November 2010 - council - lists.icann.org

ICANN Board resolution on Vertical Integration - dated 5 Nov 2010
by Bruce Tonkin Nov. 11, 2010

Nov. 11, 2010

From: http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-05nov10-en.htm New gTLDs - Cross-Ownership Issues for Registries and Registrars Whereas, at the ICANN meeting in Nairobi in March 2010, the Board passed a resolution indicating that as a default position that no co-ownership would be allowed in new gTLDs, but that if the GNSO were to develop a policy on the subject prior to the launch of new TLDs that the Board would consider using the new policy for the new gTLD program <http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-12mar10-en.htm#5>. Whereas, in May 2010, ICANN published version 4 of the Draft Applicant Guidebook, which included a note that the Board encouraged the GNSO to recommend policy on this issue, and that the Board would review this issue again if the GNSO did not make recommendations in time for launch of the new gTLD program <http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/comments-4-en.htm>. Whereas, the GNSO's Vertical Integration Working Group is divided on whether registrars should be allowed to operate registries (and consequentially whether registries should be allowed to operate registrars). The VI-WG's "Revised Initial Report on Vertical Integration Between Registrars and Registries" is posted at <http://gnso.icann.org/issues/vertical-integration/revised-vi-initial-re port-18aug10-en.pdf> [PDF, 2.42 MB]. Whereas, the GNSO VI working group's report includes a number of proposals to address vertical integration for the new gTLD program, but the VI-WG has not reached consensus as to which one to recommend <http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg09754.html>. Whereas, on 23 September 2010, ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee submitted its comments on v4 of the Applicant Guidebook, including comments on the issue of registry-registrar separation <http://www.icann.org/en/correspondence/dryden-to-dengate-thrush-23sep10 -en.pdf> [PDF, 44 KB]. Whereas, the Board has had over six months since Nairobi to consider the issue, including consideration of the GNSO VI working group's deliberations, and community comment including at the ICANN meeting in Brussels in June 2010. Whereas, the current set of agreements are not balanced in that while recent contracts prohibit registries from acquiring registrars, ICANN has never had a rule prohibiting registrars from applying for or operating TLDs. Whereas, while ICANN has individually negotiated contracts that recently have included restrictions on registry ownership of registrars, cross-ownership provisions have varied over time and no formal "policy" on this topic has ever been recommended by the GNSO or adopted by ICANN. Whereas, historical contract prohibitions on registries acquiring registrars do not provide a compelling basis for principled decision-making. Whereas, the Board is committed to making fact-based decisions, and has carefully considered available economic analysis, legal advice and advice from the community. Resolved, (2010.11.05.02), the Board directs the CEO to include the following principles relating to registry-registrar cross-ownership in the forthcoming version of the Applicant Guidebook. 1. ICANN will not restrict cross-ownership between registries and registrars. Registry operators are defined as the registry operator and all other relevant parties relating to the registry services. 2. Registry agreements will include requirements and restrictions on any inappropriate or abusive conduct arising out of registry-registrar cross ownership, including without limitations provisions protecting against: a. misuse of data; or b. violations of a registry code of conduct; 3. These provisions may be enhanced by additional enforcement mechanisms such as the use of self-auditing requirements, and the use of graduated sanctions up to and including contractual termination and punitive damages. 4. ICANN will permit existing registry operators to transition to the new form of registry agreement, except that additional conditions may be necessary and appropriate to address particular circumstances of established registries. 5. ICANN will have the ability to refer issues to relevant competition authorities. 6. ICANN will have the ability to address possible abuses that may arise out of registry-registrar cross-ownership through the consensus policy process.

6 11

Re: (SCL > 6): [council] ICANN Board Votes to Enhance New gTLDs Competition
by Alan Greenberg Nov. 11, 2010

Nov. 11, 2010

The old Bylaws said that an organization could be a member of more than one Constituency. I would have sworn that the new Bylaws explicitly said that you could not participate in multiple SG and had to choose, but I cannot find that clause there. Is there a rule in either SG charter about multiple memberships?? Alan At 10/11/2010 02:18 AM, Adrian Kinderis wrote: >Wow! > ><http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-09nov10-en.htm>http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-09nov10-en.htm > >So what happens to the Contracted Party house? Did they think of that? ;) > > >Adrian Kinderis > >

3 7

Draft GNSO Weekend Schedule for Cartagena
by Gomes, Chuck Nov. 11, 2010

Nov. 11, 2010

In response to Adrian's question, please note the following link to the GNSO Weekend Schedule for Cartagena from our 28 October Council meeting agenda: "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" Thanks again to Stéphane and Glen for all the work they have done in this regard. Chuck

1 0

Agenda Outline for the Public Council Meeting in Cartagena
by Gomes, Chuck Nov. 11, 2010

Nov. 11, 2010

<<Agenda GNSO Council Public Mtg 8 Dec 2010 High Level v1.docx>> Here is a proposed agenda outline for the Public Council Meeting in Cartagena. Note that it must be posted not later than 15 November, so feedback is needed not later than Friday this week (12 November). All feedback is welcome (i.e., order of topics, missing topics, topics not needed, etc.). Note that some of the topics are intentionally broad so that they can include multiple subtopics (e.g., New gTLDs, Whois & Internationalized Registration Data, GNSO Improvements, etc.) Chuck

2 2

RE: [council] ICANN Board Votes to Enhance New gTLDs Competition
by Rosemary Sinclair Nov. 11, 2010

Nov. 11, 2010

Hi folks Here's a contribution from a question I asked Avri - I thought we had dome something on this but couldn't remember But thanks to Avri here's some info! Cheers Rosemary Rosemary Sinclair Managing Director, ATUG Chairman, INTUG T: +61 2 94958901 F: +61 2 94193889 M: +61 413734490 Email: rosemary.sinclair(a)atug.org.au Skype: rasinclair Please visit the ATUG website for Updates and Information www.atug.com.au -----Original Message----- From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri@psg.com] Sent: Thursday, 11 November 2010 5:01 PM To: Rosemary Sinclair Subject: Re: [council] ICANN Board Votes to Enhance New gTLDs Competition Hi, I do remember that point in advice, and in discussions, but I do not believe it was codified anywhere yet. I be wrong. I had to do some search. - It is not in the bylaws or the newly propose council guidelines. - For history the old guidelines (circa 2002 of the council stated (notice the last line): http://gnso.icann.org/council/new-procedures.shtml 2.3 Each Constituency identified in paragraph 1 of this Section shall maintain its recognition, and thus its ability to select GNSO Council representatives, only so long as it in fact represents the interests globally of the stakeholder communities it purports to represent, and shall operate to the maximum extent feasible in an open and transparent manner and consistent with procedures designed to ensure fairness. No individual or entity shall be excluded from participation in a Constituency merely because of participation in another Constituency. - however: In Recommended Common Operating Principles and Participation Guidelines for GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies and Recommendations on a GNSO Database of Community Members For Operations Steering Committee (OSC) Consideration 27 May 2010 http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-csg-recommendations-task-27may10-en.p df we find 2.1.2 j. No legal or natural person should be entitled to join more than one Group as a voting member. which it seems you approved as motion 20100805-1 http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#201008 RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council approves the following CSG-WT deliverable which is organized into two sections as follows: * Sections 2.1 & 2.2: Recommended Common Operating Principles and Participation Guidelines for GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies, which Staff has incorporated into a new Chapter 7.0 in the above-referenced GNSO Operating Procedures; and * Section 2.3: Recommendations on a GNSO Database of Community Members. so putting together the old No individual or entity shall be excluded from participation in a Constituency merely because of participation in another Constituency. + the new No legal or natural person should be entitled to join more than one Group as a voting member. You get what you are looking for. sort of. a. On 10 Nov 2010, at 23:05, Rosemary Sinclair wrote: > Hi Avri > > Do you know the answer??? > > Cheers > > Rosemary > > Rosemary Sinclair > Managing Director, ATUG > Chairman, INTUG > T: +61 2 94958901 F: +61 2 94193889 > M: +61 413734490 > Email: rosemary.sinclair(a)atug.org.au > Skype: rasinclair > > Please visit the ATUG website for Updates and Information www.atug.com.au > > From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg > Sent: Thursday, 11 November 2010 3:01 PM > To: Adrian Kinderis; Gomes, Chuck; Council GNSO > Subject: RE: [council] ICANN Board Votes to Enhance New gTLDs Competition > > Can you point to where the Bylaws (or anything else) say that? Alan > > At 10/11/2010 08:53 PM, Adrian Kinderis wrote: > > Right. > > So you can be a member of each. Just not a voting member. > > Adrian Kinderis > > > From: Gomes, Chuck [ mailto:cgomes@verisign.com] > Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 8:47 AM > To: Alan Greenberg; Adrian Kinderis; Council GNSO > Subject: RE: (SCL > 6): [council] ICANN Board Votes to Enhance New gTLDs Competition > > I believe the revised Bylaws GNSO provisions require that someone may not vote in more than one SG or Constituency. > > Chuck > > From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [ mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg > Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 12:42 PM > To: Adrian Kinderis; Council GNSO > Subject: Re: (SCL > 6): [council] ICANN Board Votes to Enhance New gTLDs Competition > > The old Bylaws said that an organization could be a member of more than one Constituency. I would have sworn that the new Bylaws explicitly said that you could not participate in multiple SG and had to choose, but I cannot find that clause there. Is there a rule in either SG charter about multiple memberships?? > > Alan > > At 10/11/2010 02:18 AM, Adrian Kinderis wrote: > Wow! > > http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-09nov10-en.htm > > So what happens to the Contracted Party house? Did they think of that? ;) > > > Adrian Kinderis > >

2 1

ICANN Board Votes to Enhance New gTLDs Competition
by Adrian Kinderis Nov. 11, 2010

Nov. 11, 2010

Wow! http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-09nov10-en.htm So what happens to the Contracted Party house? Did they think of that? ;) Adrian Kinderis

4 3

FW: [REGYCON] AoC SSR RT Resignation
by Gomes, Chuck Nov. 10, 2010

Nov. 10, 2010

Here is Ramses Martinez's bio , resume (CV) and Statement of Interest for the AoC SSR RT. Chuck From: GNSO Registry Constituency Planning [mailto:REGYCON-L@NIC.MUSEUM] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 11:01 AM To: REGYCON-L(a)NIC.MUSEUM Subject: [REGYCON] AoC SSR RT Resignation Importance: High Effective earlier this week, Ken Silva is no longer at VeriSign and has hence resigned from the AoC SSR RT. Recognizing that the SSR RT is just getting started and that a quick replacement of Ken on the RT would be helpful, VeriSign wants to propose that Ramses Martinez, Director of Information Security at VeriSign, be endorsed by the RySG for the SSR RT. Ken was a key leader in security for many years and will be missed, but Ramses has more direct security experience in recent years. Whereas Ken lead security efforts for VeriSign at a high level as CTO, Ramses was the very directly involved in strategic and operational security issues. Moreover, Ramses has more international security experience. I attached the following documents that describe Ramses' qualifications and experience: * Bio * Resume (CV) * Statement of Interest Please let me know if you have any questions. Also, if the RySG would like to have a call with Ramses, I would be happy to arrange it. Finally, so that this could possibly be considered by the GNSO Council in the 18 Nov Council meeting, I would like to request that we make a decision regarding RySG endorsement for Ken's replacement in our next meeting on Wednesday, 10 November if that is possible. Chuck <<Ramses Martinez-Bio sent to RySG 4 Nov 10.doc>> <<Ramses Martinez-RESUME sent to RySG 4 Nov 10pdf.pdf>> <<Ramses Martinez Statement of Interest.pdf>>

1 0

FW: [REGYCON] Nomination of Rodney Joffe for SSR
by Gomes, Chuck Nov. 10, 2010

Nov. 10, 2010

Here is Rodney Joffe's CV for the AoC SSR RT. Chuck From: GNSO Registry Constituency Planning [mailto:REGYCON-L@NIC.MUSEUM] On Behalf Of Neuman, Jeff Sent: Friday, November 05, 2010 1:22 PM To: REGYCON-L(a)NIC.MUSEUM Subject: [REGYCON] Nomination of Rodney Joffe for SSR All, With the resignation of Ken Silva from the SSR team, Neustar would like to nominate Rodney Joffe for consideration by the RySG for endorsement to the SSR Team. Rodney is a senior vice president with Neustar whose responsibilities include defining and guiding the technical direction of the company's Internet Infrastructure Services Group as well as heading the company's cybersecurity initiatives. If you recall, Rodney initially put his name in to serve on the SSR Team from the GNSO, but pulled his name out from consideration by the gTLD Registries so as to not compete with Ken Silva from VeriSign for the gTLD Registries endorsement. He then put his name forward for endorsement from the ccNSO (who in turn did endorse Rodney along with a couple of other ccTLDs). Our understanding was that Rodney was not selected by Rod/Heather because approving Rodney (despite his qualifications) would have put too many Americans on the Review Team. As many of you know, Rodney is one of the Premiere global experts on DNS and the inventor of UltraDNS (acquired by Neustar in 2006). Rodney is frequently called upon to assist Federal Authorities with regards to investigating and protecting against cyber-crime and cyber-terrorist activities where he is a recognized expert. He regularly briefs the White House and House/Senate groups on the subject, and has testified before congress as an expert. In addition to publishing a number of confidential papers in the field, he participated as a "Designated Trusted Agent" on the planning committee for the DHS's CyberStorm II International Cyber-Terrorism exercise in March 2008. He also participated in CyberStorm III as a lead on the core scenario design team. Besides these operational activities, Rodney is also active in Internet governance bodies, serving currently on the ICANN SSAC (Security and Stability Advisory Committee) and previously on both the ICANN RSTEP (Registry Services Technical Evaluation Panel) the ICANN NOMCOM (Nominating Committee) where he served three terms. He is a founding member of the Advisory Board of the Postel Center at USC/ISI, and is engaged in several Internet engineering organizations including OARC (Operations, Analysis, and Research Center), NANOG (North American Network Operators' Group), ARIN (American Registry for Internet Numbers), and the IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force). He holds a number of issued and pending patents in the network security field. Attached is a CV for Rodney. We are gathering the appropriate forms to formally submit his name. Thank you for your consideration of Neustar's nomination. Jeffrey J. Neuman Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy 46000 Center Oak Plaza Sterling, VA 20166 Office: +1.571.434.5772 Mobile: +1.202.549.5079 Fax: +1.703.738.7965 / jeff.neuman(a)neustar.biz <mailto:jeff.neuman@neustar.biz> / www.neustar.biz <http://www.neustar.biz/> ________________________________ The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message.

1 0

FW: AoC SSR RT Replacement Candidate
by Gomes, Chuck Nov. 10, 2010

Nov. 10, 2010

As I think everyone is aware, Ken Silva, the RySG nominee for the AoC SSR RT who was selected to be on the SSR RT, resigned from the RT because of a change in employment. In response to that, the RySG nominated two candidates as possible replacements as can be seen below. If there are no objections to this, in our meeting on 18 November we will acknowledge the RySG decision and send the names on to the AoC SSR RT and in particular the Selectors, Rod and Heather for their decision. Note that the SSR RT has already started its work so it has been requested that the replacement be in place as soon as possible. To accommodate that, I requested that the RySG make a decision today to meet our 8 day advance notice requirement for Council agenda items. The approved GNSO procedures for AoC RT endorsements call for each SG to nominate one candidate for each of the RTs and that was done. But those procedures do not describe what should happen if a replacement is needed; that may be something we need to add to the procedures in the future. The RySG did not have time for a full process to endorse just one candidate and, because both have outstanding qualifications, endorsed both. If there are any questions on this please, ask. I will forward the qualifications of the two candidates as submitted to the RySG. Chuck From: David W. Maher [mailto:dmaher@pir.org] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 11:40 AM To: Gomes, Chuck Subject: AoC SSR RT Replacement Candidate Dear Chuck: This is the notification by the Registries Stakeholder Group to you as Chair of the GNSO Council that the RySG supports the following two nominees as AoC SSR RT Replacement Candidate. Ramses Martinez Rodney Joffe David David W. Maher Senior Vice President - Law & Policy Public Interest Registry 1775 Wiehle Ave, #200 Reston, VA 20190 USA (v) +1-312-876-8055 (f) +1-312-876-7934 http://www.pir.org <https://mail.pir.org/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=https://mail.pir.org/exc hweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.pir.org/> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this e-mail or any attachment is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by returning it to the sender and deleting this copy from your system. Thank you for your cooperation

1 0

Interim Report on Vertical Integration Between Registrars and Registries (Phase I)
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 10, 2010

Nov. 10, 2010

Dear Councilors, The Interim Report on Vertical Integration between Registrars and Registries (Phase I) can be viewed directly at: http://gnso.icann.org/issues/vertical-integration/vi-interim-report-phase-i… And is posted on pages: http://gnso.icann.org/issues http://gnso.icann.org/ 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

1 0