November 2009 - council - lists.icann.org

Formal Petition and Charter of the Proposed New City Top-Level Domain Constituency
by Robert Hoggarth Nov. 3, 2010

Nov. 3, 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

GNSO Council meetings: Proposed dates and times Dec 2009-Oct 2010
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 27, 2009

Nov. 27, 2009

Dear Councillors, Below is a link to the proposed dates and times for GNSO Council meetings through to the end of October 2010. http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/council-meetings-2009-2010.pdf In addition, the proposed dates and times for the Council meetings have been highlighted in colour on the GNSO calendar pages: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/index.html http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/index-2010.htm For your convenience, as well as being posted on the GNSO Council Wiki space, The GNSO Council Operating Procedures - 23 November 2009 http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/gnso-operating-procedures-clean-12nov09-en.p… have been posted on the left hand navigation bar under: GNSO Council Documents http://gnso.icann.org/council/docs Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

GNSO Council draft minutes 23 November 2009
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 27, 2009

Nov. 27, 2009

Dear Councillors, Attached please find the draft minutes of the GNSO Council meeting on 23 November 2009. Please let me know if you would like any changes to be made. Please note that following the new GNSO Council operating Procedures we no longer will need to approve minutes in our live meeting but each Councilor will individually be responsible for reviewing and commenting on the minutes. GNSO Council operating Procedures http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/gnso-operating-procedures-clean-12nov09-en.p… 3.5 Procedure to Produce the Minutes "Within 10 days of the meeting, the Chair and Vice Chairs will edit the draft and request the Secretariat to circulate the draft summary to GNSO Council members for comment and approval. All comments received will be accepted for inclusion into the draft minutes unless there are objections. If no objections are received within 10 days, the minutes will be deemed to have been approved for posting. All comments received from GNSO Council members will be incorporated in the summary unless there are objections from other GNSO Council members." Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Decision on whether to initiate a PDP regarding vertical integration of registries & registrars
by Gomes, Chuck Nov. 27, 2009

Nov. 27, 2009

In anticipation of receiving the Vertical Separation of Registries and Registrars Issues Report the end of next week (4 Dec), the current Bylaws require "the Council shall meet within fifteen (15) calendar days after receipt of such Report to vote on whether to initiate the PDP." That means we need a motion (or motions) for our next meeting on 17 Dec. It seems to me that for an issue like this that will be somewhat complicated, making a decision on initiating a PDP within as little as 13 days of receiving the issues report may be challenging, and even more so this time of year. Also, we will not have finished our project prioritization exercise by then. On the other hand, to the extent that a PDP could possibly result in delays of the introduction of new gTLDs, I think we don't want to contribute to any more delays if avoidable. So I am requesting Councilors to express your opinions in this regard. Should we consider deferring the PDP decision until January or should we vote on whether to initiate a PDP in our 17 Dec meeting? Note that we have two meetings in January on the 7th and the 28th. Your thoughts are requested. Chuck

4 4

FW: Email from Services Staff regarding Expert Advisory Groups
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 26, 2009

Nov. 26, 2009

Forwarded On Behalf Of Denise Michel Dear Community Members, As part of ICANN's work on the Applicant Guidebook for new gTLDs and the Board's direction to resolve the potential for malicious conduct over-arching issue, ICANN Staff is soliciting knowledgeable volunteers to serve on two temporary, expert advisory groups to study and develop proposed solutions for: 1. Enhancing access to zone file information; and 2. Establishing a high security TLD verification program. Attached are briefing papers on these topics that will be used for each group's kick-off call that is tentatively scheduled for Tuesday, 8 December (attached in both Word and PDF format). The call time, dial-in information and any associated materials will be provided next week. Additional information about these groups and their activities will be posted via a link on ICANN's new gTLD webpage (<http://icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/related-en.htm>). Recordings or minutes from the groups' conference calls will be publicly archived, and their outputs will be publicly posted and considered as part of ongoing Applicant Guidebook work. ICANN Staff invites the participation of experts from GNSO Stakeholder Groups, constituencies, advisory committees, and other interested parties. We look forward to your participation in this work. If you are interested in participating in either or both groups or have any questions, please email me at <craig.schwartz(a)icann.org<mailto:craig.schwartz@icann.org>> by Thursday, 3 December. Thank you. Craig Schwartz Chief gTLD Registry Liaison

1 0

Re: [council] Decision on whether to initiate a PDP regarding vertical integration of registries & registrars
by Taylor, David Nov. 26, 2009

Nov. 26, 2009

I would tend to think that given the complexities the 28 January date would be more realistic given the very short time left before 17 December and the Festive season prior to 7 January. David David Taylor Partner Lovells LLP Intellectual Property, Media and Technology Group 6 Avenue Kléber, 75116 Paris, France Tel:+33 (0) 1 53 67 47 47 Fax:+33 (0) 1 53 67 47 48 Email:drd@lovells.com www.lovells.com ________________________________ From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org To: council(a)gnso.icann.org Sent: Wed Nov 25 22:20:22 2009 Subject: [council] Decision on whether to initiate a PDP regarding vertical integration of registries & registrars In anticipation of receiving the Vertical Separation of Registries and Registrars Issues Report the end of next week (4 Dec), the current Bylaws require "the Council shall meet within fifteen (15) calendar days after receipt of such Report to vote on whether to initiate the PDP." That means we need a motion (or motions) for our next meeting on 17 Dec. It seems to me that for an issue like this that will be somewhat complicated, making a decision on initiating a PDP within as little as 13 days of receiving the issues report may be challenging, and even more so this time of year. Also, we will not have finished our project prioritization exercise by then. On the other hand, to the extent that a PDP could possibly result in delays of the introduction of new gTLDs, I think we don't want to contribute to any more delays if avoidable. So I am requesting Councilors to express your opinions in this regard. Should we consider deferring the PDP decision until January or should we vote on whether to initiate a PDP in our 17 Dec meeting? Note that we have two meetings in January on the 7th and the 28th. Your thoughts are requested. Chuck

2 1

New Registrar Agreement Covers Most Registrations
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 25, 2009

Nov. 25, 2009

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-24nov09-en.htm ________________________________ New Registrar Agreement Covers Most Registrations Over 88 percent of domain names covered by new protections 24 November 2009 Less than six months after new registrant protections were approved by the ICANN Board, over 88 percent of all generic domain names are now covered. The protections include improved ways of storing data that require registration companies to submit to more stringent rules. These are included in a revised contract between ICANN and registrars, called the Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA). Since the revised RAA was approved on 21 May 2009, 650 registrars have voluntarily agreed to be bound by the new agreement; collectively they represent 88 percent of all generic top-level domains registered. In return, those that have signed the new agreement are recognized by ICANN on its listing of accredited companies. Under their existing contract, registrars are not required to sign up to the new RAA until their existing agreement ends, but they can voluntarily sign up early. The high level of coverage achieved to date is due primarily to these voluntary early adopters. ICANN CEO and President Rod Beckstrom said of the high sign-up rate: "The fact that the vast majority of generic domain names are now covered by these protections is a clear sign of the industry's goodwill and its commitment to effective self-regulation - especially since some of these protections come at a cost to the companies themselves. It is an extraordinary achievement in a very short time." Some of the additional protections afforded registrants under the new contract include: * Enhanced enforcement tools to assure registrar compliance with ICANN policies * Enhanced data escrow requirements to protect registrants that use privacy or proxy services * A Registrant Rights & Responsibilities document * New requirements placed on resellers * Improved contact information requirements * Registrar required training program "Registrars and the ICANN community successfully collaborated to make sure consumers are well protected while respecting the competitive marketplace ICANN has made part of its mandate," said Mason Cole, Vice President of Oversee.net and chair of the Registrar Stakeholder Group. "It's encouraging to see how quickly and assertively registrars have adopted the terms of the new agreement." As an aid to potential registrants, ICANN has added an indicator on each of our public lists of registrars to show which registrars have adopted the 2009 RAA. See: * http://www.internic.net/regist.html * http://www.icann.org/en/registrars/accreditation-qualified-list.html * http://www.icann.org/en/registrars/accredited-list.html ________________________________ Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Discussion around face 2 face meetings
by Stéphane Van Gelder Nov. 25, 2009

Nov. 25, 2009

Dear all, There currently seems to be a trend towards more and more requests being made for ICANN resources to fund F2F meetings. This trend now seems to be spilling over into work teams that would previously have probably not made them but simply endeavored to complete their work through teleconference calls and email correspondence. On a personal basis, I find this trend worrying as it places an undue financial burden on ICANN and is not, in my view, viable in the long term unless we accept that a) ICANN's budget needs to grow exponentially and without limits and b) that participation in work teams means making oneself available to travel (with the inherent tendency that follows for only those people whom either have lots of time to devote to the ICANN process will tend to participate). However, I have not before approached this topic with the Council as I did not have concrete examples to provide. But a recent example has come to light, and I have been asked by the RrSG to forward the following message to the Council. This message comes from a member of PPSC WT who has asked that it be very clearly stated that this comment is not in any way meant as a criticism of Jeff Neuman, the chair of the group, whom has done an excellent job despite some difficult working conditions. Message reads: The PPSC PDP Work Team has proposed an ICANN-funded face-to-face meeting in Washington DC next year. The RrSG objects to this proposal on the following grounds: We are concerned about the potential for precedent this move would set for future PDPs struggling to meet the challenges of participation and schedule pressure. We are concerned about an expansion of ICANN-funded travel, and the impact this will have on budgets & fees. As such, we request that this (and any future) proposed meetings that call for ICANN funding be subject to a full vote of the Council, and are not decided unilaterally at the working-group level. It is difficult to commit support, in advance, for any meeting that does not have a detailed & defined agenda. And finally, we believe that an emphasis on face-to-face meetings (as opposed to remote teleconferences / webcasts) is a retreat from ICANN's mission of global participation and inclusion of interests outside the US. Thanks, Stéphane

1 0

GNSO Council meetings: Proposed dates and times Dec 2009-Oct 2010
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 24, 2009

Nov. 24, 2009

Dear Councillors, The proposed dates and times for GNSO Council meetings through to the end of October 2010, as agreed upon at the Council meeting yesterday, Monday 23 November 2009, have been posted on the GNSO calendar at: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/index.html http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/index-2010.htm The next Council meeting is scheduled on Thursday, 17 December 2009 at 15:00 UTC. Please note that some of these dates may change after March if the Council decides to have meetings once a month instead of the current three week cycle. Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Preparations for Nairobi
by Steve Antonoff Nov. 23, 2009

Nov. 23, 2009

The attached message is being provided by the ICANN Constituency Travel Team in preparation for travel to Nairobi, Kenya for ICANN's 37th meeting. This message is also posted to the "Community Travel Support" page on ICANN's website. The full travel summary will be distributed to nominated travelers by the end of December - however, given the potential challenges of either obtaining a visa or the length of time it will take to get to/from Kenya, or both, potential travelers should be aware of these issues in order to effectively pre-plan. If you believe you may be affected by either issue (or know of someone who may be affected), you may contact the ICANN Constituency Travel Team at constituency-travel(a)icann.org<mailto:constituency-travel@icann.org> immediately to begin planning. Please contact the ICANN Constituency Travel Team at constituency-travel(a)icann.org<mailto:constituency-travel@icann.org> if you have any questions. Thank you, The ICANN Constituency Travel Team (Steve Antonoff, Karen Lettner, Matt Ashtiani) Best Regards, Steve Antonoff Director of Human Resources 310-301-3885 (direct line) ICANN 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330 Marina del Rey, CA 90292

1 0