June 2010 - council - lists.icann.org

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

Nov. 3, 2010

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

1 1

Proposed agenda for the GNSO Council meeting on 15 July 2010
by Glen de Saint Géry July 8, 2010

July 8, 2010

Dear Councillors, Please find the proposed agenda for the GNSO Council meeting on 15 July 2010 in text below and attached. This agenda is posted on the GNSO home page http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-council-15jul10-en.htm and the GNSO Council Wiki space. The time for each item still has to be determined. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Agenda for GNSO Council Meeting 15 July 2010. This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures approved 28 October 2009 for the GNSO Council. http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/operating-procedures-revised-draft-clean-09o… 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 11:00 UTC See the following and http://www.timeanddate.com/ for other times: 04:00 PDT; 06:00 CDT; 07:00 EDT; 08:00 Buenos Aires; 08:00 Brazil; 13:00 CEST; 15:00 Moscow; 16:00 Pakistan; 19:00 Hong Kong; 20:00 Tokyo, 21:00 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. Please click on the link to join the GNSO Council Adobe Connect room http://icann.na3.acrobat.com/gnsocouncil/ Please enter as a 'guest'. Item 1: Administrative matters (10 minutes) 1.1 Roll call of Council members 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: * 23 June Meeting - Scheduled for approval on 12 July 2010 Item 2: Prioritization of GNSO work (? Minutes) 2.1 Refer to posted project ratings: http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-work-prioritization-project-list-value-r… 2.2 Discussion 2.3 Evaluation of the prioritization process * Lessons learned? * Areas for improvement? * How do we use the ratings? * Questions raised by the DT (Ken Bour) * Suggestions for next steps? Item 3: GNSO Affirmation of Commitments (AoC) Review Team (RT) Endorsements for Preserving security, stability and resiliency of the DNS (SSR) & Whois Policies(? minutes) 3.1 Key dates in the endorsement process * GNSO slate of endorsements is due not later than the end of August * Next Council meetings: 5 August & 26 August * Initial Council action on Stakeholder Group (SG) endorsements needs to occur on 5 August to allow for any needed follow-up action on 26 August 2010. * SG endorsements & any alternates are needed by 28 July 2010. 3.2 Review of the GNSO process * Questions? 3.3 Discussion Item 4: Whois Studies (? minutes) 4.1 Refer to: * Whois Studies Report: http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-studies-report-for-gnso-23mar10-en… * RFP for Proxy/Abuse Study: http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-18may10-en.htm * Liz Gasster's summary chart of the studies: http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-studies-chart-08jun10-en.pdf 4.2 Brief overview of the study choices http://brussels38.icann.org/meetings/brussels2010/presentation-whois-report… * Discussion * Any recommendations? 4.3 Discussion of how to proceed in selecting studies 4.4 Next steps? Item 5: Vertical Integration (VI) PDP WG (? Minutes) 56.1 Progress report (Margie Milam) 56.2 Discussion 56.3 Next steps? 56.4 Timeline? Item 6: Registration Abuse Policies Working Group Final Report (? Minutes) .6.1 Refer to Final Report: http://gnso.icann.org/issues/rap/rap-wg-final-report-29may10-en.pdf .6.2 Summary of Recommendations (Marika Konings) .6.3 Council questions 6.4 Plan for evaluating & acting on the recommendations? Item 7: Drafting team for draft DNS-CERT/SSR WG charter (? minutes) .7.1 GNSO Volunteers: * Terry Davis (NCA) * Rafik Dammak (NCSG) * Greg Aaron (RySG, Afilias) * Kathy Kleiman (RySG, PIR) * Keith Drazek (RySG, VeriSign) * Mike Rodenbaugh (CSG, CBUC) * Zahid Jamil (CSG, CBUC) * Rodney Joffe (RySG, NeuStar * Jaime Wagner (CSG, ISCPC) 7.2 Status report (Chuck Gomes) Item 8: Audio-casting of Council meetings (? minutes) 8.1 Report on costs & methods (Marika Konings or Rob Hoggarth) 8.2 Implementation status Item 9: Other Business (? minutes) 9.1 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) 11:00UTC ________________________________________ California, USA (PST) UTC-8+1DST 04:00 Cedar Rapids, USA (CDT) UTC-6+1DST 06:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EDT) UTC-5+1DST 07:00 Buenos Aires, Argentina UTC-3+0DST 08:00 Rio de Janeiro/Sao Paulo Brazil UTC-3+0DST 08:00 Dublin, Ireland (GMT) UTC+1DST 12:00 Darmstadt, Germany (CET) UTC+1+1DST 13:00 Paris, France (CET) UTC+1+1DST 13:00 Moscow, Russian Federation (MSK) UTC+3+1DST 15:00 Karachi, Pakistan UTC+5+0DST 16:00 Hong Kong, China UTC+8+0DST 19:00 Tokyo, Japan UTC+9+0DST 20:00 Melbourne/Sydney Australia (EDT) UTC+10+0DST 21:00 ________________________________________ 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

5 7

Motion and Document Deadline - Wednesday, 7 July 2010 for Council meeting on 15 July
by Glen de Saint Géry June 30, 2010

June 30, 2010

Dear Councillors, As required in the GNSO Operating Procedures, motions and reports for consideration in the GNSO Council meeting on 15 July 2010 are due not later than 8 days in advance of that meeting, that is, Wednesday, 7 July 2010. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

REMINDER: Closes 15 July at 23:59 UTC Call for Applicants for a Position of Volunteer Review Team Member
by Glen de Saint Géry June 30, 2010

June 30, 2010

Call for Applicants for a Position of Volunteer Review Team Member http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-01jun10-en.htm - Review Team 2: Security, Stability and Resiliency of the DNS - - Review Team 4: WHOIS Policy - 1 June 2010 The Affirmation of Commitments calls for a periodic review of four key ICANN objectives, namely: Ensuring accountability, transparency and the interests of global Internet users; Preserving security, stability and resiliency of the DNS; Promoting competition, consumer trust and consumer choice; WHOIS policy. Affirmation reviews are to be performed by Review Teams composed of volunteer community Members representing the relevant Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees of ICANN. A discussion paper on Affirmation Reviews Requirements and Implementation Processes [PDF, 617 KB] is available for full reference. ICANN now invites interested individuals to apply for a position of volunteer Review Team Member on the following Review Teams: Preserving security, stability and resiliency of the DNS; WHOIS policy. This call is solely intended for interested individuals who wish to apply in representation of a Supporting Organization (SO) or Advisory Committee (AC). Candidatures to serve as independent experts will not be considered. Please download the full text of this Call for Applicants [PDF, 101 KB], which contains further instructions and information on the application procedure for interested candidates. Applications will be accepted until 15 July 2010 at 23:59 UTC. SO/ACs' requirements are to be posted on the Affirmation Reviews web space very shortly. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

GAC Brussels communique
by Glen de Saint Géry June 30, 2010

June 30, 2010

Dear Councillors, Please find the link to the GAC Brussels Communique. http://gac.icann.org/system/files/Brussels-communique.pdf posted on page http://gac.icann.org/press-release/gac-2010-communique-37 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

RE: [council] FW: Eric Brunner Williams - AOC Reviews
by Tim Ruiz June 30, 2010

June 30, 2010

James Bladel applied for the Whois review team. He did not apply for the A&T review team. Glen, would you please correct that? Thanks, Tim Sent from Go Daddy Mobile Mail. > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: RE: [council] FW: Eric Brunner Williams - AOC Reviews > From: Glen de Saint Géry<Glen(a)icann.org> > Date: Tue, June 29, 2010 9:25 am > To: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes(a)verisign.com>, Council GNSO > <council(a)gnso.icann.org> > > > Chuck, > > All the applications are posted on page: > http://gnso.icann.org/aoc-reviews/ > > Thank you. > Kind regards, > > Glen > > Glen de Saint G�ry > GNSO Secretariat > gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org > http://gnso.icann.org > > From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@verisign.com] > Sent: mardi 29 juin 2010 16:23 > To: Glen de Saint G�ry; Council GNSO > Subject: RE: [council] FW: Eric Brunner Williams - AOC Reviews > > Glen, > > Is there a place where the applications are posted for each of the > RTs? If not, I think it would be helpful to do that. > > Chuck > > From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org > [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Glen de Saint G�ry > Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2010 9:54 AM > To: Council GNSO > Subject: [council] FW: Eric Brunner Williams - AOC Reviews > > Forwarded From: Alice Jansen > > Dear Glen, > > Please find enclosed Eric Brunner Williams' candidature for the: > > - Security Stability & Resiliency of the DNS Review > (identified as his first choice) > - WHOis Policy (identified as his choice number 4 out of the > 4 AoC reviews) > > CV - Letter and GNSO additional information attached - > > Thank you, > > Kind regards > > Alice > > Alice E. Jansen > -------------------------- > ICANN > Assistant, Organizational Reviews

1 0

FW: Eric Brunner Williams - AOC Reviews
by Glen de Saint Géry June 29, 2010

June 29, 2010

Forwarded From: Alice Jansen Dear Glen, Please find enclosed Eric Brunner Williams' candidature for the: - Security Stability & Resiliency of the DNS Review (identified as his first choice) - WHOis Policy (identified as his choice number 4 out of the 4 AoC reviews) CV - Letter and GNSO additional information attached - Thank you, Kind regards Alice Alice E. Jansen -------------------------- ICANN Assistant, Organizational Reviews

3 5

Brussels Approved Resolutions
by Glen de Saint Géry June 29, 2010

June 29, 2010

Dear Councillors, Attached is a copy of the resolutions approved by the Board at the Brussels meeting on 25 June 2010. Please note that the ICANN Board resolutions are posted on page: http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/ at: http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-25jun10-en.htm with a transcript of the meeting http://brussels38.icann.org/meetings/brussels2010/transcript-board-25jun10-… Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Public Comments: GNSO Council Operations Work Team and Constituency and Stakeholder Group Operations Work Team Recommendations
by Glen de Saint Géry June 28, 2010

June 28, 2010

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-28jun10-en.htm Please note the public comments are open until 18 JULY 2010. Please take the time to comment. Public Comment: Community Comment Invited on the GNSO Council Operations Work Team and Constituency and Stakeholder Group Operations Work Team Recommendations 28 June 2010 Pursuant to a Resolution passed by the GNSO Council at its meeting on 23 June 2010, the community is invited to provide comments on a set of GNSO Improvements recommendations submitted by the GNSO Council Operations Work Team and the Constituency and Stakeholder Group Work Team submitted to the GNSO Council for consideration at its meeting on 23 June 2010 at the ICANN meeting in Brussels, Belgium. Background/Explanation: These recommendations are the product of two Work Teams (Sections A and B below) that were chartered by the GNSO's Operations Steering Committee (OSC) in March 2009 to review and recommend implementation proposals concerning certain sections of the Board's GNSO Improvements Report (3 February 2008). 1. The GNSO Council Operations Work Team (GCOT) was tasked with a cross-constituency effort to review the existing GNSO operating rules and procedures and to recommend changes consistent with the new GNSO Council's goal to become a strategic manager of the policy process. In June 2009, the Work Team developed a package of recommendations, particularly those necessary to seat the new GNSO Council at the ICANN meeting in Seoul, South Korea in October 2009. The GNSO Council approved the recommendations for new GNSO Operating Procedures on 28 October 2009. Subsequently, the GCOT identified additional recommendations for amending the GNSO Operating Procedures in accordance with the Board's GNSO Improvements Report. These additional recommendations are the subject of this announcement. In particular, the Work team completed and submitted certain documents that it recommends be incorporated into the GNSO Operating Procedures (GOP) as follows: Section 2.1-Council Member Term Limits http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-gnso-op-procedures-term-limits-24may10-e… Section 2.4-Board Seat Elections http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-gnso-op-procedures-board-seat-elections-… Section 3.8-Absences and Vacancies http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-gnso-op-procedures-absences-vacancies-11… Chapter 4.0-Voting http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-gnso-op-procedures-voting-11jun10-en.pdf Chapter 5.0-Statements and Disclosures of Interest http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-gnso-op-procedures-soi-doi-11jun10-en.pdf [Note that two sections, 5.3.2 and 5.3.3, are not approved pending further Staff action to be determined. These sections are footnoted in the document as "inactive" until subsequently approved by the OSC and Council.] 2. The Constituency and Stakeholder Group Operations Work Team (CSG-WT) was tasked with developing recommendations concerning Constituency and Stakeholder Group participation rules, operating principles, and member databases. Its recommendations are part of the overall GNSO Improvements effort and are designed to improve the GNSO Council Operating Procedures and enhance Constituency and Stakeholder Group operations. The Work Team divided this task into the following four subtasks: * Subtask 1: Develop recommendations for a set of participation rules and operating procedures, to which all Constituencies should abide; * Subtask 2: Develop recommendations for clear operating principles for Constituencies to ensure that they function in a representative, open, transparent and democratic manner; * Subtask 3: Develop recommendations for creating and maintaining a database of all Constituency members and others not formally a part of any Constituency that is up-to-date and publicly accessible; and * Subtask 4: Develop a "toolkit" of in-kind staff support and/or services for all Constituencies. The Work Team completed the recommendations for Subtask 4 ahead of the other subtasks and submitted these recommendations separately to the OSC for review. The OSC approved the recommendations with modifications and submitted them to the GNSO Council, which voted to accept the recommendations on 17 December 2009 and staff work on implementation is underway. The consolidated recommendations on the three subtasks are detailed in the following report: Recommended Common Operating Principles and Participation Guidelines for GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies; and Recommendations on a GNSO Database of Community Members http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-csg-recommendations-task-27may10-en.pdf At its 23 June 2010 GNSO Council directed the Staff to post for public comment for a 21-day period the recommendations of the GNSO Council and Constituency and Stakeholder Group Operations Work Teams for public review and comment. Community members are invited to review the recommendations and comment on all aspects of the recommended procedures. Additional Document Links: * GNSO Council Operations Work Team Wiki Space and Charter * Constituency and Stakeholder Group Operations Work Team 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 Work Team and 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 28 June through 18 July 2010 and invites community comments concerning this document. * The formal Public Comment Forum Box is located here: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201007-en.htm#gcot-cs… * To submit comments: gcot-csg-recommendations(a)icann.org * To view comments: http://forum.icann.org/lists/gcot-csg-recommendations/ Staff Responsible: Julie Hedlund Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Re: [council] GNSO Wrap-Up session: Public Order and Morality
by Terry L Davis June 26, 2010

June 26, 2010

glen I'd at least like to be on the mailing list then if I have cycles, I would try to participate. Take care Terry On Thu Jun 24 9:34 , Glen de Saint Géry sent: > >Dear Councillors, > >There has been an expression of interest in discussing the topic of morality and public order by some of the GAC and ALAC members and the GNSO has been invited to join this group. > >Councillors and Stakeholders that would like to join the group please send your name and email address to: gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org. Please note that the group is open to all Stakeholder Group members, so please inform your Stakeholder Groups. > >During the GNSO Wrap-up session today, the following people volunteered: > >Bill Drake >Jaime Wagner >Olga Cavalli >Mary Wong >Caroline Greer >Zahid Jamil > >Please let me know if you would like a mailing list for your work. > >Thank you. >Kind regards, > >Glen > >Glen de Saint Géry >GNSO Secretariat >gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org >http://gnso.icann.org > > >

3 2

Safe travels
by Rosette, Kristina June 24, 2010

June 24, 2010

All, I have to drop off the call because of a conflicting call. Safe travels home, everyone. If I don't see you later today or tomorrow, see you in Cartagena! K

4 3

GNSO Wrap-Up session: Public Order and Morality
by Glen de Saint Géry June 24, 2010

June 24, 2010

Dear Councillors, There has been an expression of interest in discussing the topic of morality and public order by some of the GAC and ALAC members and the GNSO has been invited to join this group. Councillors and Stakeholders that would like to join the group please send your name and email address to: gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org. Please note that the group is open to all Stakeholder Group members, so please inform your Stakeholder Groups. During the GNSO Wrap-up session today, the following people volunteered: Bill Drake Jaime Wagner Olga Cavalli Mary Wong Caroline Greer Zahid Jamil Please let me know if you would like a mailing list for your work. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

2 1

RE: [council] Gala tickets and volunteers...
by Terry L Davis June 24, 2010

June 24, 2010

Chuck If you do something like that and wanted also to increase WG participation, you could put a threshold of something like a 50% or minimum of X meeting attendance. Take care Terry On Thu Jun 24 2:16 , "Gomes, Chuck" sent: > >I wonder if there might be a way to accommodate Timâs and >Maryâs suggestions.Â What if invitations were reserved up front for all >GNSO members who are active volunteers in the GNSO (i.e., WG members, >Councilors, SG/Constituency chairs).Â We would need to find out who of those >volunteers are planning to be in attendance and want to attend the GALA; once >that was done, Secretariat Staff could pick up those invitations arrange for >pick up as feasible. > >Â > >Chuck > >Â > > > > > > > >From: >owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf >Of StÃ©phane Van Gelder > >Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 3:06 AM > >To: Olga Cavalli > >Cc: HughesDeb(a)usa.redcross.org; MWong(a)piercelaw.edu; >council(a)gnso.icann.org > >Subject: Re: [council] Gala tickets and volunteers... > > > > > >Â > >Sorry to wade in, but I find this thread surreal. > > > >Â > > > > > >So should it be a rule at ICANN meetings that even if there >are 2,000 or more attendees, as we are told is the case here, the organizers >MUST find suitable space for them? So does that mean they have to rent a >stadium or something if ICANN meetings continue to grow in popularity and >interest worldwide? > > > > > >Â > > > > > >I understand and am sympathetic to Tim's desire to include >everyone, but what if that's not physically possible? Should a venue be >discounted because a 2,000 person gala event cannot be organized there, either >for budgetary or logistical reasons? > > > >Â > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >StÃ©phane Van Gelder > >Directeur GÃ©nÃ©ral / General manager > >+33 1 48 01 83 51 > > > >INDOM Noms de domaine / DomainÂ names > >124-126, rue de Provence > >75008 Paris > >France > >0820 77 7000 (Prix d'un appel local)Â > >De l'Ã©tranger (calling from outsideÂ France): + 33 1 76 70 05 67 > >www.indom.com > > > >Daily domain name industry news:Â www.domaines.info > >Mon blog/My blog :Â www.stephanevangelder.com > >Twitter : stephvg > > > > > >Â > > > > > >---------------- > >TÃ©lÃ©chargez l'App INDOM GRATUITE pour iPhone (App Store, Recherche: >"INDOM") > > > > > >Download INDOM's FREE iPHone App (App Store, search for INDOM). > > > > > >http://itunes.apple.com/fr/app/indom/id359401210?mt=8 > >---------------- > > > > > > > > > > > >Â > > > > > >Le 23 juin 2010 Ã 08:55, Olga Cavalli a Ã©crit : > > > > > > > > > >Hi, > >I agree with Tim and Mary. > >When meetings are organized, there should be a commitment made by organizers >and local partnersÂ to allow everyone in the ICANN community to >participating in social events including the Gala dinner. > >It is extremely disappointing to have difficulties in getting one of the >invitations for those not part of a SO or AC, even when they volunteer time and >effort in different working groups or are just part of the community attending >the meeting. > >As new rules are being established for ICANN meetings organization, I suggest >that we address this comment to those in charge of preparing them. > >Regards > >Olga > > > >2010/6/22 <HughesDeb(a)usa.redcross.org> > > > > > >I strongly >agree with Mary. > >Debbie > > > >Debra Y. Hughes l Senior Counsel > >American Red Cross > >Office >of the General CounselÂ > >2025 E Street, NW > >Washington, D.C. 20006 > >Phone: (202) 303-5356 > >Fax: (202) 303-0143 > >HughesDeb(a)usa.redcross.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org >[mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] >On Behalf Of Mary Wong > >Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 10:34 AM > >To: GNSO Council > >Subject: Re: [council] Gala tickets and volunteers... > > > > > > > >Â > > > > > > > >I >agree with Tim that it seems to defeat the purpose if the most active >volunteers at ICANN don't get an equal chance to attend the main event. > > > > > > > >Â > > > > > > > >More >broadly, I find it troubling that these events are listed as "networking >events" on the schedule, but occasionally (usually at meetings where there >are very many attendees, e.g. Paris and now Brussels) an "ordinary" >member of the community (e.g. not a Board or Council member) is >told,Â afterÂ traveling toÂ the meeting and after he/she has been >asked to name his/her hotel for transportÂ to the gala, that he/she needs a >ticket on a "first come first served" basis (BTW the meeting website >merely hints vaguely at this, saying that "Invitations will be available >... starting on Tuesday etc.")Â > > > > > > > >Â > > > > > > > >I >appreciate that this kind of decision is made by the host/sponsor for >logistical reasons, and not ICANN, but to me it could - and probably will - be >taken as a poor reflection of ICANN (especially when so much volunteer time is >being asked of the community). I also appreciate that as a Council member I get >a ticket and in advance (thank you Glen!!!!) but if I were a non-Council but >active WG member, I might be troubled by that too. > > > > > > > >Â > > > > > > > >It >seems to me that if the host/sponsor cannot hold a splashyÂ event that can >accommodate as many members of the community as wish to attend (some of whom >may be here for the first time or who may be funding themselves), then either >hold a less fancy/ambitious event so that more can attend, or don't hold one at >all (or at least don't advertise it as a gala open to all). > > > > > > > >Â > > > > > > > >All >right, nowÂ someone tell me this is "outside the scope of >Council" :) > > > > > > > >Â > > > > > > > >Have >a good day of meetings, everyone! > > > > > > > > > >Mary > > > > > > > >Â > > > > > > > > > >Mary W S Wong > > > > > > > > > >Professor >of Law & Chair, Graduate IP Programs > > > > > > > > > >Franklin >Pierce Law Center > > > > > > > > > >Two >White Street > > > > > > > > > >Concord, >NH 03301 > > > > > > > > > >USA > > > > > > > > > >Email: >mwong(a)piercelaw.edu > > > > > > > > > >Phone: >1-603-513-5143 > > > > > > > > > >Webpage: >http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php > > > > > > > > > >Selected >writingsÂ available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584 > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: > > > > > > "Tim > Ruiz" <tim(a)godaddy.com> > > > > > > > To: > > > > > "GNSO > Council " <council(a)gnso.icann.org> > > > > > > > Date: > > > > > > 6/22/2010 > 3:00 AM > > > > > > > Subject: > > > > > > [council] > Gala tickets and volunteers... > > > > > > > I learned this morning that the ATRT members do not get Gala > tickets similar to the way the Council received them. It seems to me that if > the primary social event at these meetings is going toÂ have > limitedÂ availability that active volunteers in current working groups, > work teams, etc.Â of the ACs and SOs should have some preference. > > > > Â > > > > I'm not sure if there is anything we can do about it at this > point, but Glen,Â is there any way that atÂ least the ATRT members can > be sure to get tickets if any of them want them? Â And going forward, > this is something that should be given some thought. It may even serve as an > incentive for participation in the work of the ACs and SOs. > > > > Â > > > > Tim > > > > > > > >Â > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Â > > > >Â > > > > > > > > > > > >

2 1

Brussels meeting transcripts, recordings and presentations
by Glen de Saint Géry June 24, 2010

June 24, 2010

Dear All, The transcripts of the Brussels meetings are posted on the calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#jun under the date the meeting took place. In the interest of publishing the transcripts as quickly as possible, the transcripts have not been checked against the recording for accuracy. The recordings and presentations are published on the meeting schedule under the corresponding nodes. http://brussels38.icann.org/full-schedule for example: http://brussels38.icann.org/node/12487 GNSO Council Open Meeting http://brussels38.icann.org/node/12502 Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy Part B Please let me know if you ahev any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Gala tickets and volunteers...
by Tim Ruiz June 24, 2010

June 24, 2010

8 8

AoC timeline
by Olof Nordling June 23, 2010

June 23, 2010

Dear all, The names of GNSO endorsed candidates for RT2 (Security, Stability, Resilience) and RT4 (WHOIS) are needed by the end of August 2010. Hope this answers the question raised - and apologies for my absence (the session was originally scheduled for early morning but eventually clashed with the ccNSO Review presentation - tried to send my virtual twin brother, but he refused:() All the best Olof

2 1

GNSO Council resolutions 23 June 2010
by Glen de Saint Géry June 23, 2010

June 23, 2010

Dear Councillors, Ahead of the official Council minutes, the following resolutions were passed by the GNSO Council at its open meeting in Brussels on 23 June 2010. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you very much. Kind regards, Glen GNSO COUNCIL RESOLUTION (Re: Work Prioritization) as amended Made by: Olga cavalli Seconded by: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben WHEREAS, the GNSO Council, at its 21 April 2010 meeting, adopted a resolution and timeline 21 april motions> to conduct its first Work Prioritization effort according to a set of procedures (proposed Chapter 6 and ANNEX) http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/wpmg-section-6-and-annex-09apr10-en.pdf> recommended by the Work Prioritization Model Drafting Team (WPM-DT); WHEREAS, the adopted timeline outlined four major process steps the first three of which have been completed as follows: 1) Step 1: ICANN Policy Staff prepared and delivered to the GNSO Council a recommended Work Prioritization Project List (v1.0), including a Cover Letter, on 30 April 2010 Council approved on 20 May 2010 http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/>]. 2) Step 2: Eighteen Councilors and one Liaison (19 total) submitted individual Value Ratings for all 15 Eligible Projects (approved in Step 1) on or before 9 June (deadline extended from 7 June), which were then successfully processed and aggregated by Staff for input to Step 3; 3) Step 3: The GNSO Council held a Work Prioritization group discussion session on 19 June 2010 in Brussels and successfully finalized a set of Value Ratings for 14 Eligible Projects (Note: the IDNF project was determined by the Council to be "Ineligible"); NOW THEREFORE, BE IT: RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council approves the GNSO Work Prioritization Value Ratings finalized in its group discussion session held on 19 June 2010 and directs Staff to publish those Value Ratings on the GNSO website according to Step 4 of the adopted timeline. Motion carried with one abstention COUNCIL RESOLUTION PERTAINING TO CCT FINAL CONSOLIDATED REPORT carried over from 10 June 2010 (as amended by Alan Greenberg) Made by: Chuck Gomes Seconded by: Olga Cavalli WHEREAS, the GNSO Council, at its 21 May 2010 meeting, accepted the deliverable of the Communications and Coordination Work Team (CCT) as its final set of recommendations; WHEREAS, a twenty-one (21) day Public Comment Forum http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-23apr10-en.htm completed between 23 April 2010 and 16 May 2010 and a Staff Summary and Analysis http://forum.icann.org/lists/cct-recommendations/msg00004.html has been prepared; WHEREAS, the GNSO Council agreed to take action on the CCT's recommendations as soon as possible after the end of the public comment period; NOW, BE IT THEREFORE: RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council approves the Final Consolidated Report http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/cct-consolidated-report-final-09apr10-en.pdf of the CCT, replacing the second sentence section 5.8 with "The CCT recommends that Working Group charters be drafted with careful attention to the issues and/or questions that should be considered and the goals/objectives desired to be accomplished in addition to desired timeframes.", and directs Staff to begin work on implementation. RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council accepts the CCT's specific recommendation to convene a standing committee whose role will be to monitor, coordinate, and manage the continuing implementation of the various recommendations emanating from the chartered GNSO Improvements Work Teams; Motion passes unanimously by voice vote. MOTION Referring to the GNSO Council Operations Procedures Work Team (GCOT) and the Constituency Stakeholder Group Work Team (CSG) Recommendations Made by: Chuck Gomes Seconded by: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben WHEREAS, in October 2008, the GNSO Council established a framework for implementing the various GNSO Improvements http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm identified and approved by the ICANN Board of Directors on 26 June 2008; 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 GNSO Council Operations Work Team (GCOT) https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?gnso_operations_team and the Constituency and Stakeholder Group Operations Work Team (CSG-WT), https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?constituency_operations_team which were chartered to focus on specific operational areas addressed in the BGC Report recommendations; http://www.icann.org/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-report-03fe… WHEREAS, the GCOT has completed and submitted certain documents that it recommends be incorporated into the GNSO Operating Procedures (GOP) as follows: * Section 2.1-Council Member Term Limits http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-gnso-op-procedures-term-limits-24may10-e… * Section 2.4-Board Seat Elections http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-gnso-op-procedures-board-seat-elections-… * Section 3.8-Absences and Vacancies http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-gnso-op-procedures-absences-vacancies-11… * Chapter 4.0-Voting http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-gnso-op-procedures-voting-11jun10-en.pdf * Chapter 5.0-Statements and Disclosures of Interest http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-gnso-op-procedures-soi-doi-11jun10-en.pdf o Note that two sections, 5.3.2 and 5.3.3, are not approved pending further Staff action to be determined. These sections are footnoted in the document as "inactive" until subsequently approved by the OSC and Council. WHEREAS, the CSG-WT has completed and submitted the following document that it recommends be approved for implementation within the GNSO: * Recommended Common Operating Principles and Participation Guidelines for GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies; and Recommendations on a GNSO Database of Community Members http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-csg-recommendations-task-27may10-en.pdf WHEREAS, the OSC has approved the above referenced GCOT amendments to the GOP and the CSG-WT recommendations and has forwarded these documents (via embedded links) to the GNSO Council on or before 15 June 2010; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT: RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council accepts these deliverables submitted by the Work Teams and approved by the OSC and directs Staff to post these aforementioned documents for twenty-one (21) days in the ICANN Public Comment Forum. RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council shall take formal action on these documents, including potential modification, as soon as possible after the conclusion of the public comment period. Motion passed by voice vote. 2 abstentions: Kristina Rosette, David Taylor MOTION TO APPROVE AOC ENDORSMENT PROCESS: (Original motion carried over from 10 June) Made by: Bill Drake Seconded by: Caroline Greer Whereas, in furtherance of ICANN¹s responsibilities under the Affirmation of Commitment (AOC), the GNSO Council formed a drafting team to develop a process to endorse volunteers to serve on the each of the AOC review teams; Whereas, the AOC Review Requirements Drafting team (AOC-RR Drafting Team) has proposed a process to facilitate such GNSO Council endorsements; Whereas, the GNSO Council desires to adopt the AOC-RR Drafting Team proposed process for all future AOC review team selections; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT: Resolved, that the GNSO Council hereby approves the Endorsement Process described in the attached document http://gnso.icann.org/aoc-reviews/gnso-endorsement-of-aoc-nominees-process-0 1jun10-en.pdf; Resolved further, that the GNSO Council should implement the Endorsement Process for all future AOC review team selections, including the ³WHOIS Policy² and the ³Security, Stability, and Resiliency of the DNS² Review Teams; and RESOLVED FURTHER, ICANN Staff is requested to post and distribute the Endorsement Process as widely as possible to all GNSO related groups in an effort to inform qualified applicants of the important work of the ³WHOIS Policy² and ³Security, Stability and Resiliency of the DNS² review teams. Motion passed with roll call vote: Contracted Party House: Unanimously in favour. Non Contracted Party House: 8 votes in favour 8 Votes in favour: Wendy Seltzer, Rosemary Sinclair, Olga Cavalli, Bill Drake, Zahid Jamil, Mary Wong, Rafik Dammak, Debbie Hughes 5 Votes against: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben, David Taylor, Mike Rodenbaugh, Jaime Wagner, Kristina Rosette MOTION ON ENHANCING THE TRANSPARENCY OF GNSO COUNCIL MEETINGS Made by: Bill Drake Seconded by: Olga Cavalli WHEREAS the Affirmation of Commitments mandates that ICANN processes be made as transparent as possible; WHEREAS the GNSO Council seeks to promote broad community awareness of and engagement in GNSO activities; WHEREAS the GNSO Council is a management team whose elected members represent their respective Stakeholder Groups in a manner determined by those Stakeholder Groups; WHEREAS this representation function would be enhanced if Stakeholder Group members were able to listen in real time to Council meetings; and WHEREAS it would be impractical to open the GNSO Council meeting teleconference facility to Stakeholder Group members; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT: RESOLVED that beginning in July 2010, all GNSO Council teleconference meetings will be audiocast (in addition to being recorded) so that members of the community can listen in real time. Motion passed unanimously by voice vote. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Fwd: Postponing or amending MOTION ON ENHANCING THE TRANSPARENCY OF GNSO COUNCIL?
by Stéphane Van Gelder June 23, 2010

June 23, 2010

I would like to propose the following amendment as friendly on Bill's motion (agenda item 7.2). Bill, Olga, would you accept as friendly? Stéphane Début du message réexpédié : >> RESOLVED that the Council asks staff to determine the costs associated with audiocasting all GNSO Council teleconference meetings (in addition to being recorded) so that members of the community can listen in real time. In making this determination, staff shall assess the services and prices of external suppliers, as well the cost of providing such services internally through ICANN's own network operations. Staff is asked to provide cost information on the available options to the Council prior to its meeting on 15 July 2010.

3 3

RE: [council] Gala tickets and volunteers...
by Tim Ruiz June 23, 2010

June 23, 2010

Tim never expressed a desire to include *everyone*. My simple suggestion is that when attendance will be limited volunteers active in current WGs/WTs within the various ACs and SOs be given consideration similar to the way Council has been. That could be as simple as the WG/WT Chairs gathering the necessary info and submitting requests. Tim > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [council] Gala tickets and volunteers... > From: Stéphane Van Gelder<stephane.vangelder(a)indom.com> > Date: Wed, June 23, 2010 2:05 am > To: Olga Cavalli <olgacavalli(a)gmail.com> > Cc: HughesDeb(a)usa.redcross.org, MWong(a)piercelaw.edu, > council(a)gnso.icann.org > > > Sorry to wade in, but I find this thread surreal. > So should it be a rule at ICANN meetings that even if there are 2,000 > or more attendees, as we are told is the case here, the organizers > MUST find suitable space for them? So does that mean they have to rent > a stadium or something if ICANN meetings continue to grow in > popularity and interest worldwide? > I understand and am sympathetic to Tim's desire to include everyone, > but what if that's not physically possible? Should a venue be > discounted because a 2,000 person gala event cannot be organized > there, either for budgetary or logistical reasons? > St�phane Van Gelder > Directeur G�n�ral / General manager > +33 1 48 01 83 51 > INDOM Noms de domaine / Domain names > 124-126, rue de Provence > 75008 Paris > France > 0820 77 7000 (Prix d'un appel local) > De l'�tranger (calling from outside France): + 33 1 76 70 05 67 > www.indom.com > Daily domain name industry news: www.domaines.info > Mon blog/My blog : www.stephanevangelder.com > Twitter : stephvg > ---------------- > T�l�chargez l'App INDOM GRATUITE pour iPhone (App Store, Recherche: > "INDOM") > Download INDOM's FREE iPHone App (App Store, search for INDOM). > http://itunes.apple.com/fr/app/indom/id359401210?mt=8 > ---------------- > Le 23 juin 2010 � 08:55, Olga Cavalli a �crit : > Hi, > I agree with Tim and Mary. > When meetings are organized, there should be a commitment made by > organizers and local partners to allow everyone in the ICANN > community to participating in social events including the Gala > dinner. > It is extremely disappointing to have difficulties in getting one > of the invitations for those not part of a SO or AC, even when they > volunteer time and effort in different working groups or are just > part of the community attending the meeting. > As new rules are being established for ICANN meetings organization, > I suggest that we address this comment to those in charge of > preparing them. > Regards > Olga > 2010/6/22 <HughesDeb(a)usa.redcross.org> > I strongly agree with Mary. > Debbie > Debra Y. Hughes l Senior Counsel > American Red Cross > Office of the General Counsel > 2025 E Street, NW > Washington, D.C. 20006 > Phone: (202) 303-5356 > Fax: (202) 303-0143 > HughesDeb(a)usa.redcross.org > ______________________________________________________________________ > From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org > [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong > Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 10:34 AM > To: GNSO Council > Subject: Re: [council] Gala tickets and volunteers... > I agree with Tim that it seems to defeat the purpose if the most > active volunteers at ICANN don't get an equal chance to attend the > main event. > > More broadly, I find it troubling that these events are listed as > "networking events" on the schedule, but occasionally (usually at > meetings where there are very many attendees, e.g. Paris and now > Brussels) an "ordinary" member of the community (e.g. not a Board or > Council member) is told, after traveling to the meeting and after > he/she has been asked to name his/her hotel for transport to the gala, > that he/she needs a ticket on a "first come first served" basis (BTW > the meeting website merely hints vaguely at this, saying that > "Invitations will be available ... starting on Tuesday etc.") > > I appreciate that this kind of decision is made by the host/sponsor > for logistical reasons, and not ICANN, but to me it could - and > probably will - be taken as a poor reflection of ICANN (especially > when so much volunteer time is being asked of the community). I also > appreciate that as a Council member I get a ticket and in advance > (thank you Glen!!!!) but if I were a non-Council but active WG member, > I might be troubled by that too. > > It seems to me that if the host/sponsor cannot hold a splashy event > that can accommodate as many members of the community as wish to > attend (some of whom may be here for the first time or who may be > funding themselves), then either hold a less fancy/ambitious event so > that more can attend, or don't hold one at all (or at least don't > advertise it as a gala open to all). > > All right, now someone tell me this is "outside the scope of Council" > :) > > Have a good day of meetings, everyone! > Mary > > Mary W S Wong > Professor of Law & Chair, Graduate IP Programs > Franklin Pierce Law Center > Two White Street > Concord, NH 03301 > USA > Email: mwong(a)piercelaw.edu > Phone: 1-603-513-5143 > Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php > Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network > (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584 > >>> > From: > "Tim Ruiz" <tim(a)godaddy.com> > To: > "GNSO Council " <council(a)gnso.icann.org> > Date: > 6/22/2010 3:00 AM > Subject: > [council] Gala tickets and volunteers... > I learned this morning that the ATRT members do not get Gala tickets > similar to the way the Council received them. It seems to me that if > the primary social event at these meetings is going to have > limited availability that active volunteers in current working groups, > work teams, etc. of the ACs and SOs should have some preference. > > I'm not sure if there is anything we can do about it at this point, > but Glen, is there any way that at least the ATRT members can be sure > to get tickets if any of them want them? And going forward, this is > something that should be given some thought. It may even serve as an > incentive for participation in the work of the ACs and SOs. > > Tim > > Pierce Law | University of New Hampshire - An Innovative Partnership

1 0

RE: Suggested change to CCT motion
by Gomes, Chuck June 23, 2010

June 23, 2010

I accept this as a friendly amendment. Chuck From: Olga Cavalli [mailto:olgacavalli@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 7:06 PM To: Alan Greenberg Cc: Gomes, Chuck; Liz Gasster; Mason Cole Subject: Re: Suggested change to CCT motion Thanks Alan, as Chuck made the motion I will wait for his comments. Regards Olga 2010/6/22 Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> Chuck and Olga, On Chuck's suggestions, Mason and I have come up with a change to the CCT report which addresses my concerns. Liz and I discussed it and suggest a simple fix to the motion which will incorporate this change. The change replaces one sentence. The old sentence read: The CCT recommends that Working Group charters be drafted with careful attention to the issues or questions that should be considered and the outcomes desired. The replacement is: The CCT recommends that Working Group charters be drafted with careful attention to the issues and/or questions that should be considered and the goals/objectives desired to be accomplished in addition to desired timeframes. Note that this change is in line with the ALAC comment on the CCT report. Since the original motion already directs staff to "consider" the comment during implementation, this amendment simply removes the staff discretion on whether or not to honor the comment. As such, it is not in any way changing the intent of the original motion. Since I have no rights to make what is presumably a friendly amendment, I will leave to the two of you to take whatever formal action is necessary. To fix the motion, replace the current first RESOLVED: RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council approves the Final Consolidated Report http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/cct-consolidated-report-final-09apr10-en.pd f of the CCT, without further modification, and directs Staff to begin work on implementation. with: RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council approves the Final Consolidated Report http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/cct-consolidated-report-final-09apr10-en.pd f of the CCT, replacing the second sentence section 5.8 with "The CCT recommends that Working Group charters be drafted with careful attention to the issues and/or questions that should be considered and the goals/objectives desired to be accomplished in addition to desired timeframes.", and directs Staff to begin work on implementation. Alan

2 1

Adobe Connect room for GNSO Council meeting
by Marika Konings June 23, 2010

June 23, 2010

Dear All, We’ll be using the GNSO Council Adobe Connect room for the open meeting this morning in order to review and modify (if needed) the motions: http://icann.na3.acrobat.com/gnsocouncil/. With best regards, Marika

1 0

Board Chair comments on Council Workload & Prioritisation
by Zahid Jamil June 22, 2010

June 22, 2010

At the CSG Breakfast Peter made the point that if there is an issue in regards workload or prioritisation, it is for the Council to address this matter. This would suggest that we are responsible not to overload our workload, deal with requests in a mature, responsible and measured manner. It seems that if we choose speed and meeting deadlines (at times) over getting the right outcome we are going to be responsible for this in the eyes of the Board and the community. Therefore, it seems that the Council should not shy away from stating that a time line (set by Board or any other entity) cannot be met or that we will have to take time we decide in our responsible opinion and that matters should wait until we get it right and not compromise quality over speed. I especially note this in light of deadlines, at times, being used as leverage during negotiations to push parties to compromise. Sincerely, Zahid Jamil Barrister-at-law Jamil & Jamil Barristers-at-law 219-221 Central Hotel Annexe Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan Cell: +923008238230 Tel: +92 21 5680760 / 5685276 / 5655025 Fax: +92 21 5655026 www.jamilandjamil.com Notice / Disclaimer This message contains confidential information and its contents are being communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this message by mistake and delete it from your system. The contents above may contain/are the intellectual property of Jamil & Jamil, Barristers-at-Law, and constitute privileged information protected by attorney client privilege. The reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification of any kind whatsoever of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing it in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently or incidentally or some other use of this communication) without prior written permission and consent of Jamil & Jamil is prohibited. Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

1 0

Motion on Transparency of Council Meetings
by William Drake June 21, 2010

June 21, 2010

Hello, In light of the bit of conversation over the past couple days concerning the relationship between Council members and their SGs, the ATRT process and our pending meeting with them, and internal discussions in NCSG, I hear by make the following motion. MOTION ON ENHANCING THE TRANSPARENCY OF GNSO COUNCIL MEETINGS WHEREAS the Affirmation of Commitments mandates that ICANN processes be made as transparent as possible; WHEREAS the GNSO Council seeks to promote broad community awareness of and engagement in GNSO activities; WHEREAS the GNSO Council is a management team whose elected members represent their respective Stakeholder Groups in a manner determined by those Stakeholder Groups; WHEREAS this representation function would be enhanced if Stakeholder Group members were able to listen in real time to Council meetings; and WHEREAS it would be impractical to open the GNSO Council meeting teleconference facility to Stakeholder Group members; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT: RESOLVED that beginning in July 2010, all GNSO Council teleconference meetings will be audiocast (in addition to being recorded) so that members of the community can listen in real time. *********************************************************** William J. Drake Senior Associate Centre for International Governance Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies Geneva, Switzerland william.drake(a)graduateinstitute.ch www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html www.linkedin.com/in/williamjdrake ***********************************************************

11 23

FW: OSC GCOT 3.8 and 4 and CSG report 1
by Gomes, Chuck June 21, 2010

June 21, 2010

FYI to Councilors. We have a motion for 23 June to approve these reports. Glen - Please make sure there are links to these documents. Chuck -----Original Message----- From: philip.sheppard(a)aim.be [mailto:philip.sheppard@aim.be] Sent: Sunday, June 20, 2010 10:30 AM To: Gomes, Chuck Cc: gnso-osc(a)icann.org Subject: OSC GCOT 3.8 and 4 and CSG report 1 Chuck, on behalf of the OSC these are the three documents approved at yesterdays meeting. We recommend them to Council Philip

1 0

RES: WPM Council Resolution Amendment
by Jaime Plug In June 21, 2010

June 21, 2010

Dear All, According to the results of our yesterday exercise I would like to make the following amendment to the Council Resolution on Work Prioritization. Jaime Wagner ISPs Representative CGI (Brazilian Internet Steering Commitee) j(a)bwagner.com.br <mailto:jaime@corp.plugin.com.br> jaime <mailto:jaime@corp.plugin.com.br> @cgi.br <mailto:jaime@cgi.br> +55(51)8126-0916 De: owner-gnso-wpm-dt(a)icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-wpm-dt@icann.org] Em nome de Ken Bour Enviada em: domingo, 20 de junho de 2010 12:14 Para: gnso-wpm-dt(a)icann.org Assunto: [gnso-wpm-dt] WPM Council Resolution Amendment GNSO COUNCIL RESOLUTION (Re: Work Prioritization) WHEREAS, the GNSO Council, at its 21 April 2010 meeting, adopted a resolution <https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?21_april_motions> and timeline to conduct its first Work Prioritization effort according to a set of procedures (proposed Chapter <http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/wpmg-section-6-and-annex-09apr10-en.pdf> 6 and ANNEX) recommended by the Work Prioritization Model Drafting Team (WPM-DT); WHEREAS, the adopted timeline outlined four major process steps the first three of which have been completed as follows: 1) Step 1: ICANN Policy Staff prepared and delivered to the GNSO Council a recommended Work <http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/work-prioritization-project-list-30apr10-en.pd f> Prioritization Project List (v1.0), including a Cover <http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/cover-letter-work-prioritization-proje ct-list-30apr10-en.pdf> Letter, on 30 April 2010 [Council <http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/> approved on 20 May 2010] 2) Step 2: Eighteen Councilors and one Liaison (19 total) submitted individual Value Ratings for all 15 Eligible Projects (approved in Step 1) on or before 9 June (deadline extended from 7 June), which were then successfully processed and aggregated by Staff for input to Step 3; 3) Step 3: The GNSO Council held a Work Prioritization group discussion session on 19 June 2010 in Brussels and successfully finalized a set of Value Ratings for 14 Eligible Projects (Note: the IDNF project was determined by the Council to be "Ineligible"); NOW THEREFORE, BE IT: RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council approves the GNSO Work Prioritization Value Ratings finalized in its group discussion session held on 19 June 2010 and directs Staff to publish those Value Ratings on the GNSO website according to Step 4 of the adopted timeline.

3 2