April 2010 - council - lists.icann.org

Public Comment: Community Comment Invited on Recommended New GNSO Work Prioritization Process
by Glen de Saint Géry April 25, 2010

April 25, 2010

Please take the time to comment! http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-23apr10-en.htm Public Comment: Community Comment Invited on Recommended New GNSO Work Prioritization Process 23 April 2010 At its 21 April 2010 meeting, the GNSO Council approved the use of a set of recommended new operating procedures designed to enable GNSO Councilors to begin categorizing and prioritizing their major work projects so that the Council can fulfill its new role as a strategic manager and coordinator of policy development activities within the GNSO. The ICANN community is invited to provide comments on those recommended new procedures. Background/Explanation: One of the fundamental tenets of the GNSO Improvements efforts has been to move the GNSO Council away from being a legislative body concerned primarily with voting towards becoming a more focused strategic entity with strengthened management and oversight of the policy development process. As part of that effort a newly restructured GNSO Council was seated at the Seoul ICANN meeting in October 2009. One of the new Counci's first items of business was to organize a Drafting Team (the GNSO Work Process Model Drafting Team - "WPM-DT") to develop a methodology for prioritizing the GNSO's project work. The ICANN Secretariat and Policy Staff had conducted an analysis for the Council of the actual levels of participation and attendance for GNSO Working Groups and Work Teams from the beginning of 2008 and continuing through approximately early September 2009. Staff's final report, delivered to the Council in Seoul, found " evidence of sporadic attendance and, in some cases, very low participation by some Constituencies and inconsistent participation by others." The Staff encouraged additional community dialogue concerning the following questions: * How might the GNSO's work be prioritized? * Is there too much GNSO work and, if so, what might be done to assess the total capacity? * Are Constituencies providing enough recruits to the groups being formed? * What levels of group participation should be targeted for each Constituency? The WPM-DT focused its efforts on that first question regarding Council priorities. On 9 April 2010, the WPM-DT delivered a recommended model methodology and set of procedures to help the Council prioritize its work. The WPM-DT's intent was to ensure that the recommended process: * is user-friendly, unambiguous, and straightforward to execute; * produces realistic outputs that will help the Council to make effective management decisions; and * is structured as an on-going task that accommodates change including the introduction of new projects as they are proposed in the future. At its 21 April meeting the Council accepted the deliverable of the WPM-DT and approved the use of a new Operating Procedures Chapter 6 and ANNEX http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/wpmg-section-6-and-annex-09apr10-en.pdf [PDF, 137 KB] for conducting its first Work Prioritization effort. In addition to directing the opening of this public Comment Forum, the Council established a timetable for conducting its initial effort at a group working session when councilors travel to Brussels, Belgium for the June 2010 ICANN meeting. The full GNSO Council Resolution containing the timeline of the initial effort is linked below. Community members are invited to review and comment on these new procedures. Document Links: * Proposed Chapter 6 and ANNEX to GNSO Operating Procedures [PDF, 137 KB] * Transmittal Letter to GNSO Council from the WPM-DT Chair [PDF, 13 KB] * WPM-DT Presentation to GNSO Council (21 April 2010) [PDF, 559 KB] * GNSO Council Resolution Inviting Public Comment (21 April 2010) * WPM-DT Presentation: GNSO Council Status Update (Nairobi) [PDF, 1.90 MB] * Presentation by D. Michel: GNSO Participation Study (Seoul) [PDF, 524 KB] The Process From Here: At the end of this Public Comment Forum period, ICANN Staff will review the comments submitted and prepare a summary analysis of the various submissions for GNSO Council review. The Council conditioned approval of the new procedures and said it reserves the right to modify the procedures described in Chapter 6 and the ANNEX after the conclusion of both the public comment period and the first Work Prioritization effort. Deadline and How to Submit Comments: At the direction of the GNSO Council, the Staff is opening a 21-day public consultation forum, from 26 April through 16 May 2010 and invites community comments on this document. The formal Public Comment Forum Box is located here: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201005-en.htm#wp To submit comments: work-prioritization(a)icann.org To view comments: http://forum.icann.org/lists/work-prioritization/ Staff Responsible: Robert Hoggarth Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Public Comment: Community Comment Invited on the Communications and Coordination Work Team (CCT) Final Consolidated Recommendations
by Glen de Saint Géry April 25, 2010

April 25, 2010

Please take the time to comment! Comments are open through to 13 May 2010. http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-23apr10-en.htm Public Comment: Community Comment Invited on the Communications and Coordination Work Team (CCT) Final Consolidated Recommendations 23 April 2010 Pursuant to a Resolution passed by the GNSO Council at its meeting on 21 April 2010, the community is invited to provide comments on a set of GNSO Improvements recommendations submitted by the Communications and Coordination Work Team (CCT) on 9 April 2010. The recommendations are part of the overall GNSO Improvements effort and are designed to help the GNSO Council and the GNSO Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups improve communications, cooperation and coordination among themselves and with other ICANN structures. Background/Explanation: This report is the product of a cross-constituency Communications and Coordination Work Team (CCT) that was chartered by the GNSO's Operations Steering Committee (OSC) in March 2009 to review and recommend implementation proposals concerning certain sections of the Board Governance Committee's GNSO Review Working Group Report on GNSO Improvements (3 February 2008 - see link below) including: * Developing new GNSO website requirements including document management and collaboration tools; * Improving the GNSO's ability to solicit meaningful feedback; and * Improving the GNSO's coordination with other ICANN structures. The CCT's Final Consolidated Recommendations report was approved by the OSC and forwarded to the Council effective 9 April 2010. To inform potential readers of the general content of the report, two main chapters address the following areas: Chapter II: Technology Recommendations * The GNSO website; * Document management; and * Collaboration tools. Chapter III: Communications and Coordination Recommendations * Soliciting community feedback; * Board-GNSO communications; * Cross SO/AC communication; * Time demands and prioritization; and * Other recommendations. Document Links: * CCT Final Consolidated Recommendations [PDF, 479 KB] * CCT Wiki Space and Charter * GNSO Council Resolution Inviting Public Comment * The Board's GNSO Improvements Report (3 Feb 2008) [PDF, 193 KB] The Process From Here: At the end of this Public Comment Forum period, ICANN Staff will review the comments submitted and prepare a summary analysis of the various submissions for GNSO Council review. Deadline and How to Submit Comments: At the direction of the GNSO Council, the Staff is opening a 21-day public consultation forum, from 23 April through 13 May 2010 and invites community comments on this document. The formal Public Comment Forum Box is located here: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201005-en.htm#cct To submit comments: cct-recommendations(a)icann.org To view comments: http://forum.icann.org/lists/cct-recommendations/ Staff Responsible: Julie Hedlund Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

FW: Public Meet Up with ICANN¹s CEO in Washington, DC on 27th January
by Glen de Saint Géry April 25, 2010

April 25, 2010

Forwarded From: Donna Austin on behalf of Rod Beckstrom _______ Dear Chuck and GNSO members As you know, I believe that ICANN's CEO should be accessible to the community, but also to those who may not regularly participate in ICANN's processes but are interested in the important work we do. As a part of this effort, I've started holding what I call "Meet Ups" where I make myself available in an informal setting when I travel and my schedule allows. To help ensure as many of people as possible are able to attend if they want, we announce these as far in advance as we can. All you need to bring are your thoughts, ideas, or questions and enough coin to buy your favourite form of refreshment. Here are all the details. If you have any questions, please send an email to my Chief of Staff, Donna Austin <donna.austin(a)icann.org>. Date: 27th January 2010 17:00 to 19:00 local time Place: Buffalo Billiards, Victorian Room, 1330 19th Street, Washington DC 20036 Map: http://tinyurl.com/yakmr9t I hope to see you there! Warmly Rod Rod Beckstrom President & CEO ICANN

3 3

FW: Letter from Rod Beckstrom re DNS-CERT
by Gomes, Chuck April 25, 2010

April 25, 2010

Please find attached Rod Beckstrom's response to the letter re the DNS-CERT business case that Chris Disspain, Cheryl Langdon-Orr and I sent to him and Peter. Chuck ________________________________ From: Chris Disspain [mailto:ceo@auda.org.au] Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 11:00 PM To: Gomes, Chuck; 'Cheryl Langdon-Orr' Subject: FW: Letter from Rod Beckstrom re DNS-CERT We need to discuss this. I'll be away at a staff retreat today and tomorrow. Can we speak 23.00 UTC Monday 26 April? Cheers, Chris Disspain CEO - auDA au Domain Administration Ltd ceo(a)auda.org.au <mailto:ceo@auda.org.au> www.auda.org.au <http://www.auda.org.au/> Important Notice - This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. Please consider the environment before printing this email. From: Donna Austin [mailto:donna.austin@icann.org] Sent: Thursday, 22 April 2010 11:10 To: DISSPAIN office; Gomes, Chuck; Cheryl Langdon-Orr Cc: Greg Rattray; Bart Boswinkel; David Olive Subject: Letter from Rod Beckstrom re DNS-CERT Dear Cheryl, Chris and Chuck Please find attached a letter from Rod Beckstrom responding to your letter of 25 March 2010, regarding the establishment of a DNS-CERT. Thanks Donna Donna Austin Chief of Staff Office of the CEO & President ICANN __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 5045 (20100420) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com

2 1

RE: [council] FW: Letter from Rod Beckstrom re DNS-CERT
by Tim Ruiz April 22, 2010

April 22, 2010

An ISOC letter expressing similar concerns regarding the DNS-CERT effort was posted this week: http://www.icann.org/correspondence/amour-to-dengate-thrush-14apr10-en.pdf Tim -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [council] FW: Letter from Rod Beckstrom re DNS-CERT From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes(a)verisign.com> Date: Thu, April 22, 2010 10:09 am To: <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Please find attached Rod Beckstrom's response to the letter re the DNS-CERT business case that Chris Disspain, Cheryl Langdon-Orr and I sent to him and Peter. Chuck From: Chris Disspain [mailto:ceo@auda.org.au] Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 11:00 PM To: Gomes, Chuck; 'Cheryl Langdon-Orr' Subject: FW: Letter from Rod Beckstrom re DNS-CERT We need to discuss this. I’ll be away at a staff retreat today and tomorrow. Can we speak 23.00 UTC Monday 26 April? Cheers, Chris Disspain CEO - auDA au Domain Administration Ltd ceo(a)auda.org.au www.auda.org.au Important Notice - This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. Please consider the environment before printing this email. From: Donna Austin [mailto:donna.austin@icann.org] Sent: Thursday, 22 April 2010 11:10 To: DISSPAIN office; Gomes, Chuck; Cheryl Langdon-Orr Cc: Greg Rattray; Bart Boswinkel; David Olive Subject: Letter from Rod Beckstrom re DNS-CERT Dear Cheryl, Chris and Chuck Please find attached a letter from Rod Beckstrom responding to your letter of 25 March 2010, regarding the establishment of a DNS-CERT. Thanks Donna Donna Austin Chief of Staff Office of the CEO & President ICANN __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 5045 (20100420) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com

1 0

Planning for Brussels
by Stéphane Van Gelder April 21, 2010

April 21, 2010

Councillors, Glen and I are already working on the GNSO agenda for Brussels and one of the items we need to sort out pretty quickly is whether the Council wants to have an informal dinner on the first Saturday evening like we did first in Seoul, then in Nairobi. Also, do people want to have the Sunday morning breakfast again as well? We also need to know if both houses wish to have separate meetings on the Saturday morning (reminder: due to the low numbers from the CP house in Nairobi, only the NCP house had a meeting)? The sooner we can get an idea of what people want, the easiest it will be for us to plan accordingly. Thanks, Stéphane

12 16

MP3 recording GNSO Council teleconference, Wednesday, 21 April 2010
by Glen de Saint Géry April 21, 2010

April 21, 2010

[To: liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org; council[at]gnso.icann.org] Please find the MP3 recording of the GNSO Council teleconference, held on Wednesday, 21 April 2010 at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-council-20100421.mp3 on page http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#apr Happy listening! Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

GNSO Council Resolutions 21 April 2010
by Glen de Saint Géry April 21, 2010

April 21, 2010

Dear All, Ahead of the official GNSO Council minutes, the following resolutions were passed at the GNSO Council meeting on Wednesday, 21 April 2010. 1. Motion to Accept the GNSO Improvements OSC CCT Report and initiate comment period Made by Chuck Gomes Seconded by Olga Cavalli Friendly amendment by Kristina Rosette WHEREAS, in October 2008, the GNSO Council established a framework (see GNSO Council Improvements Implementation Plan; http://www.icann.org/en/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-implemen…) for implementing the various GNSO Improvements identified and approved by the ICANN Board of Directors on 26 June 2008 (http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm#_Toc76113182 <http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm> ); WHEREAS, that framework included the formation, in January 2009, of two Steering Committees, the Operations Steering Committee (OSC) and the Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC), to charter and coordinate the efforts of five community work teams in developing specific recommendations to implement the improvements; WHEREAS, the OSC established three work teams, including the Communications and Coordination Work Team (CCT), which was chartered to focus on one of the five operational areas addressed in the BGC Report recommendations; WHEREAS, the CCT completed its deliberations and forwarded its Consolidated Final Recommendations to the OSC on 9 April 2010; WHEREAS, the OSC approved the CCT's Consolidated Final Recommendations http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/cct-consolidated-report-final-09apr10-en.pdf and forwarded the report to the GNSO Council on or before 12 April 2010; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT: RESOLVED that the GNSO Council accepts the deliverable of the CCT as its final set of recommendations and directs Staff to commence a twenty-one (21) day public comment period on the CCT's report. RESOLVED FURTHER that the GNSO Council shall take action on the CCT's recommendations as soon as possible after the end of the public comment period. Motion carried unanimously by voice vote. 2. GNSO Work Prioritisation Process Resolution Made by Olga Cavalli Seconded by Jaime Wagner WHEREAS, the ICANN Policy Staff prepared and delivered to the GNSO Council a 2008-2009 Work Team Attendance Study which confirmed that volunteer participation has been suffering and languishing. WHEREAS, the GNSO Council, considering the advice of Staff, organized a Drafting Team at the Seoul ICANN meeting for the purpose of developing a GNSO Work Prioritization model and procedure; WHEREAS, the Work Prioritization Model Drafting Team (WPM-DT) has completed its deliberations and developed a written procedure recommended for inclusion in the GNSO Operating Procedures as Chapter 6 plus an accompanying ANNEX http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/wpmg-section-6-and-annex-09apr10-en.pdf WHEREAS, the WPM-DT has developed a timeline of activities (see below) that it recommends be adopted in order that the first Work Prioritization effort can be completed by the ICANN Brussels meeting; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT: RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council accepts the deliverable of the WPM-DT, thanks the team for its efforts, and approves the use of Chapter 6 and the ANNEX http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/wpmg-section-6-and-annex-09apr10-en.pdf for conducting its first Work Prioritization effort. RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council directs Staff to commence a twenty-one (21) day public comment period on this amendment to the GNSO Operating Procedures and reserves the right to modify the procedures described in Chapter 6 and the ANNEX http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/wpmg-section-6-and-annex-09apr10-en.pdf after the conclusion of both the public comment period and the first Work Prioritization effort. RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council supports the recommended timeline (see below) for conducting the first Work Prioritization effort and directs the GNSO Secretariat to make arrangements consistent with its dates and activities. RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council take action on Chapter 6 and the ANNEX http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/wpmg-section-6-and-annex-09apr10-en.pdf with regard to the GNSO Operating Procedures as soon as possible after completion and analysis of the first Work Prioritization effort and after a second public comment period. TIMELINE FOR FIRST WORK PRIORITIZATION EFFORT Dates *Activities (per proposed ANNEX to Chapter 6 http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/wpmg-section-6-and-annex-09apr10-en.pdf 26-30 April ANNEX Step 1: Staff prepares its recommendations for Eligible and Non-Eligible Projects and their associated classifications 30 April Staff distributes recommended Project Lists to GNSO Council and all relevant GNSO structures (e.g. Stakeholder Groups, Constituencies, ALAC). 3-19 May Chair asks for Council approval (via email list) to adopt or modify Staff's recommendations 20 May Council Meeting Eligible Projects List approved by Council 21 May - 7 June ANNEX Step 2: Individual Councilor ratings completed (extended to 17 calendar days) and delivered to Staff 8-15 June ANNEX Step 2.3: Staff consolidates ratings and analyzes for commonality; prepares for Step 3. 19 June (or 20 June) ANNEX Step 3: Group Session (2 hours) to determine Value ratings 23 June Council Meeting (Brussels) EX Step 4: Approve final ratings/priorities and direct that results be published at gnso.icann.org. The motion carries with a simple majority in each house as summarized below. Contracted Parties House: 4 Votes in favour: Chuck Gomes, Edmon Chung, Caroline Greer, Terry Davis 3 Votes against: Adrian Kinderis, Tim Ruiz, Stéphane van Gelder Non Contracted Parties House: 10 votes in favour: Jaime Wagner, Wolf-Ulrich Knoben, Kristina Rosette, David Taylor, Debbie Hughes, Wendy Seltzer, Rafik Dammak, Bill Drake, Mary Wong, Olga Cavalli. Absent at time of vote: Mike Rodenbaugh, Zahid Jamil, Rosemary Sinclair. Stéphane van Gelder clarified that the addition of second comment period in the motion caused the Registrars Stakeholder Group (RrSG) to vote against the motion. Had this amendment not been added, the RrSG would have voted in favour of the model proposed by the WG. 3. Motion for WHOIS Studies Funding for FY11 Motion made by: Chuck Gomes Seconded by: Adrian Kinderis Whereas: In October 2007, the GNSO Council concluded that a comprehensive, objective and quantifiable understanding of key factual issues regarding the gTLD WHOIS system would benefit future GNSO policy development efforts (http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/) Before defining the details of studies, the Council solicited suggestions from the community for specific topics of study on WHOIS. Suggestions were submitted (http://forum.icann.org/lists/WHOIS-comments-2008/ ) and ICANN staff prepared a 'Report on Public Suggestions on Further Studies of WHOIS', dated 25-Feb-2008 (http://gnso.icann.org/issues/WHOIS-privacy/WHOIS-study-suggestion-report-25… ). On 5 November 2008 the GNSO Council formed a drafting team to solicit further constituency views assessing both the priority level and the feasibility of the various proposed WHOIS studies, with the goal of deciding which studies, if any, should be assessed for cost and feasibility. The Drafting Team determined that the six studies with the highest average priority scores should be the subject of further research to determine feasibility and obtain cost estimates. On 4 March 2009 the GNSO Council requested that Staff conduct research on feasibility and cost estimates for those six WHOIS studies and following that assessment the Council would decide which studies should be conducted (http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#200903) On 23 March 2010, staff provided its analysis to the GNSO Council of costs and feasibility for the first two study areas, and will continue to work on the remaining areas If funding becomes available, the Council will then decide which studies to fund, if any, provided that the Council's recommendation of this amount is not to be taken as an indication that the Council will recommend any or particular studies be performed provided that the total ICANN budget for FY11 is not increased as a result of funding WHOIS studies Resolved, that the GNSO Council recommends that at least $ 400,000 be set aside in the ICANN Budget for FY 2011. Resolved further, that the GNSO secretariat communicate this resolution to the ICANN Chief Financial Officer and the Board Finance Committee. The motion passes unanimously by roll call vote Contracted Parties House: 7 Votes in favour: Chuck Gomes, Edmon Chung, Caroline Greer, Terry Davis, Adrian Kinderis, Tim Ruiz, Stéphane van Gelder. Non Contracted Parties House: 9 votes in favour: Jaime Wagner, Wolf-Ulrich Knoben, Kristina Rosette, David Taylor, Debbie Hughes, Wendy Seltzer, Rafik Dammak, Bill Drake, Mary Wong, Olga Cavalli. Absent at time of vote: Mike Rodenbaugh, Zahid Jamil, Rosemary Sinclair. Olga Cavalli had to leave the call at the time of the vote. 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<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

SO / AC working group participation
by Olga Cavalli April 21, 2010

April 21, 2010

Hi, apologies I had to leave the call earlier but Wednesday morning I teach at the unversity. Please note that I want to participate in the working group included in item 5 in our agenda. Regards Olga *Item 5: Joint SO/AC WG to develop a sustainable approach to providing support to applicants requiring assistance in applying for and operating new gTLDs (5 Minutes). * 5.1 Status update (Chuck) •So far, GAC and ALAC plan to participate •Olof Nordling will be the lead New gTLD Implementation Team Staff person supporting this WG 5.2 Request for GNSO participants

1 0

Motion for WHOIS Studies Funding for FY11
by Gomes, Chuck April 20, 2010

April 20, 2010

<<Motion for Whois Studies Funding for FY11.doc>> In our Council meeting on 1 April I encouraged Councilors and their respective SGs and Constituencies to develop and propose specfic recommendations for funding of Whois Studies in the FY11 budget but no such recommendations were submitted. Recognizing that the Draft ICANN Budget has to be posted not later than 17 May and our next Council meeting after the one on 21 April is not until 20 May, three days later, I decided that we should try to make a recommendation in our meeting on 21 April. To facilitate that possibility I asked Liz to draft the attached motion (also pasted below). Because of the lateness of the motion we would need to first approve an exception to the 8-day GNSO Operating Procedures Requirement for motions before we could act on this motion. Also note that the motion has a placeholder for the amount to be budgeted for Whois Studies. My personal opinion is that it would be good to fund at least two studies in FY11 and even better if we could fund three if they are ready to go, thereby avoiding very lengthy delays for at least two and maybe three studies. Based on the estimates provided for two of the studies, a minimum of $300,000 would be needed and it might be wise to add a 10% buffer on to that, making it $330,000. If we decided to budget for three studies, one of which we do not have any cost estimates for, we could bump the amount up to $500,000. In a year of limited financial resources, we cannot guarantee how much will ultimately be put into the budget but we can should in my opinion at least make a recommendation for consideration by the community and ultimately the ICANN Board. . Please discuss this motion with your SGs and Constituencies before our meeting on Wednesday so that we can act on it using whatever amount we decide at that time if possible. Discussion on the list is encouraged and, if anyone is willing to second it without the amount inserted, that is welcome as well. If anyone would rather see an amount inserted, we can insert one that can later be amended. Chuck Motion for WHOIS Studies Funding for FY11 Whereas: In October 2007, the GNSO Council concluded that a comprehensive, objective and quantifiable understanding of key factual issues regarding the gTLD WHOIS system would benefit future GNSO policy development efforts (http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/) Before defining the details of studies, the Council solicited suggestions from the community for specific topics of study on WHOIS. Suggestions were submitted (http://forum.icann.org/lists/WHOIS-comments-2008/ ) and ICANN staff prepared a 'Report on Public Suggestions on Further Studies of WHOIS', dated 25-Feb-2008 (http://gnso.icann.org/issues/WHOIS-privacy/WHOIS-study-suggestion-repor t-25feb08.pdf ). On 5 November 2008 the GNSO Council formed a drafting team to solicit further constituency views assessing both the priority level and the feasibility of the various proposed WHOIS studies, with the goal of deciding which studies, if any, should be assessed for cost and feasibility. The Drafting Team determined that the six studies with the highest average priority scores should be the subject of further research to determine feasibility and obtain cost estimates. On 4 March 2009 the GNSO Council requested that Staff conduct research on feasibility and cost estimates for those six WHOIS studies and following that assessment the Council would decide which studies should be conducted (http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#200903) On 23 March 2010, staff provided its analysis to the GNSO Council of costs and feasibility for the first two study areas, and will continue to work on the remaining areas Resolved, that the GNSO Council recommends that at least (insert US dollar amount) be included in the ICANN Budget for FY 2011. Resolved further, that the GNSO secretariat communicate this resolution to the ICANN Chief Financial Officer and the Board Finance Committee.

4 8