February 2012 - council - lists.icann.org

Defensive Applications for New gTLDs - public comment period opened
by Glen de Saint Géry Feb. 20, 2012

Feb. 20, 2012

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-06feb12-en.htm Defensive Applications for New gTLDs Announcement: Comment Period Opens on Date: 6 February 2012 Categories/Tags: Top-Level Domains Purpose (Brief): The New gTLD Program features carefully crafted, new protections for trademark owners and consumers. When considering applications for new top-level names, the process is designed to protect these important interests through independent objection and dispute resolution processes (and other processes). However, as the time of the opening of the new gTLD application window drew near, parties stated their perception that they will need to submit "defensive" gTLD applications as a means to protect their trademarks. ICANN is seeking public comment on the sources of this perception and how it can be addressed Public Comment Box Link: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/newgtlds-defensive-applications-06fe… Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

8 9

Fwd: IRTP Part B Recommendation #9 part 2
by Stéphane Van Gelder Feb. 20, 2012

Feb. 20, 2012

Councillors, FYI. As per the action item stemming from our meeting last week. Thanks. Stéphane Début du message réexpédié : > De : Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder(a)indom.com> > Objet : IRTP Part B Recommendation #9 part 2 > Date : 20 février 2012 15:35:10 HNEC > À : Secretary <secretary(a)icann.org>, Steve Crocker <steve(a)shinkuro.com> > Cc : Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org>, David Olive <david.olive(a)icann.org>, Glen de Saint Géry <Glen(a)icann.org> > > Dear Steve, > > At its meeting last Thursday, the GNSO Council approved sending of the IRTP B Rec 9 part 2 report to the Board. > > In my capacity as Chair of the Council, I am therefore forwarding the report to you in your capacity as Chairman of the ICANN Board, and asking you to share that report with the Board. > > The report is attached, and is also posted here: http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/gnso-council-report-irtp-part-b-recommendation… > > Best, > > > > Stéphane Van Gelder > Directeur Général / General manager > INDOM Group NBT France > ---------------- > Head of Domain Operations > Group NBT >

1 0

Consent agenda
by Stéphane Van Gelder Feb. 20, 2012

Feb. 20, 2012

Councillors, As indicated during our meeting last week, following its successful trial run, I'd like to hone the consent agenda to a point where we have a formal process. During last week's meeting, we discussed and agreed on a general 3-step process for dealing with consent agenda items. 1. The Chair or meeting leader calls for any opposition to said item being in the consent agenda. If any opposition is voiced, then that item is dropped from the consent agenda (and can be re-introduced at any time in the main agenda). 2. If no opposition is voiced to the item being on the consent agenda, the Chair or meeting leader calls for any opposition to the item itself. If any opposition is voiced, then no action is taken (and the item can be re-introduced at any time in the main agenda). 3. If no opposition, the consent agenda item is deemed approved by the GNSO Council. In order to formalize this process and with a view to including the consent agenda in our rules and procedures, I have asked the SCI Chair Wolf-Ulrich Knoben to have the SCI look at it and come up with some recommendations for the Council to approve. The SCI will obviously need to go beyond the basic format outlined above. In particular, it may wish to look at items that may require exclusion from the consent agenda (a motion vote is an obvious example), to serve as guideline for the Council Chair and Leadership Team when a GNSO Council meeting agenda is being drafted. I do not think a complicated process is required, and I believe that the consent agenda framework we established last week already works very well, but I still think we would all appreciate the SCI's input. Wolf, please let us know when you have put this before the SCI and when you have an idea of the timeframe the group will need to provide the Council with a recommendation. Thanks, Stéphane

1 0

Fwd: [soac-discussion] PPC Consultation Session in Costa Rica
by Stéphane Van Gelder Feb. 18, 2012

Feb. 18, 2012

Councillors, FYI. Stéphane Début du message réexpédié : > De : Filiz Yilmaz <filiz.yilmaz(a)icann.org> > Objet : [soac-discussion] PPC Consultation Session in Costa Rica > Date : 17 février 2012 18:45:26 HNEC > À : "soac-discussion(a)icann.org" <soac-discussion(a)icann.org> > Cc : Sebastien Bachollet <sebastien.bachollet(a)icann.org> > > Dear ICANN Community Leaders, > > ICANN Board Public Participation Committee (PPC) will hold a consultation session on 15 March 2012, Thursday (9:00 am -10:30 am), during the Costa Rica Meeting. > > The agenda will include the following topics: > > - Public Comment Improvements > - Future ICANN Meetings > - Outreach > > We hope you and members of your groups can find the time to attend this session and provide feedback about the subjects above. > > Kind regards, > Filiz Yilmaz > Sr Dir Participation and Engagement > ICANN

1 0

GNSO Council resolution 16 February 2012
by Glen de Saint Géry Feb. 17, 2012

Feb. 17, 2012

Dear Councillors, Ahead of the official GNSO Council minutes, the following resolutions were passed at the Council meeting on 16 February 2012. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen 1. Consent Agenda * Approval that the Recommendations Report<http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/gnso-council-report-irtp-part-b-recommendation…> on the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy Part B (IRTP B) Recommendation 9, part 2 be sent to the ICANN Board. * Approval of the termination of the Open Council Drafting Team. * Approval of new calls for volunteers for the joint ccNSO/GNSO IDN Working Group (JIG). 2. Motion on the Adoption of the Staff Proposal on IRTP Part B Recommendation #8 WHEREAS on 24 June 2009, the GNSO Council launched a Policy Development Process (PDP) on IRTP Part B addressing the following five charter questions: a. Whether a process for urgent return/resolution of a domain name should be developed, as discussed within the SSAC hijacking report (http://www.icann.org/announcements/hijacking-report-12jul05.pdf) see also (http://www.icann.org/correspondence/cole-to-tonkin-14mar05.htm) b. Whether additional provisions on undoing inappropriate transfers are needed, especially with regard to disputes between a Registrant and Admin Contact (AC). The policy is clear that the Registrant can overrule the AC, but how this is implemented is currently at the discretion of the registrar; c. Whether special provisions are needed for a change of registrant when it occurs near the time of a change of registrar. The policy does not currently deal with change of registrant, which often figures in hijacking cases; d. Whether standards or best practices should be implemented regarding use of a Registrar Lock status (e.g. when it may/may not, should/should not be applied); e. Whether, and if so, how best to clarify denial reason #7: A domain name was already in 'lock status' provided that the Registrar provides a readily accessible and reasonable means for the Registered Name Holder to remove the lock status. WHEREAS this PDP has followed the prescribed PDP steps as stated in the Bylaws, resulting in a Final Report delivered on 30 May 2011; WHEREAS the IRTP Part B WG has reached full consensus on the recommendations in relation to each of the five issues outlined above; WHEREAS in relation to recommendation #8, the GNSO Council resolved at its meeting on 22 June to request 'ICANN staff to provide a proposal designed to ensure a technically feasible approach can be developed to meet this recommendation. Staff should take into account the IRTP Part B WG deliberations in relation to this issue (see IRTP Part B Final Report). (IRTP Part B Recommendation #8). The goal of these changes is to clarify why the Lock has been applied and how it can be changed. Upon review of the proposed plan, the GNSO Council will consider whether to approve the recommendation'; WHEREAS ICANN staff developed the proposal in consultation with the IRTP Part B Working Group which was put out for public comment (see http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/irtp-b-staff-proposals-22nov11-en.htm) WHEREAS no comments were received as part of the public comment forum and the proposal was submitted to the GNSO Council; WHEREAS on 10 January 2012, the IPC has provided its comments to ICANN staff proposal (as described in http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg12555.html ); WHEREAS ICANN staff has provided an updated proposal based on the IPC comments (as described in http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg12600.html ); WHEREAS the GNSO Council has reviewed and discussed the ICANN Staff proposal in relation to IRTP Part B recommendation #8. RESOLVED, the GNSO Council recommends to the ICANN Board of Directors that it adopts and implements IRTP Part B recommendation #8 and the related ICANN Staff updated proposal (as described in http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/irtp-recommendation-8-proposal-26jan12-en.pdf) 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: action items from Council meeting
by Stéphane Van Gelder Feb. 17, 2012

Feb. 17, 2012

Councillors, Just FYI, I have told Lesley Cowley, ccNSO Chair, that we will be cosigning the letter and that Rafik is their new liaison, as per the action items arising out of our meeting this week and summarized by Glen in the email below. Thanks, Stéphane Début du message réexpédié : > De : Glen de Saint Géry <Glen(a)icann.org> > Objet : action items from Council meeting > Date : 16 février 2012 21:04:40 HNEC > À : Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder(a)indom.com> > Cc : "gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org" <gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org> > > Hi Stéphane, > > Ahead of the official Council minutes the following action items arose from the GNSO Council meeting today: > > 1. Item 5: JIG letter to the Board > > The Council approved sending the attached letter to the Board. > > 2. Item 8: GNSO liaison to the ccNSO > > The Council approved Rafik Dammak as the GNSO Council liaison to the ccNSO Council. > > Would you like me to send the ccNSO Secretariat notification with Rafik’s contact details? > > Thanks so much. > > Glen > > > > > > Glen de Saint Géry > GNSO Secretariat > gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org > http://gnso.icann.org >

1 0

Re: RAA negotiations
by Stéphane Van Gelder Feb. 17, 2012

Feb. 17, 2012

Thanks David. Can anyone from staff provide David with the requested update? Thanks. Stéphane Van Gelder Directeur Général / General manager INDOM Group NBT France ---------------- Head of Domain Operations Group NBT Le 16 févr. 2012 à 17:39, Taylor, David a écrit : > > > Hi Stéphane, > > My AOB item was just too late in the chat on the Council call just now, no problem, but could staff give an update on the RAA negotiations? > > Thanks > > David > > Dr. David Taylor > Partner > Hogan Lovells International LLP > 6 avenue Kléber > 75116 Paris > > Tel: +33 1 53 67 47 47 > Fax: +33 1 53 67 47 48 > Email: drd(a)hoganlovells.com > www.hoganlovells.com > > > Hogan Lovells (Paris) LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with registered number OC353350, and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority of England and Wales. Registered office: Atlantic House, Holborn Viaduct, London EC1A 2FG. > Hogan Lovells (Paris) LLP is an affiliated business of Hogan Lovells International LLP, a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales. "Hogan Lovells" is an international legal practice that includes Hogan Lovells International LLP, Hogan Lovells US LLP and their affiliated businesses. The word "partner" is used to describe a partner or member of Hogan Lovells International LLP, Hogan Lovells US LLP or any of their affiliated entities or any employee or consultant with equivalent standing. Certain individuals, who are designated as partners, but who are not members of Hogan Lovells International LLP, do not hold qualifications equivalent to members. For more information about Hogan Lovells, the partners and their qualifications, see www.hoganlovells.com. > > CONFIDENTIALITY. > This email and any attachments are confidential, except where the email is marked "officiel". It may also be privileged. If received in error, please do not disclose the contents to anyone, but notify the sender by return email and delete this email (and any attachments) from your system. >

1 0

MP3 recording GNSO Council teleconference, Thursday, 16 February 2012
by Glen de Saint Géry Feb. 16, 2012

Feb. 16, 2012

[To: liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org; council[at]gnso.icann.org] Please find the MP3 recording of the GNSO Council teleconference, held on Thursday, 16 February, 2012 at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-council-20120216-en.mp3 on page http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#feb Happy listening! Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Re: [council] Motion to initiate a PDP on thick Whois
by Stéphane Van Gelder Feb. 16, 2012

Feb. 16, 2012

I don't understand what that means David. Let's discuss during the call. Stéphane Le 16 févr. 2012 à 12:31, Taylor, David a écrit : > > > Stéphane > > We would like to introduce a friendly amendment to the pending motion on Thick WHOIS, to the effect that “nothing in [the motion] is intended to prejudice migration to thick Whois through contractual means.” > > Is that friendly enough? > > Kind regards > > David > > Dr. David Taylor > Partner > Hogan Lovells International LLP > 6 avenue Kléber > 75116 Paris > > Tel: +33 1 53 67 47 47 > Fax: +33 1 53 67 47 48 > Email: drd(a)hoganlovells.com > www.hoganlovells.com > > > > From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder > Sent: 04 February 2012 11:49 > To: council(a)gnso.icann.org GNSO > Subject: [council] Motion to initiate a PDP on thick Whois > > Councillors, > > Please find attached a motion on thick whois that I wish to make. > > Please note that, although I have discussed with the registrars before making the motion, I am making it in my capacity as Chair of the GNSO Council in order to make sure work that has been undertaken in this area continues to move forwards. > > The motion simply follows the staff recommendation outlined in the issue report. > > I would ask all of you to take this motion back to your respective groups and confer with them prior to our next meeting. > > This motions suggests the initiation of a new PDP, so it should not be taken lightly. > > Thanks, > > Stéphane > > > > > Hogan Lovells (Paris) LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with registered number OC353350, and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority of England and Wales. Registered office: Atlantic House, Holborn Viaduct, London EC1A 2FG. > Hogan Lovells (Paris) LLP is an affiliated business of Hogan Lovells International LLP, a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales. "Hogan Lovells" is an international legal practice that includes Hogan Lovells International LLP, Hogan Lovells US LLP and their affiliated businesses. The word "partner" is used to describe a partner or member of Hogan Lovells International LLP, Hogan Lovells US LLP or any of their affiliated entities or any employee or consultant with equivalent standing. Certain individuals, who are designated as partners, but who are not members of Hogan Lovells International LLP, do not hold qualifications equivalent to members. For more information about Hogan Lovells, the partners and their qualifications, see www.hoganlovells.com. > > CONFIDENTIALITY. > This email and any attachments are confidential, except where the email is marked "officiel". It may also be privileged. If received in error, please do not disclose the contents to anyone, but notify the sender by return email and delete this email (and any attachments) from your system. >

1 0

Latest Updated GNSO Council meeting draft agenda 16 February 2012 at 15:00.
by Glen de Saint Géry Feb. 15, 2012

Feb. 15, 2012

Dear Councillors, In preparation for the GNSO Council meeting on Thursday, 16 February 2012 please find the latest updates to the draft agenda - A link has been added to Marika’s presentation on the Final Issue Report on ‘thick’ Whois 3.1 Presentation of Final Issue Report<http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/thick-whois-final-issue-report-14feb12…> (Marika Konings) http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/thick-whois-final-issue-report-14feb12… - In Item 5: JIG letter to the Board The latest proposed joint ccNSO/GNSO letter to the Board and the adopted ccNSO letter to the Board have been added to the Wiki motions page https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+16+February… Edmon Chung , co-chair of the JIG will provide an update - Item 6: Costa Rica Weekend agenda 6.1 Update and presentation of agenda (Wolf Ulrich Knoben) The Wiki agenda links have been added for the Saturday and the Sunday GNSO working sessions: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/GNSO+Working+Sessio… https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/GNSO+Working+Sessio… Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen …………………………………………………………………………………… Agenda for GNSO Council Meeting – 16 February 2012 http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-council-16feb12-en.htm Wiki agenda : https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Agenda+16+February+… Motions before Council https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+16+February… This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures approved 22 September 2011 for the GNSO Council and updated. http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-operating-procedures-16dec11-en.pdf 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 15:00 UTC<http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=GNSO+Council+meeti…> Coordinated Universal Time: 15:00 UTC 07:00 Los Angeles; 10:00 Washington DC; 15:00 London; 16:00 Paris; 00:00 Tokyo; 17 February 2012 04:00 Wellington 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. GNSO Council meeting audiocast http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u Item 1: Administrative matters (10 minutes) 1.1 Roll Call 1.2 Statement of interest updates 1.3 Review/amend agenda 1.4. Note the status of minutes for the previous Council meeting per the GNSO Operating Procedures: · 19 January 2012 GNSO Council minutes –approved on 16 February 2012. http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg12612.html 1.5. GNSO Pending Projects List http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/pending-projects-list.pdf · Comments and/or questions. Item 2: Consent agenda (5 minutes) A consent agenda item is being added as a standard agenda item to provide for a simplified process to obtain Council approval on specific tasks. • Approval of the Recommendations Report on IRTP B Rec 9 part 2 that Staff is proposing be sent to the Board. Refer to the Recommendations Report: http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/gnso-council-report-irtp-part-b-recommendation… • Approval of the proposal to end the work on Whois access at this time. • Approval of the termination of the Open Council DT. • Approval of new calls for volunteers for the JIG. Item 3: 'thick' Whois Final Issue Report (10 minutes) As recommended by the IRTP Part B Working Group, the GNSO Council requested ICANN Staff to prepare an Issue Report on the requirement of ‘thick’ WHOIS for all incumbent gTLDs. The Preliminary Issue Report was published for public comment (see http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-21nov11-en.htm) Staff has now submitted the Final Issue Report,<http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/final-report-thick-whois-02feb12-en.pdf> which includes the report of comments received and additional updates as a result of the comments made. The GNSO Council will now consider the Final Issue Report<http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/final-report-thick-whois-02feb12-en.pdf> and decide whether or not to initiate a PDP. 3.1 Presentation of Final Issues Report<http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/thick-whois-final-issue-report-14feb12…> (Marika Konings) http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/thick-whois-final-issue-report-14feb12… Refer to motion: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+16+February… 3.2 Reading of the motion (Stéphane Van Gelder) 3.3 Discussion 3.3 Vote Item 4: IRTP B Rec 8 (15 minutes) As adopted by the Council on 22 June 2011 http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions#201106-1 the Council requested Staff to provide a proposal designed to ensure a technically feasible approach can be developed to meet the following recommendation "prior to the consideration of approval of the recommendation regarding the standardizing and clarifying WHOIS status messages regarding Registrar Lock status". Staff submitted its recommendation on January 3, 2012 http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg12545.html A motion was presented at the Jan 19, 2012 meeting, but was withdrawn to give Staff and Council more time to fine tune. A new motion is presented today. Refer to motion https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+16+February… 4.1 Reading of the motion (Yoav Keren). 4.2 Discussion 4.3 Vote Item 5: JIG letter to the Board (10 minutes) The ccNSO has not approved the joint letter the GNSO suggested sending to the Board on the JIG. As a way forward, the ccNSO is proposing two options: 1. Sending their proposed letter https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+16+February… as a joint letter to the Board. 2. If the GNSO does not approve option 1, the ccNSO will send a letter on its own. In that case, the GNSO must decide on what it wants to do, as we had approved sending a joint letter before http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#201112 5.1 Update by Edmon Chung - co-chair JIG 5.2 Discussion 5.3 Next steps Item 6: Costa Rica Weekend agenda (20 minutes) At the Jan 19 Council meeting, it was suggested that our weekend sessions need to be focussed more on preparation work for the Council's week and less on updates. This is a discussion item on the proposed agenda. 6.1 Update and presentation of agenda (Wolf Ulrich Knoben) https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/GNSO+Working+Sessio… https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/GNSO+Working+Sessio… 6.2 Agenda for GNSO Council meeting with the Board 6.3 Agenda for GNSO Council meeting with the GAC 6.4 Agenda for GNSO Council lunch with the ccNSO 6.5 Discussion Item 7: Red Cross and Olympic Committee names (20 minutes) A GNSO Drafting Team is working on a charter to determine how to handle the protection of RC and IOC names under the new gTLD program. This agenda item is to provide the Council with an update on that work. 7.1 Update by Jeff Neuman – Drafting Team Chair 7.2 Discussion Item 8: GNSO liaison to the ccNSO (5 minutes) Olga Cavalli had served as GNSO Council liaison to the ccNSO, but has now left the GNSO Council. Therefore the GNSO Council must now appoint a new liaison to the ccNSO. 8.1 Call for volunteers 8.2 Discussion Item 9: Any Other Business (5 minutes) 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 (GNSO Operating Procedures 4.4<http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-operating-procedures-22sep11-en.pdf>) 4.4.1 Applicability Absentee voting is permitted for the following limited number of Council motions or measures. a. Initiate a Policy Development Process (PDP); b. Approve a PDP recommendation; c. Recommend amendments to the GNSO Operating Procedures (GOP) or ICANN Bylaws; d. Fill a Council position open for election. 4.4.2 Absentee ballots, when permitted, must be submitted within the announced time limit, which shall be 72 hours from the meeting‟s adjournment. 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 calendar days, provided such amendment is verbally confirmed by all Vice-Chairs present. 4.4.3 The GNSO Secretariat will administer, record, and tabulate absentee votes according to these procedures and will provide reasonable means for transmitting and authenticating absentee ballots, which could include voting by telephone, e- mail, web-based interface, or other technologies as may become available. 4.4.4 Absentee balloting does not affect quorum requirements. (There must be a quorum for the meeting in which the vote is initiated.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Local time between October & March, Winter in the NORTHERN hemisphere ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 15:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/na/pst.html>) UTC-8+0DST 07:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5+0DST 10:00 Buenos Aires, Argentina (ART<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/art.html>) UTC-3+0DST 12:00 Montevideo, Uruguay (UYST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/uyst.html>) UTC-3+1DST 13:00 London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 15:00 Abuja,Nigeria (WAT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/africa/wat.html>) UTC+1+0DST 16:00 Tunis, Tunisia (CET) UTC+1+0DST 16:00 Bonn, Germany (CET) UTC+1+0DST 16:00 Paris, France (CET) UTC+1+0DST 16:00 Ramat Hasharon, Israel(IST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/ist-israel.…>) UTC+2+0DST 17:00 Karachi, Pakistan (PKT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/pkt.html> ) UTC+5+0DST 20:00 Beijing, China (CST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/cst.html> ) UTC+8+0DST 23:00 Tokyo, Japan (JST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/jst.html>) UTC+9+0DST 00:00 Wellington, New Zealand (NZDT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/pacific/nzdt.html> ) UTC+12+1DST 04:00 next day ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of March 2012, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0