April 2011 - council - lists.icann.org

Re: [council] FW: Global Outreach Recommendations
by Stéphane Van Gelder April 21, 2011

April 21, 2011

Thanks Jonathan. Is there a second for this motion? Stéphane Le 20 avr. 2011 à 20:43, Jonathan Robinson a écrit : > All, > > Please see below (and attached) for a proposed motion regarding public comments global outreach recommendations. > > I would very much appreciate a second for the motion. > > Many thanks, > > > Jonathan > > > > MOTION RE: PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GLOBAL OUTREACH RECOMMENDATIONS > > Made by: Jonathan Robinson > Seconded by: > > WHEREAS, in October 2008, the GNSO Council established a framework for implementing the various GNSO Improvements at: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 Constituency and Stakeholder Group Operations Work Team, which were chartered to focus on specific operational areas addressed in the BGC Report recommendations at: http://www.icann.org/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-report-03fe…; > > WHEREAS, one of the recommendations in BGC Report was to develop and implement a targeted outreach program to explore the formation of new constituency groups; > > WHEREAS, the Constituency and Stakeholder Group Operations Work Team (CSG-WT) was tasked with developing the recommendations on a global outreach program and submitted the document to the OSC for consideration on 21 January 2011; > > WHEREAS, the OSC submitted to the GNSO Council on 14 February 2011 the document “Recommendations to Develop a Global Outreach Program to Broaden Participation in the GNSO” at: http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/global-outreach-recommendations-21jan11-en.pdf > > WHEREAS, the OSC recommendations describe a global outreach strategy to relevant members of the public, particularly non-English speakers and those from developing countries/regions; and for development of global outreach programs aimed at increasing participation both from current members of the ICANN community as well as potential members, particularly non-English speakers; > > WHEREAS, on 24 February 2011 the GNSO Council acknowledged receipt of the document by the OSC and directed staff to post the document for forty-five (45) days in the ICANN Public Comment Forum at: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#gnso-outreach; > > WHEREAS, ICANN Staff produced a Summary and Analysis document of the four comments received and posted it in the Forum at:http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#gnso-outreach; > > NOW THEREFORE, BE IT: > > RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council directs the OSC and the CSG-WT to review the Summary and Analysis document as well as the comments and make any changes to the proposed recommendations as are deemed appropriate. > > <Motion for Consideration -Public Comments on Global Outreach Recommendations.doc>

1 0

Whois Studies
by Jonathan Robinson April 20, 2011

April 20, 2011

All, Based on the rationalisation outlined below, I would like to propose that Council further defers consideration of the WHOIS Registrant Identification Study i.e. that the motion be amended as follows: "Council defers consideration of the WHOIS Registrant Identification Study until the 9 June 2011 meeting and requests that any applicable motions in that regard be submitted not later than 1 June 2011." The rationale for further delay is that the small working group of volunteers has met twice recently to discuss the Whois Study #2, the WHOIS Registrant Identification Study. The intention was to have a revised Study 2 proposal for Council consideration in the 28 April meeting. They anticipated making revisions to reduce presumptively negative terminology while retaining the original study design to prove/disprove a hypothesis that natural persons were using privacy/proxy while also engaging in commercial activities. But the discussion revealed more extensive questions about study 2: . First, they believe that the present Study 2 proposal could be easily amended to answer all four registrant identification questions posed by the GAC in their April-2008 recommendations. . Second, they believe that the objective and results of Study 2 can be improved to generate broader and deeper analysis that would provide needed context for GNSO and ICANN in future work on these issues. Their goal will be to submit Study 2 recommendations to the Council not later than 1 June, in time for the 9 June Council meeting. This delay should not have any impact on Studies 3 & 4, which are under consideration in the motion that is to be acted on April 28. Best wishes, Jonathan

1 0

FW: [council] FW: Global Outreach Recommendations
by Jonathan Robinson April 20, 2011

April 20, 2011

All, Please see below (and attached) for a proposed motion regarding public comments global outreach recommendations. I would very much appreciate a second for the motion. Many thanks, Jonathan MOTION RE: PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GLOBAL OUTREACH RECOMMENDATIONS Made by: Jonathan Robinson Seconded by: WHEREAS, in October 2008, the GNSO Council established a framework for implementing the various GNSO Improvements at: 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 Constituency and Stakeholder Group Operations Work Team, which were chartered to focus on specific operational areas addressed in the BGC Report recommendations at: http://www.icann.org/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-report-03feb 08.pdf; WHEREAS, one of the recommendations in BGC Report was to develop and implement a targeted outreach program to explore the formation of new constituency groups; WHEREAS, the Constituency and Stakeholder Group Operations Work Team (CSG-WT) was tasked with developing the recommendations on a global outreach program and submitted the document to the OSC for consideration on 21 January 2011; WHEREAS, the OSC submitted to the GNSO Council on 14 February 2011 the document Recommendations to Develop a Global Outreach Program to Broaden Participation in the GNSO at: http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/global-outreach-recommendations-21jan11-en.pdf WHEREAS, the OSC recommendations describe a global outreach strategy to relevant members of the public, particularly non-English speakers and those from developing countries/regions; and for development of global outreach programs aimed at increasing participation both from current members of the ICANN community as well as potential members, particularly non-English speakers; WHEREAS, on 24 February 2011 the GNSO Council acknowledged receipt of the document by the OSC and directed staff to post the document for forty-five (45) days in the ICANN Public Comment Forum at: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#gnso-outreach; WHEREAS, ICANN Staff produced a Summary and Analysis document of the four comments received and posted it in the Forum at: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#gnso-outreach; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT: RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council directs the OSC and the CSG-WT to review the Summary and Analysis document as well as the comments and make any changes to the proposed recommendations as are deemed appropriate.

1 0

Our next council meeting
by Stéphane Van Gelder April 20, 2011

April 20, 2011

Councillors, Just to let you know that I will be on a plane at the time our April 28 meeting starts and will therefore be unable to chair it. I have asked Mary and Jeff to step in and they have kindly agreed to do so, my thanks to them. I expect to be able to join the call and chair it for the second hour and will be doing my very best to do so. Stéphane

1 0

Re: Joint ccNSO/GNSO IDN Working Group (JIG)
by Stéphane Van Gelder April 20, 2011

April 20, 2011

Thanks Lesley, I am copying the Council on this email in order to pass your message on. Do you have any idea of the timeframe for you to get the desired clarification from JIG and SSAC? Stéphane Le 13 avr. 2011 à 12:38, Lesley Cowley a écrit : > Hi Stéphane, > > I am advised that Patrick Fallstrom has raised some concerns with some of the language in the JIG Final Report, as member of the SSAC sub-group. > > In the circumstances, the ccNSO will ask for clarification from JIG and SSAC, before it takes any formal position/adopts the final report – would you be able to hold off the passing the report to the ICANN Board and staff whilst this is sorted please? > > Kind regards, > > Lesley > > From: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder(a)indom.com> > Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 23:55:22 +0200 > To: Lesley Cowley <lesley(a)nominet.org.uk> > Cc: Gabriella Schittek <gabriella.schittek(a)icann.org>, Glen de Saint Géry <Glen(a)icann.org> > Subject: Joint ccNSO/GNSO IDN Working Group (JIG) > > Leslie, > > At its meeting yesterday, the GNSO Council passed the following motion on the JIG. As per this motion, I wanted to inform you of the GNSO's approval of the JIG's final report, as it pertains to new gTLDs. > > Happy to answer any questions you may have. Please pass this on to the ccNSO as you see fit. > > Thanks, > > Stéphane > > > > Motion on the JIG Final Report on Single Character IDN TLDs > =========================================================== > > WHEREAS, > The Joint ccNSO/GNSO IDN Working Group (JIG) was created by mutual charters of the ccNSO (http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/jiwg-charter.pdf) and the GNSO (http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#200907) > > The JIG identified 3 issues of common interest: 1. Single Character IDN TLDs; 2. IDN Variant TLDs; and, 3. Universal Acceptance of IDN TLDs; > The JIG has issued an Initial Report (http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/jig-initial-report-26jul10-en.pdf) for public comments (http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-27jul10-en.htm) and thereupon a Draft Final Report (http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/jig-draft-final-report-04dec10-en.pdf) for public comments (http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-04dec10-en.htm) and have incorporated the comments into, and has reached consensus on the Final Report on Single Character IDN TLDs; > > The JIG recommendations are consistent with the GNSO Final Report on the Introduction of New Top-Level Domains (http://gnso.icann.org/issues/new-gtlds/pdp-dec05-fr-parta-08aug07.htm) including the GNSO IDN WG Final Outcomes Report (http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/idn-wg-fr-22mar07.htm) and the GNSO Reserved Names WG (http://gnso.icann.org/issues/new-gtlds/final-report-rn-wg-23may07.htm) on the issue of Single Character IDN gTLDs; and, > The JIG recommendations suggested implementable measures for the acceptance of Single Character IDN gTLDs. > > RESOLVED, > The GNSO Council approves the JIG Final Report on Single Character IDN TLDs, and forwards the report to the ICANN board and staff for its implementation into the next version of the New gTLD Applicant Guidebook as it pertains to the new gTLDs. > > Resolved further, that the GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Chair to communicate its decision to the ccNSO Chair. > > RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council hereby expresses its appreciation to the JIG for their hardwork, and look forward to receiving further reports on "IDN Variant TLDs" and "Universal Acceptance of IDN TLDs".

4 9

Fwd: [gnso-chairs] Fwd: [council] Re: Board seat 14
by Stéphane Van Gelder April 20, 2011

April 20, 2011

Councillors, FYI. Thanks to Liz for providing the info. Stéphane Début du message réexpédié : > De : Liz Gasster <liz.gasster(a)icann.org> > Date : 14 avril 2011 01:50:30 HAEC > À : Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder(a)indom.com>, "gnso-chairs(a)icann.org" <gnso-chairs(a)icann.org> > Objet : RE: [gnso-chairs] Fwd: [council] Re: Board seat 14 > > Hi Stéphane, > > We confirmed with the General Counsel’s office that all you stated in your subsequent email to the Council is correct regarding the ability for Rita (if she is willing) to continue in Seat 14 past Singapore if the NCPH election process has not resulted in a selection by that time. > > Thanks, Liz > > > From: owner-gnso-chairs(a)icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-chairs@icann.org] On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder > Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2011 3:53 PM > To: gnso-chairs(a)icann.org > Subject: [gnso-chairs] Fwd: [council] Re: Board seat 14 > > Can someone from Staff please check with GC if the Board Seat 14 term actually ends in Singapore, or not? > > Please also ask what happens if the NCPH house cannot find a solution in time? > > Stéphane > > > > Début du message réexpédié : > > > De : Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder(a)indom.com> > Date : 10 avril 2011 00:50:46 HAEC > À : Council GNSO <council(a)gnso.icann.org> > Objet : Rép : [council] Re: Board seat 14 > > Thanks Avri for providing this response to my message. I am copying the Council list, as you suggested I should feel free to forward your message and as I think it contains information which will be useful to the Council as a whole. > > Reading the bylaws, your analysis that Rita's term only ends when a replacement is elected looks right. The bylaws article VI section 8.f state that: f. The terms of Seats 11 and 14 shall begin at the conclusion of ICANN's Mid-year Meeting after the 2010 ICANN annual meeting, and each ICANN annual meeting every third year after 2010. > > This would suggest to me that the current terms only ends in 2013. I will request GC advice on this just to make sure. > > I am, however, unclear on the cause of the dispute on the voting procedure that you speak of. As I read the bylaws, the successful candidate needs 60% of the house, period. There is no reference to specific votes from each SG. And I think that if there was it would actually not make any sense, as in my opinion adding a requirement of a minimum number of votes from each SG on top of the threshold would only serve to overly complicate matters, for no clear reason. > > In any case, the question we really need to answer is whether Board seat 14 can stay as currently filled, thereby giving the NCPH time to hone its voting procedures. > > Stéphane > > > > Le 9 avr. 2011 à 02:02, Avri Doria a écrit : > > > Dear Stéphane, > > As the chair of one of the two SGs in the NCPH, I have my doubts on whether we will meet this requirement. > > At this point we cannot even decide on a way to hold the election. There is a joint group between the SGs, that I am not on, that is trying to figure out a way beyond an impasse we have on whether a person only needs the 60% (8 votes) as mandated by the By-laws, or 60%, including two from each SG. From the reports I have gotten of the discussions in the joint group, they have not yet found a way beyond the impasse. > > As I read the By-laws, Rita's terms does not actually end until a replacement is elected. So unless she resigns the seat should be filled until such time as the two SGs can sort out their procedures for the election. > > With Best Regards, > > Avri Doria > Chair, NCSG Executive Committee > > Feel free to forward, or not, this as you feel appropriate. > > > On 8 Apr 2011, at 15:15, Stéphane Van Gelder wrote: > > > Hi all, > > Just taking care of some Council housekeeping issues and wanted to send out a reminder on this. > > Thanks, > > Stéphane > > > > Le 28 févr. 2011 à 12:10, Stéphane Van Gelder a écrit : > > Councillors, > > As a reminder, bylaws dictate that "the Non-Contracted Party House shall select a representative to fill Seat 14". > > A further requirement is that: "At least two months before the date specified for the commencement of the term as specified in paragraphs 1.d-g above, any Supporting Organization or the At-Large community entitled to select a Director for a Seat with a term beginning that year shall give the Secretary of ICANN written notice of its selection". > > As this pertains to Board seat 14, that term is scheduled to begin on June 24 this year. So the GNSO would need to be in a position to send our written notice by April 24. > > Stéphane > > > > > > >

2 1

GAC feedback on new gTLD Rights Protection Mechanisms
by Bruce Tonkin April 19, 2011

April 19, 2011

Hello All, Please find attached the GAC document dated 19 April 2011 on the: "Remaining points of difference between the ICANN Board and the Governmental Advisory Committee on New gTLD Rights Protection Mechanisms" I don't believe that it includes an analysis of the ICANN materials posted on 15 April 2011, but reflects the status of discussions following the meetings in Brussels and San Francisco. Regards, Bruce Tonkin

1 0

Agenda for ICANN Board Meeting, 21 April 2011
by Bruce Tonkin April 18, 2011

April 18, 2011

From: http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/agenda-21apr11-en.htm Agenda for Board Meeting 21 April 2011 Executive Session Consent Agenda: 1. Approval of Minutes of 18 March 2011 ICANN Board Meeting 2. From the BGC – Organizational Meeting to Fill Leadership Vacancies 3. From the BGC – Revised Code of Conduct 4. From the BGC – Input on Academia Representation on NomCom 5. From the BGC – Approval of Members of Board Technical Relations Working Group 6. From the SIC – Approval of Charter for Board Technical Relations Working Group 7. From the SIC – Approval of ccNSO Review Implementation Actions 8. From the BFC - Formalization of Planning Committee for existing employee retirement savings accounts (401K) 9. From the BFC - Approval of Increase Of The Registrar Accreditation Application Fee 10. Approval of Redelegation of .KP (Korea, Democratic People's Republic) 11. Approval of Tracking of Global Policy for Post Exhaustion IPv4 Allocation Mechanisms by IANA 12. From the Compensation Committee – Approval of Recommendations re Ombudsman Compensation Main Agenda: 13. President & CEO's Report 14. Update on new gTLD Timelines – for discussion 15. Review of Vertical Integration for Existing gTLD Registry Operators 16. ATRT a. Board Management of ATRT Recommendations b. Estimated Budget Implications of ATRT Recommendations for FY2012 Budget 17. Update on .NET Agreement - Status, timeline, public comments 18. Report from IANA Committee on discussions re Clarification of Terminology and Requirements for Country-code Top-Level Domain Delegations and Redelegations 19. Review and possible approval of: a. Delegation of الجزائر ("Al Jazair") representing Algeria in Arabic b. Delegation of المغرب ("al-Maghrib") representing Morocco in Arabic c. Delegation of the .срб ("srb") domain representing Serbia in Cyrillic 20. Update on NOI 21. AOB

3 5

New Draft of the Applicant Guidebook for New gTLDs is Available for Public Comment
by Bruce Tonkin April 16, 2011

April 16, 2011

Hello All, Some light reading for the weekend. See below. I would like to thank Kurt Pritz and the ICANN team for the huge effort they have put n ever since San Francisco to pull together all the feedback into this latest version. The staff are doing their best to stick to the schedule announced in San Francisco. Regards, Bruce Tonkin http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-15apr11-en.htm New Draft of the Applicant Guidebook for New gTLDs is Available for Public Comment 15 April 2011 Guidebook and Public Comment Forum ICANN has posted for public comment today the April 2011 Discussion Draft of the New gTLD Applicant Guidebook. In keeping with the draft timeline [PDF, 117 KB] approved by the ICANN Board at its meeting in San Francisco, this draft of the Applicant Guidebook will be open for comment for 30 days, through 15 May 2011. This posting includes a "track changes" version of the six modules of the Applicant Guidebook, along with a series of new Explanatory Memos related to changes made as a result of the recent consultations between ICANN's Board and Governmental Advisory Committee: 1.Trademark Protections (Trademark Claims & Sunrise Services; and The Requirement for Demonstrating Use) [PDF, 284 KB] 2.GAC and Government Objections; Handling of Sensitive Strings; Early Warning [PDF, 91 KB] 3.Exemptions to Objection Fees for Governments [PDF, 331 KB] 4.Root Zone Scaling [PDF, 286 KB] 5.Market and Economic Impacts [PDF, 480 KB] 6.Registry-Registrar Separation [PDF, 400 KB] These memos were developed to document the latest position on these topics by taking into account the current thinking, discussions and public comments received. Each memo not only reflects GAC advice but also contains the reasoning and rationale on each of the relevant issues regarding the launch of the New gTLD Program and Applicant Guidebook. Also being posted today is the ICANN Reply [PDF, 275 KB] to the GAC Comments (on the ICANN Board's Notes on the GAC Scorecard). Keeping with the draft timeline, ICANN plans post a final version of the guidebook by 30 May 2011, in time for consideration of the New gTLD implementation program at an extraordinary meeting of the ICANN Board to be held on Monday, 20 June 2011, at the ICANN meetings in Singapore.

2 1

New Draft of the Applicant Guidebook for New gTLDs is Available for Public Comment
by Glen de Saint Géry April 16, 2011

April 16, 2011

ICANN has posted the next version of the Applicant Guidebook. It is accompanied by a response to the GAC "Scorecard" and several Explanatory Memoranda that targeted GAC issues. http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-15apr11-en.htm New Draft of the Applicant Guidebook for New gTLDs is Available for Public Comment 15 April 2011 Guidebook and Public Comment Forum<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/comments-6-en.htm> ICANN has posted for public comment today the April 2011 Discussion Draft of the New gTLD Applicant Guidebook. In keeping with the draft timeline<http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/draft-timeline-new-gtlds-18mar11-en.pdf> [PDF, 117 KB] approved by the ICANN Board at its meeting in San Francisco, this draft of the Applicant Guidebook will be open for comment for 30 days, through 15 May 2011. This posting includes a "track changes" version of the six modules of the Applicant Guidebook, along with a series of new Explanatory Memos related to changes made as a result of the recent consultations between ICANN's Board and Governmental Advisory Committee: Trademark Protections (Trademark Claims & Sunrise Services; and The Requirement for Demonstrating Use)<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/trademark-protection-claims-use-15…> [PDF, 284 KB] GAC and Government Objections; Handling of Sensitive Strings; Early Warning<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/gac-objections-sensitive-strings-1…> [PDF, 91 KB] Exemptions to Objection Fees for Governments<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/exemptions-govt-objection-fees-15a…> [PDF, 331 KB] Root Zone Scaling<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/root-zone-scaling-15apr11-en.pdf> [PDF, 286 KB] Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0