October 2010 - council - lists.icann.org

FW: Mary Wong absence from council meeting
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 27, 2010

Oct. 27, 2010

-----Original Message----- Forwarded From: Avri Doria As per the proxy requirements for absence: Mary Wong will be absent from the upcoming council meeting. For any votes that may occur, the NCSG has assigned her proxy to Wendy Seltzer. Thank you. Avri Doria Chair, NCSG Executive Committee Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Updated GNSO Council Agenda for 28 October 2010 at 20 UTC
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 26, 2010

Oct. 26, 2010

Dear All, Please find the updated GNSO Council Agenda for 28 October 2010 at 20 UTC. http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-council-28oct10-en.htm https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?proposed_agenda_28_october_2010 The updates items are : Item 3: Election of Council Chair & Vice Chairs (15 minutes) Item 4: Whois Studies (15 minutes) Item 7: Planning for Cartagena Meetings (15 minutes) 7.1 Overview of plans/schedule (Stéphane Van Gelder, Glen de Saint Géry) http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/gnso-draft-agenda-cartagena-26oct10-en.pdf Item 9: Other Business (5 Minutes) 9.1 Final Report on Proposals for Improvements to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement <http://gnso.icann.org/issues/raa/raa-improvements-proposal-final-report-18o…> http://gnso.icann.org/issues/raa/raa-improvements-proposal-final-report-18o… Agenda for GNSO Council Meeting 28 October 2010. This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures approved 5 August 2010 for the GNSO Council. http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-op-procedures-05aug10-en.pdf For convenience: * An excerpt of the ICANN Bylaws defining the voting thresholds is provided in Appendix 1 at the end of this agenda. * An excerpt from the Council Operating Procedures defining the absentee voting procedures is provided in Appendix 2 at the end of this agenda. Meeting Time 20:00 UTC See the following and http://www.timeanddate.com/ for other times: 13:00 PDT; 15:00 CDT; 16:00 EST; 17:00 Buenos Aires; 17:00 Brazil; 22:00 CET; 24:00 Moscow Friday, 29 October 01:00 Pakistan; 04:00 Hong Kong; 05:00 Tokyo, 07:00 Melbourne Dial-in numbers will be sent individually to Council members. Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if a dial out call is needed. GNSO Council meeting audiocast http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u Item 1: Administrative matters (15 minutes) 1.1 Roll call of Council members and polling for Disclosures of Interest * Per the GNSO Operating Procedures, Section 5.4, we are required to poll Councilors regarding "any direct or indirect interests that may affect a Relevant Party's judgment on an issue that is under review, consideration, or discussion" in this meeting. Here is the definition provided in the procedures: "Disclosure of Interest: Relevant to a specific issue at a specific time. A written statement made by a Relevant Party of direct and indirect interests that may be commercial (e.g. monetary payment) or non-commercial (e.g. non-tangible benefit such as publicity, political or academic visibility) and may affect, or be perceived to affect, the Relevant Party's judgment on a specific issue." The main issues for this meeting are * GNSO Prioritization * Election Procedures for Council Chair & Vice Chairs * Whois Studies * Voting Procedures when Councilors are absent &/or must abstain * Disclosure of Interest Procedures 1.2 Update any statements of interest Note that revised SoI"s were received from: * Terry Davis<http://gnso.icann.org/council/soi/davis-soi-19oct10-en.htm> * David Taylor<http://gnso.icann.org/council/soi/taylor-soi-21oct10.htm> 1.3 Review/amend agenda 1.4. Note the status of minutes for the previous Council meeting per the GNSO Operating Procedures: * 7 October 2010 meeting minutes <http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg09798.html%20%20> - Scheduled for approval on 28 October 2010. Item 2: GNSO Project Prioritization (20 minutes) 2.1 Refer to posted project ratings<http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/new-gtld-applicant-support-draft-recom…>: http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-work-prioritization-project-list-value-r… 2.2 Key points made in the 15 July Council meeting (from meeting minutes): * ". . . not a useful exercise, not much was learnt, should not proceed further with the prioritization exercise." * ". . . spending more time on the exercise will not accomplish useful results." * "It was a difficult exercise, policy matters were not prioritized and the core issue, management of the workload, still has not been resolved." * "The exercise was intended as a first step and not intended to solve the workload management; other steps are needed. The exercise contributed an important degree of common awareness and dissent to the group." * "The prioritization process could be improved with further input from the Councilors and stakeholder groups." * "The exercise is important and informative from a staff perspective and the Council needs to look at a two-step process going forward: step one - form a small team to improve the process used to date drawing on input received; step two - develop a process to manage the workload with input from staff of the resources being used to support each of the working groups, which will reflect both staff and community efforts." * "Support was expressed for continuing the prioritization work, but linking it to the overall ICANN Staff and Community workload and to the Budget process." * "The question of available resources should be looked at in context. The Vertical Integration working group as an example of one that would not normally have commenced with all the work before Council, yet it did and the community resources were available." * "Some believe that work should be prioritized but the methodology chosen is not the most appropriate or efficient." 2.3 Next Steps * Staff Utilization Analysis (Liz Gasster) Refer to: http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/gnso-council-resource-management-polic… * Results of Adobe Connect Poll regarding possible next steps: o Option 1: Spend no more time on prioritization - 5 votes (33%) o Option 2: Develop a plan for using the results to manage the workload in the near term - 2 votes (13%) o Option 3: Form a drafting team with the task of developing a new process - 0 votes (0%) o Option 4: Form a drafting team with the task of improving the process - 1 vote (7%) o Option 5: Other? (including combinations of options 2, 3, and or 4) - 7 votes (47%) * Discussion? * Action Items Item 3: Election of Council Chair & Vice Chairs (15 minutes) Refer to proposed procedures: http://gnso.icann.org/elections/draft-election-procedures-2010.htm 3.1 Brief overview of procedures (Chuck Gomes) 3.2 Discussion 3.3 Edits? 3.4 Any objections to using the procedures for this election cycle? 3.5 Should we consider referring the election procedures to the OSC & GCOT for further review with the goal of starting the chair election process earlier to increase the chances of the chair being elected before the vice chairs? Item 4: Whois Studies (15 minutes) 4.1 Status Report and presentation on Whois Studies (Liz Gasster) http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/presentation-whois-studies-oct10-en.pdf * Refer to redline version of Proxy/Privacy Reveal study (Study 4) RFP at http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-29sep10-en.htm 4.2 Staff analysis of Study #3 -- WHOIS Privacy and Proxy Abuse (Liz Gasster) http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/gnso-whois-pp-abuse-studies-report-05oct… 4.3 Discussion 4.4 Next steps? Item 5: Voting Procedures when Councilors are absent &/or must abstain (25 minutes) 5.1 Overview (Ken Bour, Staff; Ray Fassett, GNSO Council Operations Work Team (GCOT) Chair) 5.2 Discussion 5.3 Report from Operations Steering Committee/ GNSO Council Operations Work Team (OSC/GCOT) (Philip Sheppard, OSC Chair; Ray Fassett) 5.4 Next steps? Item 6: Disclosure of Interest Procedures (15 minutes) 6.1 Report from OSC/GCOT (Philip Sheppard, Ray Fassett) 6.2 Discussion 6.3 Next steps? Item 7: Planning for Cartagena Meetings (15 minutes) 7.1 Overview of plans/schedule (Stéphane Van Gelder, Glen de Saint Géry) http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/gnso-draft-agenda-cartagena-26oct10-en.pdf 7.2 Next steps? Item 8: Status of Continued Action Items (10 Minutes) 8.1 Drafting team for draft DNS-CERT/SSR WG charter (Chuck Gomes) 8.2 Standing committee to monitor GNSO Improvements implementation (Glen de Saint Géry) * Volunteers to date: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben (ISCPC), Tatyana Khramtsova (RrSG), Ray Fassett (RySG), Avri Doria (NCSG), Rudi Vansnick (NCSG), Philip Sheppard (CBUC) * Feedback from Steering Committees (Rob Hoggarth) * Question raised regarding GNSO Operating Procedures: Should the concerns about the newly approved disclosure of interest requirements be dealt with by the OSC & GCOT or by the standing committee? * Next steps? Charter? 8.3 Progress of House/SG Elections * Councilors * Chair & Vice Chair Nominations * NCA Assignments Item 9: Other Business (5 Minutes) 9.1 Final Report on Proposals for Improvements to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement <http://gnso.icann.org/issues/raa/raa-improvements-proposal-final-report-18o…> http://gnso.icann.org/issues/raa/raa-improvements-proposal-final-report-18o… Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article X, Section 3) 9. Except as otherwise specified in these Bylaws, Annex A hereto, or the GNSO Operating Procedures, the default threshold to pass a GNSO Council motion or other voting action requires a simple majority vote of each House. The voting thresholds described below shall apply to the following GNSO actions: 1. Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more than 25% vote of each House or majority of one House; 2. Initiate a Policy Development Process ("PDP") Within Scope (as described in Annex A): requires an affirmative vote of more than 33% of each House or more than 66% of one House; 3. Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of more than 75% of one House and a majority of the other House ("GNSO Supermajority"); 4. Approve a PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a majority of each House and further requires that one GNSO Council member representative of at least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups supports the Recommendation; 5. Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority; and 6. Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that "a two-thirds vote of the council" demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded with respect to any contracting party affected by such contract provision. Appendix 2: Absentee Voting Procedures (Council Operating Procedures 4.4) Members that are absent from a meeting at the time of a vote on the following items may vote by absentee ballot: 1. Initiate a policy development process; 2. Forward a policy recommendation to the Board; 3. Recommend amendments to the ICANN Bylaws; 4. Fill a position open for election. 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 following 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. There must be a quorum for the meeting in which the vote is initiated. ________________________________________ Local time between March and October, Summer in the NORTHERN hemisphere ________________________________________ Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) 20:00UTC ________________________________________ California, USA (PST) UTC-8+1DST 13:00 Cedar Rapids, USA (CDT) UTC-6+1DST 15:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EDT) UTC-5+1DST 16:00 Buenos Aires, Argentina UTC-3+0DST 17:00 Rio de Janeiro/Sao Paulo Brazil UTC-3+0DST 17:00 Dublin, Ireland (GMT) UTC+0DST 21:00 Darmstadt, Germany (CET) UTC+1+1DST 22:00 Paris, France (CET) UTC+1+1DST 22:00 Moscow, Russian Federation (MSK) UTC+3+0DST 00:00 next day Karachi, Pakistan UTC+5+0DST 01:00 next day Hong Kong, China UTC+8+0DST 04:00 next day Tokyo, Japan UTC+9+0DST 05:00 next day Melbourne/Sydney Australia (EDT) UTC+10+1DST 07:00 next day ________________________________________ The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of October 2010, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

RE: Absence from GNSO Council meeting
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 26, 2010

Oct. 26, 2010

Dear Mary, I hereby acknowledge receipt of your notification. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org Forwarded From: Mary Wong Dear Glen, This is a note to inform you and thus the Council that I will be unable to participate on the Council call this Thursday due to travel. I therefore appoint my co-Councillor, Wendy Seltzer (cc'd here) to be my proxy for any applicable purpose, including voting, that may arise during the call. My Stakeholder Group has been duly notified and our Chair, Avri, is also cc'd on this email for confirmation. Please acknowledge receipt and do let me/us know if there is further follow up required. Thanks much, Mary Mary W S Wong Professor of Law Chair, Graduate IP Programs

1 0

TLG Review – Independent External Reviewers' Draft Report for Public Comment
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 25, 2010

Oct. 25, 2010

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-23oct10-en.htm ________________________________ TLG Review – Independent External Reviewers' Draft Report for Public Comment 23 October 2010 Public Comment Deadline: 21 November 2010 ICANN continues its work to conduct bylaw mandated organizational reviews to provide for continual improvement in its technical coordination and policy development support roles. In August 2010, ICANN appointed JAS Communications LLC to carry out an independent, external review of ICANN's Technical Liaison Group (TLG). JAS Communications LLC has delivered their draft report<http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/tlg/tlg-review-draft-report-16oct10-en.pdf> [PDF, 286 KB] with recommendations and conclusions based on their independent research and interviews conducted. The draft report has been received by the ICANN Board's Structural Improvements Committee (SIC). The draft report is now released for consultation and public comment. Comments received will be taken into account by the independent external reviewers in producing their final report, which will then be considered by the SIC and subsequently by the ICANN Board for potential actions to take. The community is invited to participate in this comment forum by 21 November 2010 and to provide input on the draft report via: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201011-en.htm#tlg-rev… For additional information, please refer to the TLG Review web page<http://icann.org/en/reviews/tlg/>. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

ICANN News Alert -- Updated New gTLD Budget Published
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 25, 2010

Oct. 25, 2010

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-22oct10-en.htm ________________________________ Updated New gTLD Budget Published 22 October 2010 The New gTLD Budget is a critical component of the program and has been recently updated following public comment and additional analysis. Taking that into account, the Board approved the budget at its most recent meeting (http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-25sep10-en.htm#1) The document is an analysis of the New gTLD program costs, including an assessment of the timing required to complete certain remaining activities necessary for operational readiness. To ensure costs are appropriately managed, tracked and disclosed, the gTLD budget has been organized according to three phases: 1) Development; 2) Deployment; and 3) Application Processing. You can see the updated budget here: http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/explanatory-memo-new-gtld-program-… [PDF, 456 KB] The proposed budget was originally posted for public comment on 31 May 2010. Only four comments were received but other comments, received during the general Guidebook comment process were also taken into account. Staff's Summary & Analysis of these comments can be found here: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/summary-comments-new-gtld-program-bu… [PDF, 108 KB]. What changed? The main change from the original proposed budget is the deployment costs which increased from US$2.6 million to US$4 million. Two major additions include funds for non-financial support of applicants as recommended by the Applicant Support working group and funding for root zone stability efforts. The snapshot from the Applicant Support Working Group can be found here: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#wg-snapshot. The Final Milestone recommendation from the group should be available soon. Resources * New gTLD Program: http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtld-program.htm * Applicant Support Working Group snapshot: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#wg-snapshot Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Draft GNSO Council Election Procedures for the GNSO Council Chair to be seated in Cartagena
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 25, 2010

Oct. 25, 2010

Dear All, Please find the draft GNSO Council Election Procedures for the GNSO Council Chair to be seated in Cartagena in December 2010. In addition, these procedures will be posted on pages: http://gnso.icann.org/ http://gnso.icann.org/elections/index.html DRAFT COUNCIL ELECTION PROCEDURES OCTOBER/ NOVEMBER 2010 Prepared 25 October 2010 This document contains the GNSO Council Election Procedures for the GNSO Council Chair to be seated in Cartagena in December 2010. References * ICANN Bylaws (http://www.icann.org/en/general/bylaws.htm#X ) Article X, Section 3, paragraph 7. The GNSO Council shall select the GNSO Chair for a term the GNSO Council specifies, but not longer than one year. Each House (as described in Section 6 of this Article) shall select a Vice-Chair, who will be a Vice-Chair of the whole of the GNSO Council, for a term the GNSO Council specifies, but not longer than one year. The procedures for selecting the Chair and any other officers are contained in the GNSO Operating Procedures. In the event that the GNSO Council has not elected a GNSO Chair by the end of the previous Chair's term, the Vice- Chairs will serve as Interim GNSO Co-Chairs until a successful election can be held. * GNSO Council Operating Procedures approved on 5 August 2010 (http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-op-procedures-05aug10-en.pdf ) 2.2 Officer Elections: Chair and Vice-Chairs - The GNSO Council shall select the GNSO Chair and two Vice Chairs as follows: a. The GNSO Chair shall be elected by a 60 percent vote of both houses. b. Each house will be allowed one candidate for GNSO Council Chair. A candidate for GNSO Council Chair does not need to be a member of a house but must be a member of the GNSO Council. Should a Chair be elected outside the houses that Chair will be a non-voting Chair. i. All ballots will include the "none of the above" option. In the event that this option gets 60 percent of both houses, each house will commence a new nomination period of not longer than 15 days. The election will be rescheduled for no sooner than 30 days. ii. In the case of a tie the election will be rescheduled no sooner than 30 days. In the case of a second tie, each house will commence a new nomination period of not longer than 15 days. The election will be rescheduled for no sooner than 30 days. iii. The leading candidate will be defined as the one with the highest score. For each candidate, determine the percentage of vote received in each house; add these percentages to determine the score; the leader is the one with the higher score. (Maximum score equals 200.) iv. In case neither candidate reaches the 60 percent of both houses threshold, a second ballot will be held between the leader and "none of the above." v. If the single candidate does not reach the 60 percent of both houses threshold, then each house will commence a new nomination period of not longer than 15 days. The election will be rescheduled for no sooner than 30 days. c. Each house shall select a Vice Chair within their respective houses. d. A Chair and Vice Chair may not be elected from the same Stakeholder Group. e. The Chair or Vice Chair shall retain their votes in their respective houses. f. In the event that the GNSO Council has not elected a GNSO Council Chair by the end of the previous Chair's term, the Vice-Chairs will serve as Interim GNSO Co-Chairs until a successful election can be held. g. The Council shall inform the Board and the Community appropriately and post the election results on the GNSO website within 2 business days following the election. Chair Qualifications Summary Nominees must be members of the council at the time the election is held and not necessarily at the time that the nominations are made. This means that: * A current council member who will not be in the new council is not eligible to run for chair. * An incoming council member who is not currently in the council is eligible to run for chair. Only current GNSO Council members are eligible to make nominations and second nominations. Chair Nomination Process Per the GNSO Operating Procedures referenced above (Section 2.2.b): "Each house will be allowed to nominate one candidate for GNSO Council Chair. Each house is responsible for determining how to nominate its candidate." To allow for the possibility of a timely Council election process in Cartagena, each house is asked to submit its nominee for Council chair for the term beginning at the end of the 2010 ICANN annual meeting not later than 10, November 2010. Nominees shall submit a candidacy statement in writing to the GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org) as soon as possible after they have been selected by their house and not later than 22:00 UTC on 12, November 2010. A candidate for GNSO Council Chair does not need to be a member of the house selecting the candidate. Should the non voting NCA be elected as chair he/she would be a non-voting chair. The two houses may, separately, select the same candidate from the nominee pool if they so wish. House nominations for Council Chair should be sent to gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org. The GNSO Secretariat will send each House's nomination to the Council list as soon as it is received. Voting Procedure The candidates from each of the houses shall have the opportunity of meeting with Council Members during the GNSO Council meeting on 18 November 2010. The first round of voting for Council Chair will be held electronically from 19 November until 2 December 2010. The GNSO Secretariat will announce the results of the first round of voting no later than 3 December 2010. If no election of chair occurs in the first round of voting, the GNSO Operating Procedures quoted above in Section 2.2.b will be followed. Seating of the New Chair Chuck Gomes, current GNSO Council chair, will serve as chair of the Council meeting on 8 December 2010. The newly elected chair of the Council shall assume responsibilities at the end of the 2010 ICANN Annual meeting or as soon as an election occurs thereafter. If no chair has been elected by the end of the Annual meeting on 10 December 2010, the vice-chairs will assume the chair responsibilities as defined in the Bylaws and a runoff will be scheduled as described in the GNSO Operating Procedures. The winning candidate needs 60% of the votes of each house. The Council shall inform the Board and the Community appropriately and post the election results on the GNSO website within 2 business days following the election. (Note: The Election of Vice Chairs is house specific and will be defined elsewhere) Please 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

2 1

Disclosures of Interest for 28 Oct Meeting
by Gomes, Chuck Oct. 24, 2010

Oct. 24, 2010

If any Councilor has a Disclosure of Interest for our 28 Oct Meeting regarding an agenda item that is not already covered in your Statement of Interest, please submit it to the Council list in advance of the meeting. The main issues for this meeting are: * GNSO Prioritization * Election Procedures for Council Chair & Vice Chairs * Whois Study #3 - WHOIS Privacy and Proxy Abuse * Voting Procedures when Councilors are absent &/or must abstain * Disclosure of Interest Procedures Per the GNSO Operating Procedures, Section 5.4, we are required to poll Councilors regarding "any direct or indirect interests that may affect a Relevant Party's judgment on an issue that is under review, consideration, or discussion". . . Chuck

1 0

FW: Statement of interest David Taylor
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 22, 2010

Oct. 22, 2010

Forwarded From: Taylor, David Hi Glen Please see below my updated SOI Kind regards David Dr. David Taylor Statement of Interest - David Taylor - European representative, Intellectual Property Constituency Updated October 21 2010 I am a Partner in Hogan Lovells International LLP ("Hogan Lovells"), an international law firm with 2500 lawyers worldwide and I head up the firms Domain Name Practice called Anchovy®. I work out of our Paris office and am a qualified lawyer in both England and France with a background in engineering and a PhD in Physics. I specialize in advising clients in intellectual property and technology issues because I find them interesting and in particular the protection of brands online and domain names. I formed our specialised stand alone domain name practice, called Anchovy®, over a decade ago, for brand owners worldwide offering a one stop shop for all domain name related matters including strategy, portfolio management and enforcement across the globe. The Hogan Lovells domain name practice is an integral part of the firm's full brand protection service. From time to time Hogan Lovells has represented firm clients in intellectual property matters adverse to registrars and it is likely to do so periodically in the future. We may also, from time to time, represent registrars during the course of our business. I have filed numerous UDRPs since its inception in 1999 and many other complaints under specific ccTLD dispute resolution policies. I have also acted for numerous respondents in such matters. I also act as an independent domain name panelist with WIPO (for the UDRP) the Czech Arbitration Court (for .EU and the UDRP), Nominet (for .UK) and Malaysia (.MY). Our firm is an accredited domain name registrar with ICANN as well as for a number of ccTLDs. With regard to new gTLDs I am advising a number of our clients generally on developments, risks and opportunities some of whom may apply for a new gTLD in due course. I am an individual member of the IPC and member of various other Intellectual Property organisations; INTA, Marques, ECTA and the Society of Computers and Law. I am currently a special advisor to the INTA Internet Committee. I have no financial or any relevant interests in ICANN or the GNSO. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

2 1

Agenda - 28 October 2010 ICANN Board Meeting
by Bruce Tonkin Oct. 22, 2010

Oct. 22, 2010

From: http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/agenda-28oct10-en.htm Agenda - 28 October 2010 ICANN Board Meeting 28 October 2010 1. Executive Session a. Approval of CEO Objectives & Metrics 2.Consent Agenda a. Approval of Minutes of 5 August 2010 ICANN Special Board Meeting b. Approval of Minutes of 25 September 2010 ICANN Special Board Meeting c. From the SSAC – Changes to SSAC Membership d. From the Board Governance Committee – Approval of revised Board Audit Committee Charter and Board Executive Committee Charter e. From the Board Governance Committee – Approval of Chair and Vice-Chair Position Descriptions f. From the Board Governance Committee – Approval for Posting of Bylaw Changes relating to Transition of Board Terms g. From the Board Structural Improvements Committee – Approval of Bylaws Necessary to Seat Director from At-Large Community h. From the Board Structural Improvements Committee – Approval of Posting for Comment of SSAC Related Changes to ICANN Bylaws i. From the Board Structural Improvements Committee – Approval of Posting for Comment of Nominating Committee Chair-Elect Changes to ICANN Bylaws j. Ratification of MOU with Global Cyber Security Center (ES-SEC) k. Approval of Funding Source for New gTLD Deployment Budget Main Agenda 3. President & CEO’s Report 4. IDN ccTLDs a. Update on IDN ccTLDs b. Issues Report on Variant Management 5. Delegation of قطر. ("Qatar") 6. Re-delegation of .QA (QATAR) top-level 7. New gTLD Program a. Update on Timeline b. Vertical Integration c. GNSO New gTLD Recommendation 6 Objection Process d. GAC Issues Letter including Geographic Names e. Affirmation of Commitment Considerations 8. ICM Registry Sponsored Top-Level Domains – .XXX 9. Status Report on AOC Reviews 10. Oversight of Board Committees – Report of Board Finance Committee & Board Audit Committee 11. Any Other Business

1 0

Updated Statement of Interest
by Terry L Davis Oct. 21, 2010

Oct. 21, 2010

Chuck/Glen Below is my updated statement of interest. I retired from Boeing on October 7th and joined iJet Onboard on the 18th. Take care Terry Davis GNSO Nomcom ============================================================================================= Statement of Interest I am the Chief Scientist for "iJet Onboard" of Seattle, Washington. I serve as their primary technical advisor and consultant on aviation communications; links, network, security, supporting systems, system engineering, etc. I am also a member of the University of Washington's Information Assurance Advisory Board. As part of my activities for iJet, I support several aviation and industry standards organizations; these include IEEE, IETF, ARINC, ATA, and ICAO. In my current work in support of these organizations, I am currently serving as a technical advisor to ICAO's Aeronautical Communication Panel, Working Group-I. In this role I am providing liaison with IANA and ARIN on the IPv6 address requirements for the Next Generation Air Traffic Management Networks. Also as part of this work I also have an interest in a quasi-governmental TLD that the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) may consider for the Next Generation of Air Traffic Management (ATM) Network. Neither myself or iJet currently have any contract, statement of work, financial interest, share ownership, or any other business relationship with ICANN, registries or registrars except as a registrant of several domain names.

4 3

Scheduling Process for Cartagena
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 20, 2010

Oct. 20, 2010

Dear All, Please note these deadlines and procedures for all document posting for the Cartagena meetings. What must be posted by the 15th of November? The document deadline policy adopted by the Board in Seoul provides, amongst other things, that: "The Board has approved a single deadline for international public meetings of 15 working days before the official opening of the meeting." Working days are defined as weekdays, with a calendar week representing five working days. Public holidays are not treated as exceptions. The first day of the meeting is the one on which the opening ceremony is held. The document deadline relates to the time at which the documentation is available for public review and download. The document deadline applies to meeting agendas. Meeting agendas are defined as an overview of all public sessions taking place within the conference venue, both in the days before the official opening ceremony and after the final Board meeting. That overview should include: * a breakdown of topics to be discussed * a list of speakers/panelists split up according to relevant subject * an explanation of the session's goals and expected outcomes * hyperlinks to relevant documentation. NO FURTHER CHANGES TO THE SCHEDULE WILL BE MADE AFTER THE 15TH OF NOVEMBER. This does not include changes to the content of session pages (i.e. agenda details or summary text). Requests for changes after the 15th will be subject to the following change-management process (NO EXCEPTIONS): Process for adding new sessions to the Meeting public schedule less than 15 working days prior to the Meeting start If a new session is to be added within the 15-day window, it must be urgent and meet requirements, like: * A failure to hold the meeting will endanger ICANN committed deliverables, critical progress on an issue, or accomplishing something integral to ICANN's mission or is likely to: o Create material legal liability; o Create an unacceptable negative accountability or transparency perception; or o Create or cause financial losses. * The meeting may not be organised in conflict with any previously identified cross-community session that would cause a conflict for many attendees. * All the informational requirements of the meeting must be provided with (or as soon as possible after) the initial request - including complete agenda, required other information, and technical requirements. * The organiser provides clear and sufficiently detailed explanation of why the meeting meets the criteria for a late addition. In cases where there are less than 5 working days before the start of a meeting: 1. Sessions added in this period must meet the requirements above. 2. Organisers of meetings that meet the requirements must give 24 hours advance notice. 3. Meetings added are subject to space and services availability 4. The meeting may not be organised in conflict with any previously-identified cross-community timeslot. The COO will make a decision on requests received, using the criteria above, and provide a decision within 24 hours. * If the request is rejected, reasons will be provided to interested community members. In either case, the organiser will be notified. * The details of all meetings added or not added will be retained and published in the interests of transparency and accountability of decision-making. * If the organiser wishes to have the request reconsidered, the reconsideration will be handled by the Chair of the Public Participation committee of the Board of ICANN. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

2 2

FW: GCOT recommendations
by Gomes, Chuck Oct. 19, 2010

Oct. 19, 2010

Please note that the GCOT submitted the attached recommended changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures relating to statements of interest and declarations of interest. The next step will be for the OSC to review and make recommendations to the Council and/or the GCOT. Because of a typically full agenda, we will likely not have time to discuss these in our 28 October Council meeting, but I encourage Councilors to send any comments they have to members of the OSC as they consider the suggested changes. Here are the names of GNSO participants who are listed as members of the OSC: * Olga Cavalli - Alternate Chair (NomCom Appointee) * Avri Doria (Non Commercial Stakeholder Group) * Chuck Gomes - (GNSO Council Chair) * Ray Fassett (gTLD Registries Stakeholder Group) * Robin Gross (Non Commercial Stakeholder Group) * Wolf-Ulrich Knoben (Internet Service Providers Constituency) * Vanda Scartezini (ALAC) * Philip Sheppard (Business Constituency) * Ken Stubbs (gTLD Registries Stakeholder Group ) * Steve Metalitz (Intellectual Property Constituency) * Stéphane Van Gelder (Registrar Stakeholder Group) Chuck From: Ray Fassett [mailto:ray@goto.jobs] Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 12:30 AM To: philip.sheppard(a)aim.be Cc: Gomes, Chuck Subject: GCOT recommendations Philip & Chuck, attached are the recommendations of the GCOT specific to Section 5 to the Rules of Procedure for consideration by the OSC. There is both a red-line and clean version. The red-line version has a brief explanatory comment from me for each edit. I will summarize below each of the recommendations: 1. To clarify that declarations of interest are not to be written documents 2. To exempt ICANN staff personnel from the requirement of completing statements of interest (upon condition as stated) 3. To simplify the questions pertaining to the statement of interest form while keeping to their intent (note this is section 5.3.3 originally not adopted by the Council that we hope now will be as a result of these edits, assuming approved by the OSC.) 4. To remove the condition that participants are to be individually polled by the Chair for updates to their disclosure of interest due to feedback we've received relative to the inefficiency of this condition in practice. I think that's it. Please let me know if any questions. While the GCOT will remain cooperatively on standby for any additional guidance from the OSC, there is no additional work slated to our agenda at this time. Thanks, Ray

1 0

Final Report on Proposals for Improvements to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 19, 2010

Oct. 19, 2010

Dear All, Please note that the Final Report on Proposals for Improvements to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement http://gnso.icann.org/issues/raa/raa-improvements-proposal-final-report-18o… has been posted on pages: http://gnso.icann.org and http://gnso.icann.org/issues under the heading: Registrar Accreditation Agreement * Final Report on Proposals for Improvements to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement http://gnso.icann.org/issues/raa/raa-improvements-proposal-final-report-18o… Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Re: [council] Kurt Question
by Kurt Pritz Oct. 18, 2010

Oct. 18, 2010

Hi Adrian: There is a Board meeting on the 28th with new gTLDs as an agenda item, and right around that time, maybe a week later, the work on the Guidebook will be wrapped. Those two events will indicate both a Board and staff intent on whether to propose the Guidebook version as final. Hope this is helpful. Kurt ----- Original Message ----- From: Adrian Kinderis <adrian(a)ausregistry.com.au> To: Adrian Kinderis <adrian(a)ausregistry.com.au>; Kurt Pritz Cc: Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin(a)melbourneit.com.au>; 'Council GNSO' <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Sent: Fri Oct 15 14:44:35 2010 Subject: RE: [council] Kurt Question Kurt, Just following up on the below. Thanks. Adrian Kinderis Chief Executive Officer AusRegistry International Pty Ltd Level 8, 10 Queens Road Melbourne. Victoria Australia. 3004 Ph: +61 3 9866 3710 Fax: +61 3 9866 1970 Email: adrian(a)ausregistry.com Web: www.ausregistry.com - Follow AusRegistry International on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ausregistryint The information contained in this communication is intended for the named recipients only. It is subject to copyright and may contain legally privileged and confidential information and if you are not an intended recipient you must not use, copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this communication in error, please delete all copies from your system and notify us immediately. -----Original Message----- From: Adrian Kinderis Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 8:15 AM To: Kurt Pritz Cc: Bruce Tonkin; Council GNSO Subject: RE: [council] Kurt Question Kurt, Thanks for taking the time to respond. Your budget analogy is a good one. I understand that, like the budget, comment from the Community could be accepted and considered all the way up the Board meeting. So, with that in mind are you able to say whether the staff will be putting forward to the Board a "Proposed Final Applicant Guidebook" prior to the December ICANN Meeting? With respect to your idea on the review of comments being limited to certain areas. I like the idea in principle and would be supportive of it. However, as we have seen in the past, no area is off limits to certain community and even those that we considered "locked away" some time ago seem to be reopened at their whim. It may be difficult to roll this out. An answer to the above would be appreciated. Adrian Kinderis -----Original Message----- From: Kurt Pritz [mailto:kurt.pritz@icann.org] Sent: Saturday, 9 October 2010 5:15 AM To: Adrian Kinderis Cc: Bruce Tonkin; Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Kurt Question Hi Adrian: Evidently, when the subject line includes the word "Kurt, " the email is labelled as junk. I'm not sure what that means. Bruce is right, of course. The parallel I would draw is with the ICANN budget. ICANN posts a "Proposed Final Budget" prior to the June ICANN meeting. There is comment before and during the meeting that the Board considers. Similarly, with new gTLDs, ICANN could publish a proposed final Guidebook. When proposed, the Board could decide to approve the Guidebook as approved, or to approve it with certain tweaks, or to have more extensive analysis again. As you know, there has been comment and analysis on many, many aspects of the Guidebook. All the comments to date have been addressed, although not always in the way the commenters request. Given the diversity of interests, I think that is impossible. Given the depth of analysis to date and the most recent set of Board resolutions, perhaps review of comments in this next version of the Guidebook be limited in some way to changes in the Guidebook or new topics. What do you think? Kurt On Oct 7, 2010, at 10:52 PM, Adrian Kinderis wrote: > > Thanks Bruce. Very firm. I like it. > > However, it is all in how you look at it. > > The staff can certainly put something forward that they may consider "final" and yes the Board may not approve it. However, the staff could still have thought that they were "final". > > My question was to Kurt, and therefore staff, in that, does he believe that the next version will be the one they expect the Board to sign off on or will it be sent back for public comment. > > A legitimate question given staff's history of announcing that they expect future drafts every time they have released one. > > A response would be appreciated. > > Adrian Kinderis > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin > Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 3:50 PM > To: Council GNSO > Subject: RE: [council] Kurt Question > > > Hello Adrian, > > >>> Does that mean there will be others and the next won't be "final"? > > It will be final when the Board approves it. Until then it is always a > draft. > > Regards, > Bruce Tonkin > > > >

1 0

Final Report on Proposals for Improvements to the RAA
by Margie Milam Oct. 18, 2010

Oct. 18, 2010

Dear Councilors, On behalf of the Joint GNSO/ALAC RAA Drafting Team, I am pleased to deliver the Final Report on Proposals for Improvements to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement to the GNSO Council for its review and consideration. Please note that the version attached to this email is a condensed version which includes the entire text of the Final Report but excludes all exhibits. With exhibits, the Final Report is 179 pages long. The complete Final Report, with all exhibits, will be posted on the GNSO Council's home page shortly. Best Regards, Margie ________ Margie Milam Senior Policy Counselor ICANN _________

2 1

RE: [council] Kurt Question
by Adrian Kinderis Oct. 15, 2010

Oct. 15, 2010

Kurt, Just following up on the below. Thanks. Adrian Kinderis Chief Executive Officer AusRegistry International Pty Ltd Level 8, 10 Queens Road Melbourne. Victoria Australia. 3004 Ph: +61 3 9866 3710 Fax: +61 3 9866 1970 Email: adrian(a)ausregistry.com Web: www.ausregistry.com - Follow AusRegistry International on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ausregistryint The information contained in this communication is intended for the named recipients only. It is subject to copyright and may contain legally privileged and confidential information and if you are not an intended recipient you must not use, copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this communication in error, please delete all copies from your system and notify us immediately. -----Original Message----- From: Adrian Kinderis Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 8:15 AM To: Kurt Pritz Cc: Bruce Tonkin; Council GNSO Subject: RE: [council] Kurt Question Kurt, Thanks for taking the time to respond. Your budget analogy is a good one. I understand that, like the budget, comment from the Community could be accepted and considered all the way up the Board meeting. So, with that in mind are you able to say whether the staff will be putting forward to the Board a "Proposed Final Applicant Guidebook" prior to the December ICANN Meeting? With respect to your idea on the review of comments being limited to certain areas. I like the idea in principle and would be supportive of it. However, as we have seen in the past, no area is off limits to certain community and even those that we considered "locked away" some time ago seem to be reopened at their whim. It may be difficult to roll this out. An answer to the above would be appreciated. Adrian Kinderis -----Original Message----- From: Kurt Pritz [mailto:kurt.pritz@icann.org] Sent: Saturday, 9 October 2010 5:15 AM To: Adrian Kinderis Cc: Bruce Tonkin; Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Kurt Question Hi Adrian: Evidently, when the subject line includes the word "Kurt, " the email is labelled as junk. I'm not sure what that means. Bruce is right, of course. The parallel I would draw is with the ICANN budget. ICANN posts a "Proposed Final Budget" prior to the June ICANN meeting. There is comment before and during the meeting that the Board considers. Similarly, with new gTLDs, ICANN could publish a proposed final Guidebook. When proposed, the Board could decide to approve the Guidebook as approved, or to approve it with certain tweaks, or to have more extensive analysis again. As you know, there has been comment and analysis on many, many aspects of the Guidebook. All the comments to date have been addressed, although not always in the way the commenters request. Given the diversity of interests, I think that is impossible. Given the depth of analysis to date and the most recent set of Board resolutions, perhaps review of comments in this next version of the Guidebook be limited in some way to changes in the Guidebook or new topics. What do you think? Kurt On Oct 7, 2010, at 10:52 PM, Adrian Kinderis wrote: > > Thanks Bruce. Very firm. I like it. > > However, it is all in how you look at it. > > The staff can certainly put something forward that they may consider "final" and yes the Board may not approve it. However, the staff could still have thought that they were "final". > > My question was to Kurt, and therefore staff, in that, does he believe that the next version will be the one they expect the Board to sign off on or will it be sent back for public comment. > > A legitimate question given staff's history of announcing that they expect future drafts every time they have released one. > > A response would be appreciated. > > Adrian Kinderis > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin > Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 3:50 PM > To: Council GNSO > Subject: RE: [council] Kurt Question > > > Hello Adrian, > > >>> Does that mean there will be others and the next won't be "final"? > > It will be final when the Board approves it. Until then it is always a > draft. > > Regards, > Bruce Tonkin > > > >

1 0

FW: [ALAC-Announce] Meeting Invitation / Community Call on FY11 Update to the Plan for Enhancing Internet SSR - 18 October 2010 at 1800 UTC
by Gomes, Chuck Oct. 15, 2010

Oct. 15, 2010

Note the following invitation to participate in an ALAC session "to talk about the FY11 Update to the Plan for Enhancing Internet Security, Stability and Resiliency". Chuck From: Cheryl Langdon-Orr [mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 2:24 AM To: Chris Disspain; Gomes, Chuck Subject: Fwd: [ALAC-Announce] Meeting Invitation / Community Call on FY11 Update to the Plan for Enhancing Internet SSR - 18 October 2010 at 1800 UTC FYI as with all our community briefing calls this is open for ANYONE to join so some of your community might be interested and of course your Council(s) or Excom (selves) are also more than welcome... Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: ICANN At-Large Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> Date: 14 October 2010 12:10 Subject: [ALAC-Announce] Meeting Invitation / Community Call on FY11 Update to the Plan for Enhancing Internet SSR - 18 October 2010 at 1800 UTC To: "alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org" <alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> Dear All, Further to the Doodle poll, the AtLarge Community is invited to join Patrick Jones, ICANN's acting coordinator of the Security group, to talk about the FY11 Update to the Plan for Enhancing Internet Security, Stability and Resiliency on Monday 18 October 2010 at 1800 UTC (1100 PDT, 1400 EDT, 15:00 Buenos Aires, 1900 London, 2000 CEST, 0200 Hong Kong, 0500 Sydney) ICANN developed a Plan for Enhancing Internet Security, Stability & Resiliency<http://icann.org/en/topics/ssr/ssr-draft-plan-fy11-13sep10-en.pdf> in the 2009-2010 operational year. Patrick will review the FY11 version of this plan which is intended as a baseline document for ICANN and its community for organizing its security, stability and resiliency efforts. The plan does not envision major new roles or programs for ICANN in this area. Patrick will review the plan that delineates ICANN's specific programs that address the security, stability and resiliency of the Internet's naming andaddressing systems and discuss the activities planned for the 2011 fiscal year. The draft agenda (to be updated) and participation instructions are available at: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/SSR+Briefing+Call Adobe Connect: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/ssr/ Please let us know if you require a dial-out by emailing: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org. This call will be held in English only due to insufficient demand for interpretation. Thank you. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Seth Greene, Gisella Gruber-White, Marilyn Vernon, Kristina Nordström ICANN At-Large Staff _______________________________________________ ALAC-Announce mailing list ALAC-Announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

1 0

Draft Agenda for GNSO Council Meeting 28 October 2010.
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 14, 2010

Oct. 14, 2010

Agenda for GNSO Council Meeting 28 October 2010. http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-council-28oct10-en.htm https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?proposed_agenda_28_october_2010 This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures approved 5 August 2010 for the GNSO Council. http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-op-procedures-05aug10-en.pdf For convenience: * An excerpt of the ICANN Bylaws defining the voting thresholds is provided in Appendix 1 at the end of this agenda. * An excerpt from the Council Operating Procedures defining the absentee voting procedures is provided in Appendix 2 at the end of this agenda. Meeting Time 20:00 UTC See the following and http://www.timeanddate.com/ for other times: 13:00 PDT; 15:00 CDT; 16:00 EST; 17:00 Buenos Aires; 17:00 Brazil; 22:00 CET; 24:00 Moscow Friday, 29 October 01:00 Pakistan; 04:00 Hong Kong; 05:00 Tokyo, 07:00 Melbourne Dial-in numbers will be sent individually to Council members. Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if a dial out call is needed. GNSO Council meeting audiocast http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u Item 1: Administrative matters (15 minutes) 1.1 Roll call of Council members and polling for Disclosures of Interest * Per the GNSO Operating Procedures, Section 5.4, we are required to poll Councilors regarding "any direct or indirect interests that may affect a Relevant Party's judgment on an issue that is under review, consideration, or discussion" in this meeting. Here is the definition provided in the procedures: "Disclosure of Interest: Relevant to a specific issue at a specific time. A written statement made by a Relevant Party of direct and indirect interests that may be commercial (e.g. monetary payment) or non-commercial (e.g. non-tangible benefit such as publicity, political or academic visibility) and may affect, or be perceived to affect, the Relevant Party's judgment on a specific issue." The main issue for this meeting is * GNSO Prioritization 1.2 Update any statements of interest 1.3 Review/amend agenda 1.4. Note the status of minutes for the previous Council meeting per the GNSO Operating Procedures: * 7 October 2010 meeting minutes - Approved on 28 October 2010. Item 2: GNSO Project Prioritization (20 minutes) 2.1 Refer to posted project ratings<http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/new-gtld-applicant-support-draft-recom…>: http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-work-prioritization-project-list-value-r… 2.2 Key points made in the 15 July Council meeting (from meeting minutes): * ". . . not a useful exercise, not much was learnt, should not proceed further with the prioritization exercise." * ". . . spending more time on the exercise will not accomplish useful results." * "It was a difficult exercise, policy matters were not prioritized and the core issue, management of the workload, still has not been resolved." * "The exercise was intended as a first step and not intended to solve the workload management; other steps are needed. The exercise contributed an important degree of common awareness and dissent to the group." * "The prioritization process could be improved with further input from the Councilors and stakeholder groups." * "The exercise is important and informative from a staff perspective and the Council needs to look at a two-step process going forward: step one - form a small team to improve the process used to date drawing on input received; step two - develop a process to manage the workload with input from staff of the resources being used to support each of the working groups, which will reflect both staff and community efforts." * "Support was expressed for continuing the prioritization work, but linking it to the overall ICANN Staff and Community workload and to the Budget process." * "The question of available resources should be looked at in context. The Vertical Integration working group as an example of one that would not normally have commenced with all the work before Council, yet it did and the community resources were available." * "Some believe that work should be prioritized but the methodology chosen is not the most appropriate or efficient." 2.3 Next Steps * Staff Utilization Analysis (Liz Gasster) Refer to: http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/gnso-council-resource-management-polic… * Results of Adobe Connect Poll regarding possible next steps: o Option 1: Spend no more time on prioritization - 5 votes (33%) o Option 2: Develop a plan for using the results to manage the workload in the near term - 2 votes (13%) o Option 3: Form a drafting team with the task of developing a new process - 0 votes (0%) o Option 4: Form a drafting team with the task of improving the process - 1 vote (7%) o Option 5: Other? (including combinations of options 2, 3, and or 4) - 7 votes (47%) * Discussion? * Action Items Item 3: Whois Study #3 - WHOIS Privacy and Proxy Abuse (15 minutes) Refer to: The Abuse Study Staff Analysis http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/gnso-whois-pp-abuse-studies-report-05oct… 3.1 Status Report (Liz Gasster) 3.2 Discussion 3.3 Next steps? Item 4: Absentee Voting Procedures (25 minutes) 4.1 Overview (Ken Bour, Staff; Ray Fassett, GNSO Council Operations Work Team (GCOT) Chair) 4.2 Discussion 4.3 Report from Operations Steering Committee/ GNSO Council Operations Work Team (OSC/GCOT) (Philip Sheppard, OSC Chair; Ray Fassett) 4.4 Next steps? Item 5: Disclosure of Interest Procedures (15 minutes) 5.1 Report from OSC/GCOT (Philip Sheppard, Ray Fassett) 5.2 Discussion 5.3 Next steps? Item 6: Planning for Cartagena Meetings (15 minutes) 6.1 Overview of plans/schedule (Stéphane Van Gelder, Glen de Saint Géry) 6.2 Next steps? Item 7: Status of Continued Action Items (10 Minutes) 7.1 Drafting team for draft DNS-CERT/SSR WG charter (Chuck Gomes) 7.2 Standing committee to monitor GNSO Improvements implementation (Glen de Saint Géry) * Volunteers to date: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben (ISCPC), Tatyana Khramtsova (RrSG), Ray Fassett (RySG), Avri Doria (NCSG), Rudi Vansnick (NCSG), Philip Sheppard (CBUC) * Feedback from Steering Committees (Rob Hoggarth) * Question raised regarding GNSO Operating Procedures: Should the concerns about the newly approved disclosure of interest requirements be dealt with by the OSC & GCOT or by the standing committee? * Next steps? Charter? 7.3 Progress of House/SG Elections * Councilors * Chair & Vice Chair Nominations * NCA Assignments 7.4 Whois Studies * Refer to redline version of Proxy/Privacy Reveal study (Study 4) RFP at http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-29sep10-en.htm * Status of Whois Study 4, WHOIS Privacy/Proxy Relay & Reveal Study (Liz Gasster) Item 8: Other Business (5 Minutes) Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article X, Section 3) 9. Except as otherwise specified in these Bylaws, Annex A hereto, or the GNSO Operating Procedures, the default threshold to pass a GNSO Council motion or other voting action requires a simple majority vote of each House. The voting thresholds described below shall apply to the following GNSO actions: 1. Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more than 25% vote of each House or majority of one House; 2. Initiate a Policy Development Process ("PDP") Within Scope (as described in Annex A): requires an affirmative vote of more than 33% of each House or more than 66% of one House; 3. Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of more than 75% of one House and a majority of the other House ("GNSO Supermajority"); 4. Approve a PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a majority of each House and further requires that one GNSO Council member representative of at least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups supports the Recommendation; 5. Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority; and 6. Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that "a two-thirds vote of the council" demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded with respect to any contracting party affected by such contract provision. Appendix 2: Absentee Voting Procedures (Council Operating Procedures 4.4) Members that are absent from a meeting at the time of a vote on the following items may vote by absentee ballot: 1. Initiate a policy development process; 2. Forward a policy recommendation to the Board; 3. Recommend amendments to the ICANN Bylaws; 4. Fill a position open for election. 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 following 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. There must be a quorum for the meeting in which the vote is initiated. ________________________________________ Local time between March and October, Summer in the NORTHERN hemisphere ________________________________________ Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) 20:00UTC ________________________________________ California, USA (PST) UTC-8+1DST 13:00 Cedar Rapids, USA (CDT) UTC-6+1DST 15:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EDT) UTC-5+1DST 16:00 Buenos Aires, Argentina UTC-3+0DST 17:00 Rio de Janeiro/Sao Paulo Brazil UTC-3+0DST 17:00 Dublin, Ireland (GMT) UTC+0DST 21:00 Darmstadt, Germany (CET) UTC+1+1DST 22:00 Paris, France (CET) UTC+1+1DST 22:00 Moscow, Russian Federation (MSK) UTC+3+0DST 00:00 next day Karachi, Pakistan UTC+5+0DST 01:00 next day Hong Kong, China UTC+8+0DST 04:00 next day Tokyo, Japan UTC+9+0DST 05:00 next day Melbourne/Sydney Australia (EDT) UTC+10+1DST 07:00 next day ________________________________________ The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of October 2010, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Draft minutes GNSO Council meeting on 7 October 2010.
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 14, 2010

Oct. 14, 2010

Dear Councillors, Attached please find the draft minutes of the GNSO Council meeting on 7 October 2010. Please let me know if you would like any changes made. If no comments are received, these minutes will be published, as approved on the website on page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/index.html#oct on Monday, 25 October 2010. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Motion and Document Deadline - Wednesday, 20 October 2010 for Council meeting on 28 October 2010
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 14, 2010

Oct. 14, 2010

Dear Councillors, As required in the GNSO Operating Procedures, motions and reports for consideration in the GNSO Council meeting on 28 October 2010 are due not later than 8 days in advance of that meeting, that is, Wednesday, 20 October 2010. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Updated: Request for Information Issued on Proposed High Security Zone Verification Program
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 14, 2010

Oct. 14, 2010

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-22sep10-en.htm Updated: Request for Information Issued on Proposed High Security Zone Verification Program Updated 13 October 2010 22 September 2010 ICANN is updating today this posting on the Request for Information (RFI) [PDF, 432 KB] for the proposed High Security Zone Verification Program (the "HSTLD Program"). The purpose of the RFI is to assist the ICANN community in understanding potential frameworks and approaches to evaluate new gTLD registries against the criteria in the draft HSTLD Program, determine where improvements to draft criteria and the overall program may be necessary to ensure its success, and to assess the viability of the proposed HSTLD Program. ICANN, in cooperation with its community-led Advisory Group, has developed a proposed voluntary HSTLD Program consisting of control elements to increase security and trust in the Domain Name System (DNS) for those Top-Level Domain (TLD) registry operators that elect to participate in the program. This proposed program has been identified as one of nine measures intended to mitigate malicious conduct in new gTLDs. For additional information about the HSTLD Program or the Advisory Group, please see the concept paper, Model for a High Security Zone Verification Program [PDF, 214 KB], the Public Archive of HSTLD Proceedings, and the Draft Program Development Snapshot #2 - High Security Zone Top-Level Domain Advisory Group (HSTLD Advisory Group) [PDF, 771 KB]. Respondents should pay careful attention to Appendix A of Snapshot #2 [PDF, 343 KB] as it outlines potential control elements for registries, registrars and registrants in the proposed HSTLD Program. Respondents are requested to reply to hstldrfi(a)icann.org by 23 November 2010. Questions about the RFI should be submitted to the same email address by 27 October 2010. In response to inquiries ICANN has received about the RFI, a conference call will be convened shortly after 27 October 2010, to respond to questions. Participation in the call will be open to anyone that submitted questions prior to 27 October 2010. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Public Comment extended to 3 November: FY 11 Update to Plan for Enhancing Internet Security, Stability & Resiliency
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 13, 2010

Oct. 13, 2010

**Please note that the Public Comment Period has been extended to 3 NOVEMBER 2010 23:59 UTC.** Public Comment: FY 11 Update to Plan for Enhancing Internet Security, Stability & Resiliency http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-13sep10-en.htm Updated 4 October 2010 13 September 2010 4 October 2010 Update – ICANN is providing an update to the public comment period on the FY 11 SSR Plan, with the posting of translations in Arabic, French, Russian and Spanish (note – the Chinese translation will be added early next week). Accordingly, the comment period is being extended to 3 November 2010 23:59 UTC. In June 2009, the ICANN Board accepted the first ICANN Plan for Enhancing Internet Security, Stability & Resiliency. ICANN is today releasing an update for FY 11. The plan delineates ICANN's specific programs that will address security, stability and resiliency. It also details planned activities that will enhance its contributions through the 2010-2011 operational year. This plan is an update from the initial plan published in May 2009 and is intended as a baseline document for ICANN and its community for organizing its security, stability and resiliency efforts. The plan does not envision major new roles or programs for ICANN in this area from the programs described in the FY 10 version of the Plan. The programs and initiatives in which ICANN plans to engage during the 2010-2011 Operating year include: * Improving root zone management through automation; improve authentication of communications with TLD managers and continued support for the adoption of DNS Security Extensions (DNSSEC) following the implementation of DNSSEC in the root zone in July 2010 * Improving ICANN's Global Security Engagement with key stakeholders and partners * Building on the collaborative efforts of the Internet security community efforts to effectively respond to malicious abuses of the Domain Name System (DNS) Comments on the Plan [PDF, 2.52 MB] are welcomed through 13 October 2010 3 November 2010 23:59 UTC. Comments may be submitted at ssr-plan-fy11(a)icann.org address and viewed at http://forum.icann.org/lists/ssr-plan-fy11/ address. Plan for Enhancing Internet Security, Stability, and Resiliency (FY 11): * العربية [PDF, 1.76 MB] * 中文 (to be added) * English [PDF, 2.52 MB] * Français [PDF, 1.65 MB] * Русский [PDF, 1.79 MB] * Español [PDF, 2.62 MB] Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Kurt Question
by Adrian Kinderis Oct. 12, 2010

Oct. 12, 2010

He says "next version of book". Does that mean there will be others and the next won't be "final"? Adrian Kinderis

5 8

ccNSO Update - ccNSO ICANN Board Nomination Results
by Olga Cavalli Oct. 12, 2010

Oct. 12, 2010

Hi, The nomination period for a ccNSO representative to the ICANN Board ended last week. The only nominee was Chris Disspain, who accepted the nomination. The nomination report is available at *http://www.ccnso.icann.org/announcements/announcement-11oct10-en.htm * Chris will take the seat on the ICANN Board afther the ICANN meeting in June 2011. Best regards Olga

1 0

FW: Scheduling request - ICANN TLG discussion
by Gomes, Chuck Oct. 12, 2010

Oct. 12, 2010

Please note that I have asked to participate in an interview for the independent review of the ICANN TLG. If anyone has any input regarding this that you would like me to communicate, please let me know this week. Chuck -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Schmidt [mailto:jschmidt@jascommunications.com] Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 8:58 PM To: Gomes, Chuck Cc: William Yang Subject: Scheduling request - ICANN TLG discussion Chuck: JAS Communications LLC has been engaged to perform the independent review of the TLG and has been tasked to deliver a final report prior to the ICANN meeting in Cartagena. We would like to set a time for a telephonic interview with you in the next two weeks to discuss your opinions, observations, and experiences with the TLG. To facilitate scheduling, please respond with three dates in the time slots below when you have 30 minutes of availability. We will confirm the appointment within 24 hours. Monday thru Friday: 1100 - 1400 UTC Monday and Thursday: 2000 - 2300 UTC During our interview, we are interested in: (1) understanding the historical operations and impact of the TLG; (2) the role the TLG plays in the relationship between ICANN, ETSI, ITU, W3C, and IAB; and (3) your thoughts on how to improve the TLG in the future. Please consider these questions prior to our appointment, and please feel at ease during our conversation as all discussions are confidential and data are presented without attribution. Furthermore, please be aware that we will be opening an online survey in October and will invite your participation in that forum as well. Finally, we invite comments by email at any time by anyone with opinions or experiences about the TLG. Please email tlg-review(a)jascommunications.com. Please feel free to share with the GNSO. We recognize this is a very tight timeline and we sincerely appreciate your willingness to accommodate scheduling prior to 24-Sept. Please feel free to reach out to us or to our ICANN Liaison Olof Nordling with questions or comments about the review process. Please also note that a web page has been established for Organizational Review matters at http://www.icann.org/en/reviews. Thank you, Jeff Schmidt<jschmidt(a)jascommunications.com> William Yang<wyang(a)jascommunications.com> JAS Communications LLC

1 0