June 2011 - council - lists.icann.org

*My* Guide to Singapore
by Mary.Wong＠law.unh.edu 10 Jun '11

10 Jun '11

Dear friends, Welcome to Singapore! Quick question: what do you do for a break, on a 15-hour flight, when you're done reading the Applicant Guidebook? :) Write a very biased guide to Singapore, encompassing restaurants, bars, shopping tips and top sightseeing recommendations of course! So I updated a document I wrote for friends and family from abroad who came to my wedding two summers ago, and attach it for your pleasure and perusal. Quite a few of you are already familiar with my hometown, so I'll be looking to you to add to and comment on the suggestions I've included. Here are a few additional informational tips I didn't include in the guide: - Singapore Changi Airport is clean, efficient and pretty much open 24 hours (with plenty of eating, shopping and seating options). Upon arrival, you'll be unlucky to wait more than 10 minutes at Immigration, following which there's a Duty Free (before Baggage Claim) that's open late. There's a taxi queue that's rarely that long, and the ride to the Swissotel/Fairmont complex is about 20 minutes (more during peak commuting hours, when the freeway can get jammed up), and cost around US$18-25, depending on surcharges and time of day). There's also a subway that goes directly (with one change of train) to the Swissotel/Fairmont complex, and each Arrival Hall has several ATMs for withdrawing Singapore currency. - Singapore's not a cheap city, especially for hotels and higher-end dining and shopping, but public transport is fast, efficient and cheap (the Swissotel/Fairmont complex is directly above a major subway interchange that will take you easily to the financial district and the Orchard Road shopping area). Taxis are plentiful and relatively inexpensive - but can be difficult to get when it rains, during peak commuting hours, and when the drivers are changing shifts (4 p.m. and 11 p.m.) - Alcohol and cigarettes are heavily taxed, so they are probably going to be more expensive than you may be used to. - Dress code is generally business casual. Even for business meetings, men rarely wear suits because of the climate, sticking with shirt and tie. Very few places will require dressing up for, but note that in most nice restaurants, bars and clubs, shorts, sandals, slippers and collar-less tee-shirts are not permitted. - It will be HOT and HUMID. The only difference is whether it's sunny or raining :) Let me know if there's anything else I can do to make your visit a good one! Safe travels, and see you soon in sunny Singapore, Mary Mary W S Wong Professor of Law Chair, Graduate IP Programs Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAWTwo White StreetConcord, NH 03301USAEmail: mary.wong(a)law.unh.eduPhone: 1-603-513-5143Webpage: http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.phpSelected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584

1 0

Reminder- Singapore Dinners - please complete the poll
by Glen de Saint Géry 10 Jun '11

10 Jun '11

Hi again everyone, I'd just like to do a quick poll. Because of the distances many people will have traveled and the possibility of cocktail receptions on Saturday (we know there are already a couple such planned for Sunday evening), may I ask that you take 30 seconds to fill out this Doodle poll, as to your preferences for either a Saturday or a Sunday night dinner? http://www.doodle.com/qu4yu7gzdth9xkde (if you are NOT planning to attend, I'd appreciate it if you'd also visit the poll and select NO for both options, as this will give us an idea of the numbers to book for.) In either case, dinner will be at 8.30 p.m., and will be off-site, featuring a unique aspect of Singaporean cuisine. Thanks all! Cheers Mary Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

IDN Variant TLD Case Study Update
by Glen de Saint Géry 10 Jun '11

10 Jun '11

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-3-09jun11-en.htm IDN Variant TLD Case Study Update 9 June 2011 On April 20, 2011, ICANN announced its approach to move forward with the IDN Variant TLDs Issues Project by publishing the Final Proposal for the Project<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/idn-variant-tlds-delegation-20apr1…> [PDF, 195 KB] and the Call for Volunteers<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/idn-variant-tlds-call-for-voluntee…> [PDF, 112 KB]. This project is dedicated to identifying the issues involved in the delegation of IDN Variant TLDs. Today, we are pleased to announce the formation of six case study teams, comprising a total of 66 experts from 29 countries and territories. In addition, six organizations are in the process of being selected to be local hosts for each of the case studies. A local host organization will provide meeting and other facilities to support the case studies work. A decision and announcement will follow shortly. Individual members are listed at the end of this announcement and they offer expertise in the following areas: DNS, IDNA, linguistics, security & scalability, policy, registry/registrar operations, and community representatives. On Saturday, 18 June 2011, all-day project team meetings are being planned in Singapore at which the case study teams will meet together in plenary sessions and in individual breakout working sessions. Interested members of the community can receive updates and participate in the discussions of this work by subscribing to vip(a)icann.org<mailto:vip@icann.org> mailing list (https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/vip) or by visiting https://community.icann.org/display/VIP/. Arabic Case Study 1. Sarmad Hussain (Coordinator) 2. Abdulaziz Al-Zoman 3. Behnam Esfahbod 4. Fahd A. Batayneh 5. Huda Sarfraz 6. Khaled Koubaa 7. Manal Ismail 8. Mohamed El-Bashir 9. Raed Al-Fayez 10. Siavash Shahshahani 11. Syed Iftikhar H. Shah Chinese Case Study 1. Xiaodong Lee (Coordinator) 2. Chris Dillon 3. Hong Xue 4. James Seng 5. Jian Zhang 6. Joe Zhang 7. Jonathan Shea 8. Joseph Yee 9. June Seo 10. Shianyong Tseng 11. Wei Wang 12. Yoshiro Yoneya Cyrillic Case Study 1. Alexey Sozonov (Coordinator) 2. Alexei Mykhaylov 3. Alexey Ptashniy 4. Daniel Kalchev 5. Iliya Bazlyankov 6. Oksana Prykhodko 7. Saso Dimitrijoski 8. Sergey Sharikov 9. Vladimir Shadrunov Devanagari Case Study 1. Dr. Govind (Coordinator) 2. Amardeep Singh Chawla 3. Bal Krishna Bal 4. Basanta shrestha 5. Bhavin Turakhia 6. James Galvin 7. Jitender Kumar 8. K. B. Narayanan 9. Kalyan Kale 10. Mahesh Kulkarni 11. Manish Dalal 12. Prabhakar Kshotriya 13. Pramod Pandey 14. Raiomond Doctor 15. Rajiv Kumar 16. Satyendra Kumar Pandey 17. Shashi Bharadwaj 18. Tulika Pandey Greek Case Study 1. Vaggelis Segredakis (Coordinator) 2. Asimina Giannopoulou 3. Catherine Tsapikidou 4. Evangelos Melagrakis 5. Fotia Panayiotou 6. George Papapavlou 7. Giannis Papaioannou 8. Panagiotis Papaspiliopoulos Latin Case Study 1. Jothan Frakes (Coordinator) 2. Andrzej Bartosiewicz 3. Cary Karp 4. Eric Brown 5. Francisco Obispo 6. Giovanni Seppia 7. Wil Tan 8. Will Shorter Others * The joint ccNSO-GNSO Working Group on IDNs (JIG) will appoint an observer for each case study. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Public Comment: The GNSO Council is Requesting Your Input on the New GNSO Policy Development Process
by Glen de Saint Géry 10 Jun '11

10 Jun '11

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-09jun11-en.htm Public Comment: The GNSO Council is Requesting Your Input on the New GNSO Policy Development Process 9 June 2011 As part of the GNSO Improvements Process, which has as its objective to improve the structure and operations of the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO), the Policy Development Process Work Team (PDP-WT) has now submitted<http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-31may11-en.htm> to the GNSO Council its Final Report that outlines the proposed new GNSO Policy Development Process in the form of forty-seven (47) recommendations, an outline of the proposed new Annex A - GNSO Policy Development Process for the ICANN Bylaws as well as a supporting document that is envisioned to be included in the GNSO Council Operating Procedures as the PDP Manual (see http://gnso.icann.org/issues/pdp-wt-final-report-final-31may11-en.pdf [PDF, 1.39 MB]. Prior to considering this Final Report, the GNSO Council is seeking your input. Comments on the PDP-WT Final Report, including the recommendations, the outline of the proposed Annex A and the PDP Manual can be submitted until 9 July 2011 (see details on how to submit comments below). Following the public comment period, the GNSO Council will review the comments received and determine whether additional modifications need to be made to the report or whether the new GNSO Policy Development Process is ready for adoption following which it will be submitted to the ICANN Board for its consideration. Background On 26 June 2008 the ICANN Board approved a set of recommendations<http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm> designed to improve the effectiveness of the GNSO, including its policy activities, structure, operations, and communications. The following pertains to the PDP-WT's mission: Revising the PDP: The Policy Development Process (PDP) needs to be revised to make it more effective and responsive to ICANN's needs. It should be brought in-line with the time and effort actually required to develop policy and made consistent with ICANN's existing contracts (including, but not limited to, clarifying the appropriate scope of GNSO "consensus policy" development). While the procedure for developing "consensus policies" will need to continue to be established by the Bylaws as long as required by ICANN's contracts, the GNSO Council and Staff should propose new PDP rules for the Board's consideration and approval that contain more flexibility. The new rules should emphasize the importance of the preparation that must be done before launch of a working group or other activity, such as public discussion, fact-finding, and expert research in order to properly define the scope, objective, and schedule for a specific policy development goal and the development of metrics for measuring success. The revised PDP, after review and approval by the GNSO Council and ICANN Board, would replace the current PDP defined in Annex A of the ICANN bylaws. Background Documents / Links * PDP-WT Final Report<http://gnso.icann.org/issues/pdp-wt-final-report-final-31may11-en.pdf> [PDF, 1.39 MB] * Proposed Final Report Public Comment Review Tool<http://gnso.icann.org/issues/pdp-wt-public-comments-review-tool-24may11-en.…> [PDF, 196 KB] * PDP-WT Proposed Final Report<http://gnso.icann.org/issues/pdp-wt-proposed-final-report-21feb11-en.pdf> [PDF, 1.21 MB] * PDP-WT Initial Report<http://gnso.icann.org/issues/pdp-initial-report-31may10-en.pdf> [PDF, 2.35 MB] * PDP-WT Workspace<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsoppsc/PDP-WT+Home> * GNSO Improvements<http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/> Deadline and How to Submit Comments * Comments are welcome via e-mail to pdp-final-report(a)icann.org<mailto:pdp-final-report@icann.org> until 9 July 2011. * Access to the public comment forum from which comments can be posted can be found at: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201107-en.htm#pdp-fin… * An archive of all comments received will be publicly posted at: http://forum.icann.org/lists/pdp-final-report/ Staff Responsible: Marika Konings Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Topics for our Singapore meetings
by Stéphane Van Gelder 10 Jun '11

10 Jun '11

All, We are still missing suggestions for topics for our 3 main meetings with other groups in Singapore. Those meetings are with the Board, the GAC and the ccNSO. As discussed in previous email threads on this list, so far only the Board and ccNSO meetings look certain for Singapore. To get the ball rolling, I would like to suggest some topics for those 2 meetings. ccNSO - ICANN budget. The ccNSO has a working team looking at the ICANN budget and I think it would be very useful for both SOs to share that experience. I have discussed this with Lesley (ccNSO Chair) and she sees value in it as well. The idea is not to start up the old discussion about ccTLD contributions, but instead to benefit from the ccNSO's work on the proposed ICANN budget for the coming FY. The issue being that we are all so swamped with documents and reports that we have no time to look at this all-important budget. The ccNSO's work team can help us identify the key issues. - ccTLDs becoming registrars. This may not interest everyone and is just a suggestion, but we might want to discuss what ccTLD operators plans are with regards to possibly becoming gTLD registries, as some have already mentioned an interest in running gTLDs as registries (mostly geo TLDs in their regions). Board - CWGs. I think this is a discussion we need to continue to have with the Board, if only to update them on the recent discussions we've had amongst ourselves. - GNSO/Board interact. This is changing, at the Board's initiative. We should perhaps touch on how useful we've found our dinners and interaction with the Board in the past. Once again, these are just suggestions. The idea is to make some headway on this, as past requests from Mary and Glen for topic ideas have yielded very little response. Thanks, Stéphane

5 7

Standing Committee on improvements implementation
by KnobenW＠telekom.de 10 Jun '11

10 Jun '11

Hi Stéphane, Herewith I let you know that I have been elected chair of the Standing Committee on improvements implementation for a two years term. According to the Working Group guidelines 2.1.4.2 "the newly elected Chair will act on a provisional basis until the Chartering Organization has confirmed the appointment." I'm asking you as chair of the Chartering Organization to initiate the confirmation process. Kind regards Wolf-Ulrich

2 1

Cartagena Board Resolution on Consumer Choice, Competition and Innovation
by Glen de Saint Géry 09 Jun '11

09 Jun '11

FYI Dear All, Arising from Item 2: Pending Projects - Cartagena Board Resolution on Consumer Choice, Competition and Innovation a mailing list was requested to enable the group of volunteers to move forward with their work. Mailing list address: gnso-consumercci-dt(a)icann.org (Consumercci = consumers choice, competition and innovation drafting team) Public archives: http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-consumercci-dt/ Subscribers to the mailing list: Rosemary Sinclair - NCSG Debbie Hughes - NCSG Wendy Seltzer - NCSG Jonathan Robinson - Registries SG Steve delBianco - CBUC John Berard - CBUC Carlos Aguirre - NCA Bruce Tonkin - ICANN Board ICANN Staff: Liz Gasster Margie Milam Glen de Saint Géry Gisella Gruber-White Observers: Stéphane van Gelder - GNSO chair Mary Wong - GNSO vice chair Jeff Neuman - GNSO vice chair Please let me know who else should be subscribed to this mailing list. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

MP3 recording GNSO Council teleconference, Thursday, 9 June 2011
by Glen de Saint Géry 09 Jun '11

09 Jun '11

[To: liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org; council[at]gnso.icann.org] Please find the MP3 recording of the GNSO Council teleconference, held on Thursday, 9 June, 2011 at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-council-20110609-en.mp3 on page http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#jun Happy listening! Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

GNSO Council motions 9 June 2011
by Glen de Saint Géry 09 Jun '11

09 Jun '11

Dear All, Ahead of the official GNSO Council minutes, the following motions were passed at the Council meeting on 9 June 2011. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Motion 1. WHOIS Registrant Identification Study Motion May 2011 Whereas: In October 2007, the GNSO Council concluded that a comprehensive and objective understanding of key factual issues regarding the gTLD Whois system would benefit future GNSO policy development efforts (http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/). On 4 March 2009, the GNSO Council requested Staff to conduct research on feasibility and cost estimates for selected Whois studies and report its findings to Council. (See Motion 3, http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#200903). On 23-Mar-2010, Staff presented a report on the feasibility and cost estimates for a Whois "Registrant Identification" Study, finding that the study would cost approximately $150,000 (USD) and take approximately one year to complete (http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-studies-report-for-gnso-23mar10-en…). This exploratory study would examine Whois data for a representative sample of gTLD domain names to classify the types of entities that register domains, including natural persons, various kinds of legal persons and Privacy and Proxy service providers. On 28 April 2011 the Council deferred consideration of the Whois Registrant Identification Study until the 9 June 2011 meeting and requested that any applicable motions in that regard be submitted not later than 1 June 2011. On 20 May 2011 a volunteer Whois studies group submitted to the GNSO Council revised Whois Registrant Identification Study Terms of Reference http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/tor-whois-registrant-id-studies-20may11-… supporting Rationale http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-registrant-id-study-rationale-20ma… and Summary of Changes http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/summary-changes-whois-registrant-id-stud… Resolved; The Council requests that ICANN staff proceed with the Whois Registrant Identification Study as set forth in the revised Terms of Reference http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/tor-whois-registrant-id-studies-20may11-… Further resolved, the Council asks staff to report back to the Council if the original estimate for the study of $150,000 USD is exceeded by greater than 20%. Further resolved, in recognition of the substantial amount of coordination needed to direct the research, that staff be given the discretion to manage this study serially or in parallel with the other Whois studies, with a goal of expediting completion of all of the studies as efficiently as possible. Motion 2: To Acknowledge the Receipt of the Policy Development Process Work Team Final Report and Initiate a Public Comment Period WHEREAS, in October 2008, the GNSO Council established a framework (see GNSO Council Improvement Implementation Plan; (http://www.icann.org/en/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-implemen…) for implementing the various GNSO Improvements identified and approved by the ICANN Board of Directors on 26 June 2008 (http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm#_Toc76113182) (http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm); WHEREAS, that framework included the formation, in January 2009, of two Steering Committees, the Operations Steering Committee (OSC) and the Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC), to charter and coordinate the efforts of five community work teams in developing specific recommendations to implement the improvements; WHEREAS, the PPSC established two work teams, including the Policy Development Process Work Team (PDP-WT), which was chartered to develop a new policy development process that incorporates a working group approach and makes it more effective and responsive to ICANN's policy development needs; WHEREAS, the GNSO Council decided to terminate the PPSC on 28 April 2011 and instructed the PDP-WT to deliver its Final Report directly to the GNSO Council; WHEREAS, the PDP-WT submitted its Final Report, http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-31may11-en.htm, on 31 May 2011 to the GNSO Council; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT: RESOLVED that the GNSO Council acknowledges receipt of the PDP-WT Final Report as delivered by the PDP-WT and directs ICANN Staff to commence a thirty (30) day public comment period on this Final Report. RESOLVED FURTHER that the GNSO Council shall take action on the PDP-WT Final Report as soon as possible after the end of the public comment period. RESOLVED FURTHER that the GNSO Council recommends that a concise summary of the new Policy Development Process be drafted by ICANN Staff, following approval of the new PDP by the ICANN Board, in order to serve as a primer to the new Annex A of the ICANN Bylaws and PDP Manual for potential PDP WG members. 3 Motion regarding the JAS milestone report. Whereas: The GNSO Council and ALAC established the Joint SO/AC Working Group (JASWG) on support for new gTLD applicants in April of 2010; and The Working Group released it Milestone Report posted for consideration by the Board, Chartering Organizations and at-large Community. This report documented the completion of work as defined in the original charter and requested an update to the Working Groups charter, and The GNSO and ALAC, separately, renewed the Working Groups charter with additional work item in February 2011, and The Joint SO/AC Working Group received and discussed the public comments, and The Joint SO/AC Working Group has completed the work as defined in its extended charter and published a second milestone report (https://community.icann.org/display/jaswg/JAS+Issues+and+Recommendations#) on 8 May 2011 covering those chartered items (http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#20110113-1) entitled JAS Milestone Report. and The GNSO council does not wish to delay the start of the new gTLD application process, and The GNSO council does not wish to delay implementation of support programs for applicants from developing regions, Resolved: The GNSO Council thanks the members of the Joint SO/AC Working Group for its efforts and its dedication to completing the work on such a tight schedule, and The GNSO Council request that the report be put out for community review as soon as possible, The JAS Working Group continues working to deal with any issues that may arise in the upcoming review by the community, That the JAS Working group publish their final report after this review process. Resolved further, that the GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Chair to communicate its decision to the ALAC Chair. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

WHOIS Review Team: Call for Public Comment
by Glen de Saint Géry 09 Jun '11

09 Jun '11

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-09jun11-en.htm WHOIS Review Team: Call for Public Comment 9 June 2011 Discussion Paper In anticipation of the Singapore meeting, the WHOIS Policy Review Team wishes to solicit input from the Community on their Discussion Paper<http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/affirmation/whois-rt-discussion-paper-09jun…> [PDF, 182 KB], which calls for feedback on issues identified by the Review Team. The public comment box shall remain open for 45 days consistent with ICANN practices and will close on 23 July 2011. Please submit your comments at: whoisrt-discussion-paper(a)icann.org<mailto:whoisrt-discussion-paper@icann.org>. Your participation is essential to the success of the review, and your input will be carefully considered. The WHOIS Review Team also welcomes general comments and feedback on any other issues you would like the Review Team to consider. Activities in Singapore Please note that the WHOIS Review Team will hold a full day of public face-to-face meeting on Sunday, 19 June in Singapore (Morrison). Public attendance is welcome but comments should be submitted during the Interaction with the Community Session scheduled for Wednesday, 22 June, 14:30-16:00 (Canning). Sessions with ICANN SOs/ACs and constituencies are foreseen in Singapore; the Review Team's schedule may be found at: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Singapore+Meeting Background The WHOIS Policy Review Team<https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/WHOIS+Policy+Review+Team> was launched in October 2010 in line with the Affirmation of Commitments<http://www.icann.org/en/documents/affirmation-of-commitments-30sep09-en.htm> (AoC) provisions, section 9.3.1, which stipulates that: "ICANN additionally commits to enforcing its existing policy relating to WHOIS, subject to applicable laws. Such existing policy requires that ICANN implement measures to maintain timely, unrestricted and public access to accurate and complete WHOIS information, including registrant, technical, billing, and administrative contact information. One year from the effective date of this document and then no less frequently than every three years thereafter, ICANN will organize a review of WHOIS policy and its implementation to assess the extent to which WHOIS policy is effective and its implementation meets the legitimate needs of law enforcement and promotes consumer trust." http://www.icann.org/en/documents/affirmation-of-commitments-30sep09-en.htm<http://www.icann.org/en/documents/affirmation-of-commitments-30sep09-en.htm> The WHOIS policy Review Team is composed of ten SO/AC representatives, two independent experts, one Law Enforcement representative, the ICANN President and CEO (Selector)'s designated nominee and the Chair of the GAC (Selector)'s designated nominee. For full reference, please consult: http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/affirmation/composition-4-en.htm. In March 2011, the WHOIS Policy RT submitted its scope of work and roadmap<https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Scope+and+Roadmap+of+the+WH…>, outreach plan<https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Outreach+plan>, action plan<https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Action+plan> and list of key definitions for public comment http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-04mar11-en.htm. In San Francisco, it held sessions with a number of ICANN SO/ACs and constituencies as well as a general interaction with the Community session in order to gather feedback on its working definitions. The Review Team's progress, working documents, activities may be viewed on a public wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/WHOIS+Policy+Review+Team Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0