October 2009 - council - lists.icann.org

Formal Petition and Charter of the Proposed New City Top-Level Domain Constituency
by Robert Hoggarth Nov. 2, 2010

Nov. 2, 2010

Dear GNSO Council Members; For your information, attached please find a copy of the Formal Petition and Charter of the proposed new City Top-Level Domain Constituency submitted by Dirk Krischenowski of dotBERLIN GmbH & Co. KG. This significant step represents the fourth formal new constituency petition submitted to the Board in the context of the new GNSO Improvements effort. The Staff will soon open a 30-day Public Comment Forum regarding the Petition which will extend into July. Any comments submitted in the Forum will be summarized for the Board's review. I have shared a copy of the attached documents with the Board and will be sending copies to the GNSO Constituencies leaders list as well. The document is now also posted on the GNSO Improvements web page at http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/newco-process-en.htm.@icann.org Please drop me a line if you have any questions or comments on this matter. Best regards, Rob Hoggarth Robert L. Hoggarth, Esq. Senior Policy Director ICANN 424 558 4805 robert.hoggarth(a)icann.org

1 1

FW: Proposal for updated charter of the JIG WG
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 2, 2009

Nov. 2, 2009

Forwarded From: Bart Boswinkel Hi Glen, Included the proposed updated charter for the JIG WG. Could you forward it to the GNSO Council and request to adopt the charter as well? The change is last paragraph. Proposed closing date is now either adoption of IDN ccPDP recommendations or adoption of new gTLD application Guidebook. Kind regards, Bart

4 5

Action Items aring from GNSO Council follow-up meeting
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 30, 2009

Oct. 30, 2009

Dear All, Action Items arising from the GNSO Council follow-up session on Thursday 29 October 2009. 1. Meeting times for Council meetings: Due date Friday 6 November. Meeting times to rotate. Work group to examine issue: *Stephane van Gelder - chair *Han Chuan Lee *Edmon Chung *Adrian Kinderis 2. Council meetings at 3 week intervals until Nairobi, then the intervals between meetings will be revisited. - Next Council meeting MONDAY 23 November 2009. Time to be determined. 3. GNSO Work prioritization process Work group: *Jaime Wagner *Chuck Gomes *Olga Cavalli *Adrian Kinderis - Identify Staff support - Adrian to provide links or references to useful prioritsation tools Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you and safe travels! Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org gnso(a)mobileemail.vodafone.fr http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Board Meeting - GAC Communique
by Adrian Kinderis Oct. 29, 2009

Oct. 29, 2009

All, I stood up in the Board Meeting today and asked about this. Here is what I am concerned about; 1. The GAC believes that there will be another DAG (no big news there nor issue) 2. Interestingly, the GAC believes that they will comment on this draft, whichever version, *IN NAIROBI*. That means that they (the GAC) believe the process will open for comment and that they will be able to provide their comments in Nairobi (i.e. March, 2010). From this we can assume, that the GAC assumes that no final Application Guidebook will be posted before Nairobi. Whist this isn't particularly ground breaking, nor determinative, it is significant that the GAC have this view. Just figured I'd share these thoughts will you all. Adrian Kinderis -----Original Message----- From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin Sent: Friday, 30 October 2009 12:12 PM To: Council GNSO Subject: [council] GAC Communiqué on new gTLDs >From GAC Communiqué: The GAC provided ICANN with extensive comments on the DAG version 2 in its letter to the Board dated 18th August. The GAC appreciates the reply provided by the Chairman of the Board on 22nd September. Following discussions in Seoul however, both between GAC members and with other stakeholders, the GAC feels that many of its concerns remain outstanding, related in particular to: - the need to take full account of the security, stability and resiliency issues including those identified in the recent root scaling reports. These concerned the potential cumulative effects of changes resulting from the introduction and implementation of DNSSEC, IDNs, new gTLDs and IPv6; - the importance of further economic studies to improve the community's understanding of all the costs, benefits and market impacts; - the need for more effective protection of intellectual property rights; - the ongoing discussions within the community regarding structural separation between registries and registrars, price caps and the potential impacts on competition in the DNS market; - the need to explore track differentiation between categories; - the need to respect national public interests and sovereign rights regarding strings with geographical meaning; - the need to assist developing countries which would otherwise be constrained by their limited access to financial and technical resources. In the expectation that a new draft of the Applicant Guidebook will be issued, the GAC does not intend to comment at this stage in detail on version 3. The GAC therefore intends to provide more comprehensive comments to the Board before the next meeting in Nairobi.

3 4

Re: [council] GNSO Board Report
by rosemary.sinclair＠atug.org.au Oct. 29, 2009

Oct. 29, 2009

Hi Chuck Will read when I get home I'm really looking forward to working with everyone over the next two years! Much to do and many ideas Cheers Rosemary Sent from my BlackBerry® from Optus -----Original Message----- From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes(a)verisign.com> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 12:45:26 To: <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] GNSO Board Report Here's is the report I delivered to the Board this morning in Seoul regarding our week of work. Chuck

1 0

Re: [council] GNSO Board Report
by rosemary.sinclair＠atug.org.au Oct. 29, 2009

Oct. 29, 2009

Hi Chuck Will read when I get home I'm really looking forward to working with everyone over the next two years! Much to do and many ideas Cheers Rosemary Sent from my BlackBerry® from Optus -----Original Message----- From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes(a)verisign.com> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 12:45:26 To: <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] GNSO Board Report Here's is the report I delivered to the Board this morning in Seoul regarding our week of work. Chuck

1 0

FW: GAC Communique
by Gomes, Chuck Oct. 29, 2009

Oct. 29, 2009

Here's the full text of the GAC communique delivered by Janis Karklins this morning. Chuck ________________________________ From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri@psg.com] Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 9:14 PM To: Gomes, Chuck Subject: Fwd: GAC Communique he probably meant to address this to you. a. Begin forwarded message: From: "Janis Karklins" <janis.karklins(a)icann.org> Date: 29 October 2009 11:23:46 GMT+09:00 To: <ceo(a)auda.org.au>, "'Avri Doria'" <avri(a)psg.com> Subject: GAC Communique FYI JK

1 0

GNSO Board Report
by Gomes, Chuck Oct. 29, 2009

Oct. 29, 2009

Here's is the report I delivered to the Board this morning in Seoul regarding our week of work. Chuck

1 0

GAC Communiqué on new gTLDs
by Bruce Tonkin Oct. 29, 2009

Oct. 29, 2009

>From GAC Communiqué: The GAC provided ICANN with extensive comments on the DAG version 2 in its letter to the Board dated 18th August. The GAC appreciates the reply provided by the Chairman of the Board on 22nd September. Following discussions in Seoul however, both between GAC members and with other stakeholders, the GAC feels that many of its concerns remain outstanding, related in particular to: - the need to take full account of the security, stability and resiliency issues including those identified in the recent root scaling reports. These concerned the potential cumulative effects of changes resulting from the introduction and implementation of DNSSEC, IDNs, new gTLDs and IPv6; - the importance of further economic studies to improve the community's understanding of all the costs, benefits and market impacts; - the need for more effective protection of intellectual property rights; - the ongoing discussions within the community regarding structural separation between registries and registrars, price caps and the potential impacts on competition in the DNS market; - the need to explore track differentiation between categories; - the need to respect national public interests and sovereign rights regarding strings with geographical meaning; - the need to assist developing countries which would otherwise be constrained by their limited access to financial and technical resources. In the expectation that a new draft of the Applicant Guidebook will be issued, the GAC does not intend to comment at this stage in detail on version 3. The GAC therefore intends to provide more comprehensive comments to the Board before the next meeting in Nairobi.

1 0

GNSO Council meeting in Seoul 28 October 2009
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 29, 2009

Oct. 29, 2009

Dear Councillors, Please find the presentations and transcript of the GNSO Council Public meeting held in Seoul on 28 October 2009 at: http://sel.icann.org/node/6708 The resolutions are posted to the Council mailing list http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg07807.html Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0