June 2008 - council - lists.icann.org

Proposed Travel Policy
by Tim Ruiz June 22, 2008

June 22, 2008

We had briefly discussed the Council submitting a comment on the proposed SO travel funding. To put the current proposal in perspective you need to first look at the projected contributions that come through the SOs in the currently proposed budget for FY09: GNSO: $56,051,000 ccNSO: $2,300,000 ASO: $823,000 Based on that, the percentage of each SOs contribution that is being handed back to fund travel is as follows: GNSO: $184,800 (0.33% of contribution) ccNSO: $170,400 (7.41% of contribution) ASO: $127,200 (15.46% of contribution) In my opinion, there is no rationale that justifies these returns for travel funding. The majority of the members of the Registrar Constituency opposes the proposed model, and in fact believe that no travel funding should be provided to the Council at all. However, understanding that the majority of the Council believes otherwise I would like to propose that the Council consider supporting one of these alternative funding models (some additional detail may be needed): 1. Travel support to the SOs should be based in part on the level of contrinbution to ICANN's budget. To the extent that travel support is provided to the GNSO, the funds should be allocated to each constituency and each constituency should have the authority to allocate that support among its members and representatives for travel or other constituency needs. 2. That all funds for SO travel support be pooled, and support would be applied for on a demonstrated needs basis. See the proposal submitted by Ken Stubbs at: http://forum.icann.org/lists/travel-support-draft/msg00006.html Tim

1 0

Notice of New Registry Service proposal posted
by Patrick Jones June 22, 2008

June 22, 2008

Dear Council members, ICANN has commenced its 15-calendar day preliminary determination period on a request from Afilias for an Abusive Use Policy in .INFO. Information on the proposal can be found at http://www.icann.org/registries/rsep/#2008007. Although public comments can be submitted at any time on a registry services proposal to registryservice at icann.org, this is not notification of a formal comment period. Information on the Registry Services Evaluation Process can be found at http://www.icann.org/registries/rsep/. Please let me know if you have additional questions. Regards, Patrick -- Patrick L. Jones Registry Liaison Manager & Coordinator, ICANN Nominating Committee Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & 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

1 0

Proposed Motion for 25 June on GNSO "Improvments"
by Avri Doria June 21, 2008

June 21, 2008

Hi Based on my understanding of the results of today's meeting, I have drafted the following motion. thanks a. Motion: Avri Doria Second: Whereas it is expected that ICANN Board of Directors will adopt recommendations for GNSO "Improvements" and in response to Board resolution 2008.02.15.03 that directed the ICANN Staff in consultation with GNSO to develop an implementation plan And whereas such a plan was developed by the Planning Team composed of staff and GNSO members working jointly and in cooperation, Therefore: The GSNO Council approves the Framework defined in GNSO Improvements – Top Level Plan of 21 June 2008 prepared by the GNSO Improvements Planning Team as documented in (url) and request that constituencies and nomcom appointees begin the task of naming representatives to serve in the two Standing Committees as defined in the Top Level Plan.

1 0

blueboard
by Avri Doria June 21, 2008

June 21, 2008

Hi, I have attached the blueboard from today's blue sky meeting. i want to remind everyone of a couple of points. - this is te start of a rolling list of issues that some of the people who attended today's meeting think might be worth discussing in terms of policy implications for the GNSO and ICANN. - this is _not_ a plan - there was no agreement on the wording of the issues - there is no commitment anywhere about anything in this list other then they are on a list of things that will discussed further. Over time as the list matures and some comments are added to the list, as well as possibly new items and depending what comes out of the constituency meetings, the public meeting and future council meetings, we may start to prioritize some of the items that are on this list in order to create a draft policy strategy plan for the future. But I reiterate this list is just a first step in that direction with a long ways to go yet. With all sorts of constituency and public reviews to happen before it ever becomes a plan. I will abstract the information from this list to create a slide or two for the public meeting. Thanks to everyone who risked contributing their thoughts to this process. And thanks to Olof for facilitating the beginning of this process. a.

1 0

Update on GNSO Council activities regarding front running
by Liz Gasster June 21, 2008

June 21, 2008

All, Today the Council discussed next steps on front running. The Council appreciates the interest of those who have volunteered to join this group. At the meeting today, the Council noted the need to do the following before initiating work by this group, as follows: 1. Updated input from the ALAC on whether further work is needed following anticipated Board action on domain tasting 2. Updated information on whether the SSAC is looking further at this issue (or has immediate plans to do so) 3. Verification as to the Board's anticipated actions on domain tasting, once decided 4. The Council learned that ICANN's operations staff will be initiating a study to determine whether front running is occurring The Council suggests that these updates and activities conclude before work is initiated by this group. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Liz

1 0

revision to draft GNSO improvements top level plan
by Liz Gasster June 21, 2008

June 21, 2008

All, Attached please find a revised version of the GNSO Improvements Top Level Plan, based on Council discussions today. Please let me know ASAP if there are additional changes needed. Thanks, Liz

1 0

summary of possible WHOIS studies w/ hypotheses only
by Liz Gasster June 21, 2008

June 21, 2008

All, as discussed in today's meeting, attached please find an abbreviated summary of WHOIS study suggestions which includes each hypothesis (excluding the GAC suggestions) but excludes the staff commentary provided in the earlier version. Unfortunately the summary is still 6 pages long - but easier to navigate than the original 12-page document. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Liz

2 1

RE: statement and response on the IDNC Interim Report
by Edmon Chung June 19, 2008

June 19, 2008

Hi Everyone, Not sure if the previous file/email did get through to everyone. But anyway, here is a slightly updated version based on the newly published draft from the IDNC (http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-3-13jun08-en.htm / http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/idn-cctld-fast-track-draft-final-report -recommendations-13jun08.pdf). Edmon > -----Original Message----- > From: Edmon Chung [mailto:edmon@dotasia.org] > Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 12:11 AM > To: 'gnso-idnc-initial(a)icann.org' > Cc: 'GNSO.SECRETARIAT(a)GNSO.ICANN.ORG'; 'Avri Doria' > Subject: RE: statement and response on the IDNC Interim Report > > Sending this again, as it seems the previous one didn't go through. > Edmon > > PS. Glen/Avri, in case this doesn't go through to the list, could you let me know. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Edmon Chung [mailto:edmon@dotasia.org] > Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 3:50 PM > To: 'gnso-idnc-initial(a)icann.org' > Subject: RE: [council] RE: statement and response on the IDNC Interim Report > > Hi Everyone, > > This is long over due... anyway, please find a brief document I have drafted as > mentioned previously. > > Comments welcome. Since we will be having a council meeting later this week, > perhaps it is best we decide how to move forward on this after that. But meanwhile > please provide your thoughts. > > Edmon > > > PS. Glen/Avri, is it appropriate to post this to the GNSO wiki, and how do I do that? > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org > > [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Edmon Chung > > Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 7:10 PM > > To: 'Council GNSO' > > Cc: gnso-idnc-initial(a)icann.org > > Subject: [council] RE: statement and response on the IDNC Interim > > Report > > > > > > It seems I have not been able to send this email out to the > > 'gnso-idnc-initial(a)icann.org' list. > > Am sending to council instead. > > Edmon > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Edmon Chung [mailto:edmon@dotasia.org] > > > Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2008 7:05 PM > > > To: 'gnso-idnc-initial(a)icann.org' > > > Cc: 'jonb' > > > Subject: RE: statement and response on the IDNC Interim Report > > > > > > I just realized that my earlier message was bounced. I am not sure > > > if it > > was > > > because I used a different account (edmon(a)registry.asia vs. > > edmon(a)dotasia.org) > > > or it was because the mailing-list was closed down. Anyway, am > > > trying > > again. > > > Edmon > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Edmon Chung [mailto:edmon@registry.asia] > > > > Sent: Friday, May 02, 2008 4:37 PM > > > > To: 'gnso-idnc-initial(a)icann.org' > > > > Cc: 'jonb' > > > > Subject: statement and response on the IDNC Interim Report > > > > > > > > Hi Everyone, > > > > > > > > I know this is 2 weeks overdue, but would like to try to pick this > > > > up > > and move > > > > quickly. > > > > > > > > Here are the few topics I think we should focus on for a response: > > > > > > > > 1. Fast Track as an ongoing process > > > > - acceptable but should ensure the continued security and > > > > stability > > of the > > > > Internet > > > > - i.e. introduction/delegations must be predictable and not ad hoc > > > > - i.e. in rounds and not "at anytime" > > > > - rules and mechanisms must be setup prior to the first round > > > > > > > > 2. Meaningful String > > > > - applaud the adoption of the criteria > > > > - agree with the adherence to official language > > > > - caution the use of exceptions > > > > > > > > 3. Non-contentious > > > > - charter states: " The purpose of the IDNC Working Group (IDNC > > > > WG) > > is to > > > > develop and report on feasible methods, if any, that would enable > > > > the > > > introduction, > > > > in a timely manner and in a manner that ensures the continued > > > > security > > and > > > > stability of the Internet, of a limited number of non-contentious > > > > IDN > > ccTLDs while > > > > the overall policy is being developed." > > > > - suggested change of scope to: " E: The proposed string and > > delegation > > > > request should be noncontentious > > > > within the territory" is not consistent with the charter > > > > > > > > 4. Objection mechanism > > > > - no discussion in the Interim report of why the > > > > - understand the sensitivities around a formal objection mechanism > > > > - informal process acceptable > > > > - without already built in a channel to facilitate the voicing of > > concerns > > > > would put undue pressure on ICANN board to make decision > > > > > > > > 5. Contractual relationship > > > > - without contractual relationship unable to bind Fast Track > > > > ccTLDs > > to PDP > > > > - overarching technical and techno-policy requirements for IDN > > deployment > > > > (IDN Guidelines, standards, IANA table etc.) > > > > - Fast Track is different from PDP and will not set precedence > > > > nor > > pre-empt > > > > PDP > > > > > > > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > > > I will draft a brief document over the weekend with the above (and > > incorporate > > > > other comments as they come in). > > > > > > > > Since there isn't much time before our next council call on May 8, > > perhaps it is > > > > best to coordinate over this mailing list. If others feel a > > teleconference would be > > > > better, please suggest to this list. > > > > > > > > Edmon > > > > > > > > > > > > PS. Glen, please add John Bing to the list.

1 0

GNSO Council and working session agendas for the PARIS meetings
by Glen de Saint Géry June 18, 2008

June 18, 2008

Dear Councillors, Please find the GNSO Related events schedule at: http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/gnso-paris-schedule-jun08.pdf The above highlights some of the events of particular interest to the GNSO Council and constituencies and should be read together with the ICANN schedule http://par.icann.org/en/schedule Please find the GNSO Council and working sessions proposed agendas at: http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/ It is an quick link from the home page: http://gnso.icann.org/ that takes you to all the agendas (Please note that there may be changes to the agendas) Agenda for GNSO working session 21 June 2008 http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/paris-agenda-21june08.shtml WIKI reference: https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?agenda_21_june_2008 Agenda for GNSO working session 22 June 2008 http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/paris-agenda-22june08.shtml WIKI reference: https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?agenda_22_june_2008 Agenda for the GNSO Open Council meeting 25 June 2008 http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/paris-agenda-25june08.shtml WIKI Reference: https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?agenda_25_june_2008 Agenda for the Joint ccNSO/GNSO Council meeting 26 June 2008 http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/paris-agenda-26june08.shtml WIKI Reference: https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?agenda_26_june_2008 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

1 0

Possible discussion points for IDNC discussions in Paris
by Gomes, Chuck June 18, 2008

June 18, 2008

I prepared the attached one pager to facilitate our discussion of the fast track in our working session and with the GAC, not intending to give it to the GAC. I eliminated 4 of the 15 points from the Executive Summary of our comments to the ccNSO/GAC issues paper because I thought they might not be as directly useful in our discussions in Paris. The remaining 11 points could serve as our agenda for this discussion in the working session on Sunday and help us decide what we want to communicate with the GAC. After a conversation with Suzanne Sene on this subject, I am convinced that we may be able to maximize our effectiveness in Paris if we take a position like the following, which I believe is consistent with our comments on the issues paper: "Neither territory IDN TLDs or generic IDN TLDs should be advantaged over the other; in other words, territory IDN TLDs should not be introduced before IDN gTLDs, nor should IDN gTLDs be introduced before territory IDN TLDs, unless one SO takes an unreasonably long period of time to finish implementation plans." For ease of reference, our full comments document can be found at http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/ccnso-gac-issues-report-idn-cctlds-gnso-res ponse-20feb08.pdf Chuck

1 0