e-voting but in the new wording from the GC ! Philip

2 1

Motion for absentee voting
by Philip Sheppard 20 Mar '08

20 Mar '08

A second please for this motion. Philip --------------------------------------- Whereas Council members are from time to time disenfranchised from voting by the current ICANN by-laws, Council requests the Board to adopt the following change to the bylaws drafted by the ICANN general council's office to permit absentee voting in certain specific circumstances. Add to:ICANN Bylaws ARTICLE X: Section 3. 8 c. Absentee voting. Members that are absent from a meeting at the time of a vote on whether to initiate a PDP, forward a policy recommendation to the Board, or fill a position open for election may vote by absentee ballot. The GNSO Secretariat will provide reasonable means for transmitting and authenticating absentee ballots, which could include voting by telephone, e-mail, or web-based interface. Absentee ballots must be submitted within 72 hours after the start of the meeting in which a vote is initiated, except that in exceptional circumstances announced at the time of the vote the Chair may reduce this time to 24 hours or extend the time to 7 days. Philip Sheppard

2 3

Re: [council] Motion for absentee voting
by cyrilchua＠atmdlaw.com.sg 20 Mar '08

20 Mar '08

Support. Kind regards, Cyril Chua Partner IP & Technology Group -------- Alban Tay Mahtani & de Silva LLP 39 Robinson Road #07-01, Robinson Point, Singapore 068911 Tel: (65) 6534 5266 / Fax: (65) 6223 8762 / DID: (65) 6428 9812 http://www.atmdlaw.com.sg -------- ALBAN TAY MAHTANI & DE SILVA LLP < This message (including attachments) contains privileged and confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not to take any action in reliance on it nor to disseminate, distribute, publish or copy this message. If you have received this message in error, please accept our apologies, delete all copies from your system and notify us at mail(a)atmdlaw.com.sg. Unless it relates to the official business of ATMD, any opinions or matters expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Philip Sheppard" [philip.sheppard(a)aim.be] Sent: 03/20/2008 11:02 AM CET To: "'GNSO Council'" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] Motion for absentee voting A second please for this motion. Philip --------------------------------------- Whereas Council members are from time to time disenfranchised from voting by the current ICANN by-laws, Council requests the Board to adopt the following change to the bylaws drafted by the ICANN general council's office to permit absentee voting in certain specific circumstances. Add to:ICANN Bylaws ARTICLE X: Section 3. 8 c. Absentee voting. Members that are absent from a meeting at the time of a vote on whether to initiate a PDP, forward a policy recommendation to the Board, or fill a position open for election may vote by absentee ballot. The GNSO Secretariat will provide reasonable means for transmitting and authenticating absentee ballots, which could include voting by telephone, e-mail, or web-based interface. Absentee ballots must be submitted within 72 hours after the start of the meeting in which a vote is initiated, except that in exceptional circumstances announced at the time of the vote the Chair may reduce this time to 24 hours or extend the time to 7 days. Philip Sheppard

1 0

Proposed GNSO Council Agenda 27 March 2008
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG 20 Mar '08

20 Mar '08

Proposed GNSO Council Agenda 27 March 2008 This agenda was established according to the Rules of Procedure for the GNSO Council Coordinated Universal Time UTC 19:00 - see below for local times (12:00 Los Angeles, 15:00 Washington DC, 19:00 London, 20:00 Brussels, 06:00 Melbourne, next day) Avri Doria will be chairing the GNSO Council meeting Scheduled time for meeting 120 minutes. Dial-in numbers sent individually to Council members. Item 0: Roll call of Council members (5 mins) Item 1: Update any statements of interest (5 mins) Item 2: Review/amend agenda (5 mins) Item 3: Approve GNSO minutes of 31 January 2008 (5 mins) http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg04828.html Item 4: Confirm Election Results for ICANN Board seat 14 (5 mins) Please check your vote against your code http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg04814.html Item 5: Update from Denise Michel on Board activities (15 mins) 5.1 Discuss feedback from Board on new gTLD process Item 6: IDNC update - Edmon Chung (10 mins) Item 7: GNSO - ccNSO relations (10 mins) Item 8: GNSO Improvements - Discuss planning group (20 mins) 8.1 Add members to initial planning group Item 9: Discuss Whois report - Start discussions on what to ask for a bid on. (20 mins) http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois-privacy/whois-study-suggestion-report-25… Item 10: Report on Single-Character Domain Names at the second -level (20 mins) - determine next steps ICANN synthesis on Single-Character Domain Names at the Second-Level http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/icann-synthesis-on-sldns-27feb08.pdf Item 11: Vote on Electronic Voting (15 mins) Absentee voting bylaw amendment http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/absentee-voting-bylaw-amendment-15feb08.pdf Item 12: Transfer Denial Reasons PDP Update (10 mins) INTER-REGISTRAR TRANSFER POLICY ISSUES - PDP Recommendations - 19 Mar 08 http://gnso.icann.org/issues/transfers/gnso-initial-report-on-irt-policy-17… Item 13: AOB (5 mins) Item 14: Action Item Review (5 mins) http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/pending-action-list.pdf (12:00 Los Angeles, 15:00 Washington DC, 19:00 London, 20:00 Brussels, 06:00 Melbourne, next day) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Local time between October and March, Winter in the NORTHERN hemisphere ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 19:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PST) UTC-8-1DST 12:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5+1DST 15:00 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil UTC-3+0DST 16:00 Buenos Aires, Argentina UTC-3+0DST 16:00 London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 19:00 Brussels, Belgium (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 20:00 Karlsruhe, Germany (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 20:00 Barcelona, Spain (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 20:00 Oslo, Norway (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 20:00 Amman, Jordan UTC+2+1DST 22:00 Phnom Penh, Cambodia UTC+7+0DST 02:00 Hong Kong, China UTC+8+0DST 03:00 Singapore, Singapore UTC+8+0DST 03:00 Melbourne, Australia (EST) UTC+10+1DST 06:00 (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 -- Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

FW: [REGYCON] FW: [REGYCON] FW: [council] ICANN Synthesis on Single-Character Names at the Second-Level
by Gomes, Chuck 19 Mar '08

19 Mar '08

In anticipation of our planned discussion of the single-character second-level names issue on 27 March, I am forwarding the following email that raises a fundamental question on that issue. It seems to me that it would be good for us to understand whether or not additional policy development work is need on this issue. Chuck ________________________________ From: GNSO Registry Constituency Planning [mailto:REGYCON-L@NIC.MUSEUM] On Behalf Of Neuman, Jeff Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 10:19 AM To: REGYCON-L(a)NIC.MUSEUM Subject: [REGYCON] FW: [REGYCON] FW: [council] ICANN Synthesis on Single-Character Names at the Second-Level All, Here is the note I sent on 2/27 that has not been answered. I have sent a reminder to ICANN's GC office several times since then to get an answer. Please feel free to post. Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq. Sr. Director, Law, Advanced Services & Business Development NeuStar, Inc. e-mail: Jeff.Neuman(a)Neustar.us <mailto:Jeff.Neuman@Neustar.us> ________________________________ From: Neuman, Jeff Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 9:17 PM To: 'GNSO Registry Constituency Planning'; 'Patrick Jones'; 'Craig Schwartz' Cc: halloran(a)icann.org; John Jeffrey Subject: RE: [REGYCON] FW: [council] ICANN Synthesis on Single-Character Names at the Second-Level I am cc'ing Patrick, Craig, Dan and John on this so I can repeat the same questions I have now asked twice to ICANN staff and Board members. I even note that Craig took notes at the constituency meeting in Dehli to follow up on these questions. I would like the following answered: Does ICANN believe that they can force gTLD Registries to allocate single letter domain names in the first place through a Consensus Policy? I note the following statement in the report: "ICANN has received many inquiries from third parties seeking to register single-character domain names, has advised these parties that the names are reserved, and informed these parties that the reservation can be removed through a bottom-up process. - On what basis did ICANN make these statements? I do not believe that ICANN (or the community) can force these reservations to be removed without registry consent even if there is a Consensus Policy. If ICANN feels differently, please explain the rationale of your statement. Let me expand on why I believe ICANN cannot force the allocation of single letter domains. The following is from the .biz agreement (also in .com, .net, .info and others) which states that Consensus policies may not "3.1 (b)(v)(I) alter services that have been implemented pursuant to Section 3.1(d) of this Agreement (unless justified by compelling and just cause based on Security and Stability." 3.1(d) is the section talking about Registry Operations. It includes the following: "3.1 (d)(i)(A) Registry Operator shall reserve, and not register any TLD strings (i) appearing on the list of reserved TLD strings attached as Appendix 6 hereto or (ii) located at http://data.iana.org/TLD/tlds-alpha-by-domain.txt for initial (i.e., other than renewal) registration at the second level within the TLD." So, it states that a consensus policy may not modify the reserved names list "Unless justified by compelling and just cause based on security and stability." ICANN - Where is the compelling security justification?? Thanks. Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq. Sr. Director, Law, Advanced Services & Business Development NeuStar, Inc. e-mail: Jeff.Neuman(a)Neustar.us <mailto:Jeff.Neuman@Neustar.us> ________________________________ From: GNSO Registry Constituency Planning [mailto:REGYCON-L@NIC.MUSEUM] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 8:14 PM To: REGYCON-L(a)NIC.MUSEUM Subject: [REGYCON] FW: [council] ICANN Synthesis on Single-Character Names at the Second-Level I haven't had a chance to read this yet but thought I would forward it right away. Chuck ________________________________ From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Patrick Jones Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 7:22 PM To: council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: [council] ICANN Synthesis on Single-Character Names at the Second-Level Prior to the Delhi meeting I advised the Council that staff was preparing a paper on single-character domain names at the second-level. The attached ICANN Synthesis on Single-Character Domain Names at the Second-Level is being sent to the Council for information and discussion. Staff is working on engagement of a qualified entity or entities to assist with additional process development for various auction needs. Further information will be provided to the community and the Council. In the meantime, could you place this paper on the schedule near the end of the Council meeting for discussion on 6 March? Regards, Patrick Patrick L. Jones Registry Liaison Manager & Coordinator, ICANN Nominating Committee Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330 Marina del Rey, CA 90292 Tel: +1 310 301 3861 Fax: +1 310 823 8649 patrick.jones(a)icann.org

2 2

Upcoming agenda questions:
by Avri Doria 19 Mar '08

19 Mar '08

Hi, We (Chuck, Glen and I) am in the process of putting together the agenda for the meeting on the 27th. I have some questions: - Is someone going to offer a motion regarding electronic voting. - re the Whois studies discussion - is there need to invite Lorrie Cranor, the expert who was consulted in preparing the report, to the meeting. I have been informed that she is available, but we don't want to waster her time, or ICANN budget, if we don't have any specific questions for her at this time. - On March 6 Denise reported that the Board was waiting for the GNSO and/or CCNSO to submit a followup to our counter-point letters. Is this something we want to pursue or are we happy with the way things are going? Note: As I mentioned briefly at the end of the previous meeting, the ccNSO has contacted me regarding the Paris meeting with a proposal that we meet together on Thursday afternoon. I think this is a good idea. What do others think? One pending issue is whether this is a council-council meeting, as it was last time, or an SO-SO meeting? As I understand it, the ccNSO generally meets in full SO mode. If it is to be a SO-SO meeting, I would like to find a volunteer to work with the ccNSO volunteer to set this up. I will add this to the agenda, but wanted to bring up the issue. thanks. a.

2 1

Draft GNSO Council minutes 31 January 2008
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG 19 Mar '08

19 Mar '08

[To: council[at]gnso.icann.org] Dear Council Members, Attached, please find the draft minutes of the GNSO Council teleconference held on 31 January 2008. Please let me know if you would like any changes 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

1 0

GNSO Initial Report on Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy: Clarification of Reasons for Denial - Call for Comments
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG 19 Mar '08

19 Mar '08

[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-17mar08.htm GNSO Initial Report on Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy: Clarification of Reasons for Denial 17 March 2008 The GNSO Initial Report on Inter/Registrar Transfer Policy: Clarification of Reasons for Denial [PDF, 229K] has been posted for comment. http://www.icann.org/public_comment/#transfer-policy-2008 In September 2007, a report into the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (the rules for transfer of domain names between registrars) asked ICANN to draw up an Issues Report to review possible changes. Four clauses in the policy were identified as being unclear when it came to denying a transfer, something that had led to a variation in practices between registrars. The Issues Report [pdf] http://gnso.icann.org/issues/transfers/issues-report-transfer-denial-clarifi cations-19oct07.pdf went into greater overall detail and was then put out for comment to the GNSO's constituencies. That process is captured in an Initial Report http://gnso.icann.org/issues/transfers/gnso-initial-report-on-irt-policy-17m ar08.pdf which is now being put out for public comment as the first step in a Policy Development Process (PDP) per ICANN's bylaws, see: http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#AnnexA The report concludes that there is general support for more work being done on clarifying the language in the policy. Some suggested wording for those changes is contained in the constituency comments in an appendix at the end of the Initial Report. http://gnso.icann.org/issues/transfers/gnso-initial-report-on-irt-policy-17m ar08.pdf Comments are sought specifically on the interpretation and phrasing of the four reasons for transfer denials, as further elaborated in the report. A summary/analysis of comments to this public comment period will form part of a final report to the GNSO Council near the end of April. The Final Report will then form the basis of discussion by the GNSO Council toward possible changes. The comment period will be from 18 March 2008 to 7 April 2008. Comments may be submitted by email to: <transfer-policy-2008(a)icann.org> Comments may be viewed at: http://forum.icann.org/lists/transfer-policy-2008/. -- Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Final Recommendation Document for IRTP PDPs
by Gomes, Chuck 19 Mar '08

19 Mar '08

Here is the Final Recommendation Document for IRTP PDPs prepared by the small team that volunteered to make recommendations regarding how to proceed with the remaining 19 IRTP issues. Please review it prior to our meeting on 27 March to facilitate initial discussion of next steps in that meeting. Also, constituencies representatives may send this to your constituencies for their review and comment per your constituency procedures. In the meantime, if there are any questions, please let me know. Chuck

1 0