October 2011 - council - lists.icann.org

Document and motion Deadline 18 OCTOBER for Open Council Dakar meeting on 26 October at 14:00 UTC
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 15, 2011

Oct. 15, 2011

Dear Councillors, Reports, motions and documents for consideration are due no later than (NLT) 8 days in advance (i.e.Tuesday, 18 October 2011) of the GNSO Council meeting in Dakar on 26 October, 2011 at 14:00 UTC. If you have reports for consideration, please send them directly to me at GNSO.Secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:GNSO.Secretariat@gnso.icann.org> so that they can be forwarded to the Council. Motions should be sent to the Council mailing list. Thank you very much. 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

Nominating Committee Appointees (NCA) selection to two Houses
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 15, 2011

Oct. 15, 2011

Dear All, As you know, the Nominating Committee (Nom Com) has selected two Nom Com Appointees (NCAs), Lanre Ajayi and Thomas Rickert, to serve on the GNSO Council for the upcoming year. Thomas Rickert has requested to be assigned to the Contracted Parties House (CPH) and the CPH has formally agreed that Thomas is a voting member in the CPH. As it has traditionally been the norm that the previous year's non-voting NCA becomes a voting NCA, we expect that Carlos Aguirre will be assigned to the NCPH this year, and Lanre Ajayi will be assigned the non-voting seat. Is this correct? Due to the close proximity of the Dakar meeting and the need to finalize organizational aspects of the meeting, the GNSO Council Secretariat would appreciate being informed of the NCPH NCA assignment no later than 30 September 2011 at 22:00 UTC. Thank you very much. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

7 11

Candidate Statement for position of GNSO Council chair
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 14, 2011

Oct. 14, 2011

Dear Councillors, Stéphane's candidate statement is posted at: http://gnso.icann.org/elections/index.html http://gnso.icann.org/elections/svg-candidacy-statement-13oc11-en.pdf May we remind the Council that Voting will take place during the Council meeting in Dakar on Wednesday, 26 October 2011. In order for this to happen, the Council meeting will be split in two parts: * Full Open Council meeting with the current Council. * Seat the new Councillors. Start new meeting, with one agenda item: the Chair Election * Election will take place by show of hands ; 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 From: Stéphane Van Gelder [mailto:Stephane.vangelder@indom.com] Sent: jeudi 13 octobre 2011 15:34 To: Glen de Saint Géry Cc: council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: Re: [council] Please accept/reject nomination to the position of GNSO Council Chair Please find attached my candidate statement in acceptance of this nomination. Stéphane

3 3

RE: [council] Re: A question to the candidate
by john＠crediblecontext.com Oct. 14, 2011

Oct. 14, 2011

1 0

CPH Vice Chair
by Stéphane Van Gelder Oct. 14, 2011

Oct. 14, 2011

Councillors, FYI, I have been informed by David Maher, Chair of the RySG, and Mason Cole, Chair of the RrSG, that the CPH has nominated Jeff Neuman as Vice Chair for a second term. They have asked me to pass that information on to the Council. Congratulations to Jeff. Stéphane

1 0

A question to the candidate
by john＠crediblecontext.com Oct. 14, 2011

Oct. 14, 2011

I forgot to switch my earlier email to plain text. Sorry all. Berard Stephane, As you think about how you might approach a second term as Chair of the Council, I wonder if you could give us your thoughts on this: In the “Discussion Paper on Next Steps to Produce a New Form of the RAA” sent to the Council yesterday by Kurt Pritz, is this: "We also note that disagreements in the GNSO Council regarding the process over the last year have resulted in delays in considering the substantive issues." This is not the first time or the softest way in which we have heard this criticism of delay and disharmony. How would you move to solve it? Cheers, Berard

2 1

RE: [council] A question to the candidate
by Tim Ruiz Oct. 14, 2011

Oct. 14, 2011

I think the bigger question is why Staff submitted this to the Council in the first place. Seems it skirts around the one thing that was actually asked, what is or isn't within the picket fence. In my opinion, it does not advance anything constructive and only serves to set those with different opinions even more firmly in their positions. Tim > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [council] A question to the candidate > From: john(a)crediblecontext.com > Date: Fri, October 14, 2011 9:08 am > To: "StÃ©phane_Van_Gelder" <stephane.vangelder(a)indom.com> > Cc: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org>, > "Glen_de_Saint_GÃ©ry" <Glen(a)icann.org> > > Stephane, > > > As you think about how you might approach a second term as Chair of the Council, I wonder if you could give us your thoughts on this: > > > In the â��Discussion Paper on Next Steps to Produce a New Form of the RAAâ�� sent to the Council yesterday by Kurt Pritz, is this: > > "We also note that disagreements in the GNSO Council regarding the process over the last year have resulted in delays in considering the substantive issues." > > This is not the first time or the softest way in which we have heard this criticism of delay and disharmony. How would you move to solve it? > > Cheers, > > Berard > >

2 1

RE: [council] For consideration: RAA DIscussion Paper
by Tim Ruiz Oct. 14, 2011

Oct. 14, 2011

Kurt, There is a serious error in this document in section VI. It states that the issues report recently approved by Council was proposed by me. As you very well know, Councilors are elected by and represent their SG or C, not themselves. The motion and issues report request was authored by and comes from the RrSG. I would appreciate that correction being made as soon as possible. Tim > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [council] For consideration: RAA DIscussion Paper > From: Kurt Pritz <kurt.pritz(a)icann.org> > Date: Thu, October 13, 2011 1:36 pm > To: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> > > > Dear GNSO Council Members, > > I would appreciate it if you could please review the attached �Discussion Paper on Next Steps to Produce a New Form of the RAA�. This paper suggests possible options for consideration by the community to move the RAA amendment process forward in a cooperative and timely manner. > > This paper was prepared in response to a request from the Board to categorize proposed amendment topics and summarize possible options for next steps. > > > The recent efforts by the GNSO Council to address some of the law enforcement recommendations demonstrate progress and are encouraging. There are many other proposals to be addressed. We believe that this paper can be useful in identifying additional alternative paths. To be clear, this is not intended to interrupt current work or advance ICANN Board or staff opinion in the policy discussions. The paper is meant to be responsive to requests for information. It is also meant to signal that there will be a high level of staff support to facilitate the development of RAA amendments and any related policy activities. > > > Two additional points: You will find that the categorization of topics is not as straightforward as we all might prefer. As described in the paper, it is difficult to determine whether a proposal is a policy issue or is within the picket fence without considering specific amendment language. Finally, the paper indicates a preference for undertaking substantive discussion now, to develop specific recommendations for amendments through negotiation or policy development or both. > > We hope that this Discussion Paper will encourage further dialogue in Dakar with the GNSO Council, the Registrar Stakeholder Group, and the ICANN community with regard to identifying an acceptable path forward. I am sure this paper is likely to raise questions also. I think an exchange of questions and answers is important to realize the full benefit of the thought that went into this � a writing does not always capture or describe all the ideas generated. Please direct those questions to Margie Milam, who will share them with the cross-functional team that worked on this for your consideration. > > Best regards, > > Kurt > > > > > > Kurt Pritz > ICANN > > > 4676 Admiralty Way, #330 > Marina del Rey, CA 90292 > > > > > >

1 0

A question to the candidate
by john＠crediblecontext.com Oct. 14, 2011

Oct. 14, 2011

1 0

ICANN Board resolutions - from 11 Oct 2011
by Bruce Tonkin Oct. 14, 2011

Oct. 14, 2011

From: http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-11oct11-en.htm Approved Board Resolutions | Special Meeting of the ICANN Board 11 October 2011 * Note: Where available, draft Rationale of the Board's actions is presented under the associated Resolution. The draft Rationale is not final until approved with the minutes of the Board meeting. Consent Agenda Resolved, the following resolutions in this Consent Agenda are approved: 1.1. Approval of Minutes of 25 August 2011 ICANN Board Meeting Resolved (2011.10.11.01), the Board approves the minutes of the 25 August 2011 ICANN Board Meeting. 1.2. Approval of Minutes of 17 September 2011 ICANN Board Meeting Resolved (2011.10.11.02), the Board approves the minutes of the 17 September 2011 ICANN Board Meeting. 1.3. Approval of Delegation of .CW (Curacao), Transitional Arrangements for Netherlands Antilles (.AN) ====================================================================================== Whereas, CW is the ISO 3166-1 two-letter country-code designated for Curaçao; Whereas, ICANN has received a request for delegation of .CW to the University of the Netherlands Antilles; Whereas, ICANN has reviewed the request, and has determined that the proposed redelegation would be in the interests of the local and global Internet communities; Resolved (2011.10.11.03), the proposed delegation of the .CW top-level domain to the University of the Netherlands Antilles is approved. Whereas, the .AN top-level domain was delegated on the basis of its former listing as an ISO 3166-1 two-letter country code designated for the Netherlands Antilles; Whereas, the ISO 3166-1 standard has removed the "AN" code, and the ISO 3166 Maintenance Agency recommends its use be discontinued; Whereas, ICANN is not responsible for deciding what is or is not a country, and adheres to the ISO 3166-1 standard for guidance on when to add, modify and remove country-code top-level domains; Whereas, the .AN top-level domain is still the primary domain used by parties in the countries and municipalities that comprised the former Netherlands Antilles; Whereas, there is a transition plan to move registrations from the .AN domain to new domains .CW and .SX, with the University of the Netherlands Antilles continuing to act as manager of the .AN domain until transition is complete, Resolved (2011.10.11.04), that the University of Netherlands Antilles be instructed to report their progress on decommissioning the .AN domain every six months to ICANN against a relevant set of metrics, Resolved (2011.10.11.05), that the University of Netherlands Antilles work to complete the transition of the .AN domain to the .CW domain, the .SX domain, and any other relevant domain; so that it may be removed from the DNS root zone no later than 31 October 2014. Resolved (2011.10.11.06), that the .AN domain be removed from the DNS root zone on 31 October 2014, if not requested earlier by the manager of the domain. 2. Approval of CEO Search Committee Membership ================================================= Whereas, 16 August 2011, Rod Beckstrom announced that he will continue to fulfill his term as ICANN's President and CEO, which will be completed on 1 July 2012. Whereas, the ICANN Board discussed CEO Succession planning at the Board meeting on 17 September 2011. Whereas, the ICANN Board directed the Board Governance Committee to recommend a slate of Board members to comprise a CEO Search Process Management Work Committee for the Board to consider at its next meeting. Whereas all members of the current Board and liaisons, including incoming, have all stated without reservation that they are not a candidate for the position of CEO and will not accept it as offered. Resolved (2011.10.11.07), no current or incoming member of the Board or liaisons may be considered as a candidate for the role of the CEO for the current CEO Selection process. Whereas, the following are the proposed members of the group, based upon Board Governance Committee recommendation and as refined by the Board: Steve Crocker George Sadowsky Bertrand de La Chapelle Erika Mann Chris Disspain Cherine Chalaby Ray Plzak R. Ramaraj Resolved (2011.10.11.08), the Board approves the recommended membership of the CEO Search Process Management Work Committee. Resolved (2011.10.11.09), the George Sadowsky will be the Chair of the CEO Search Committee. Rationale for Resolutions 2011.10.11.07 - 2011.10.11.09 The ICANN Board has begun planning for and developing the CEO succession process, to assist in transition of the leadership. The establishment of a work committee will allow the Board to coordinate this process with regular reporting to the Board as a whole, as well as reviewing opportunities for community involvement in the process. Timely succession of the ICANN CEO will assist the organization in maintaining its work in overseeing the security and the stability of the DNS. The establishment of the work committee will not have a financial impact on ICANN, though resources are likely to be required at later points in the process.

1 0