June 2012 - council - lists.icann.org

TR: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#96]
by Glen de Saint Géry June 6, 2012

June 6, 2012

FYI De : ICANN [mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com] Envoyé : mercredi 6 juin 2012 07:06 À : gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org Objet : GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#96] Name of Officer: * Robin Gross Officer Email Address: * robin(a)ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org> Date Prepared: * Tuesday, June 5, 2012 GNSO Organization: * Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group Officer Position or Title: * NCSG Chair Voting Remedy: * Proxy Reason(s) for or condition(s) leading to the remedy: * Wolfgang Kleinwachter will be unable to attend the 7 June 2012 GNSO Council meeting. Mary wong will serve as Wolfgang's proxy for the meeting. Specific subject(s)/measure(s)/motion(s)/action(s) of the Council for which the remedy is being exercised: * all Date upon which the remedy will expire or terminate: [Note: may not exceed 3 months initially; may be renewed by sending an email with explanation to GNSO Secretariat] * Friday, June 8, 2012 I affirm that a voting position has been established on the matter(s) at issue pursuant to provisions contained in our Charter or Bylaws. * Yes Our GNSO Councilor has been instructed on how to vote on the matter(s). * Yes Please identify the GNSO Councilor who will serve as the voting proxy: * Mary Wong

1 0

TR: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#95]
by Glen de Saint Géry June 6, 2012

June 6, 2012

fyi De : ICANN [mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com] Envoyé : mercredi 6 juin 2012 07:04 À : gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org Objet : GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#95] Name of Officer: * Robin Gross Officer Email Address: * robin(a)ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org> Date Prepared: * Tuesday, June 5, 2012 GNSO Organization: * Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group Officer Position or Title: * NCSG Chair Voting Remedy: * Proxy Reason(s) for or condition(s) leading to the remedy: * Wendy Seltzer will be unable to attend the 7 June 2012 GNSO Council meeting. Bill Drake will serve as Wendy's proxy for the meeting. Specific subject(s)/measure(s)/motion(s)/action(s) of the Council for which the remedy is being exercised: * all Date upon which the remedy will expire or terminate: [Note: may not exceed 3 months initially; may be renewed by sending an email with explanation to GNSO Secretariat] * Friday, June 8, 2012 I affirm that a voting position has been established on the matter(s) at issue pursuant to provisions contained in our Charter or Bylaws. * Yes Our GNSO Councilor has been instructed on how to vote on the matter(s). * Yes Please identify the GNSO Councilor who will serve as the voting proxy: * William Drake

1 0

Action points from May 10 meeting
by Stéphane Van Gelder June 5, 2012

June 5, 2012

Councillors, We have a few action points from our last meeting that I'd like to remind us all of. On ALAC's Icann academy, I had an action to inform the ALAC CHair that I would be joining the group. That has been done. I also had an action to draft some general guideline points that the Council would feel comfortable with me portraying to the group as a GNSO position. That has been done. On the decision to cancel Fridays at Icann meetings, Wendy had an action point to draft an initial message for me to send to the Board on behalf of the GNSO. On the URS in the draft budget, Wendy had an action point to draft an initial message for me to send to the Board on behalf of the GNSO. On the IOC/RC, we have yet to determine a common Council position. Thanks, Stéphane Van Gelder Directeur Général / General manager INDOM Group NBT France ---------------- Head of Domain Operations Group NBT

3 5

TR: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#94]
by Glen de Saint Géry June 5, 2012

June 5, 2012

FYI De : ICANN [mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com] Envoyé : mardi 5 juin 2012 16:17 À : gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org Objet : GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#94] Name of Officer: * Steve DelBianco Officer Email Address: * sdelbianco(a)netchoice.org<mailto:sdelbianco@netchoice.org> Date Prepared: * Tuesday, June 5, 2012 GNSO Organization: * Business Constituency Officer Position or Title: * Vice chair for policy coordination Voting Remedy: * Proxy Reason(s) for or condition(s) leading to the remedy: * Councilor John Berard will be airborne during the time schedule for Council call Specific subject(s)/measure(s)/motion(s)/action(s) of the Council for which the remedy is being exercised: * Motions on WHOIS access, RAP charter drafting teams, and other business to come before Council Date upon which the remedy will expire or terminate: [Note: may not exceed 3 months initially; may be renewed by sending an email with explanation to GNSO Secretariat] * Friday, June 8, 2012 I affirm that a voting position has been established on the matter(s) at issue pursuant to provisions contained in our Charter or Bylaws. * Yes Our GNSO Councilor has been instructed on how to vote on the matter(s). * Yes Please identify the GNSO Councilor who will serve as the voting proxy: * Zahid Jamil

1 0

ICANN 44 | Prague | 24 - 29 June 2012 - Full Schedule View
by Glen de Saint Géry June 5, 2012

June 5, 2012

ICANN 44 | Prague | 24 - 29 June 2012 http://prague44.icann.org/full-schedule Full Schedule View Schedule subject to change. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

ICANN Board Conflicts of Interest Review - Independent Expert Report
by Glen de Saint Géry June 5, 2012

June 5, 2012

http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-8-04jun12-en.htm ICANN Board Conflicts of Interest Review - Independent Expert Report 4 June 2012 As part of ICANN's ongoing focus on improving how the ICANN Board addresses conflicts of interest, as well as enhancing ICANN's ethical culture, ICANN is posting the work of the team of international ethic experts in this regard. The team, comprised of Jermyn Brooks (former World Chair of Price Waterhouse; currently Board member of Transparency International and Chair of its Business Advisory Board; Chair of the Global Network Initiative), Mervyn King (ex-judge from South Africa, the most prominent name in corporate governance worldwide, currently honorary chair of the Global Reporting Initiative and Chair of the International Integrated Reporting Council) and Aron Cramer (president and CEO of Business for Social Responsibility, prolific speaker and writer on corporate responsibility and sustainability issues as well as advisor to many companies including the ICT industry), has prepared a Report for discussion<http://prague44.icann.org/meetings/prague2012/presentation-ethics-coi-final…> [PDF, 570 KB] with the ICANN Board and the community at the upcoming Prague meeting. Information on the session is available at http://prague44.icann.org/node/31635. The team's work has been conducted in coordination with the Board Governance Committee, and is the third part of ICANN's comprehensive review of its conflicts and ethics practices. Just recently<http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-15may12-en.htm>, ICANN adopted a Revised Conflicts of Interest Policy and additional governance documents, and also released two reports by Cooley LLC on ICANN's corporate governance practices. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

RAA Negotiations - Update
by Glen de Saint Géry June 5, 2012

June 5, 2012

http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-7-04jun12-en.htm RAA Negotiations - Update 4 June 2012 In advance of the Prague Meeting, ICANN is posting a group of documents on the status of negotiation of amendments to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA). While ICANN and the Registrars have made progress in the negotiations, the negotiations are not complete and there remain key areas of difference. Of highest priority for ICANN are the areas of Whois verification and data retention requirements, where ICANN and Registrars are not able to agree on certain aspects of the law enforcement recommendations. Because these two areas are so important, ICANN and the registrars are not able to post consolidated, negotiated amendments in advance of the Prague meeting. The memorandum described below explains this more fully; the draft RAA posted reflects ICANN's most recent proposal. · In the RAA Negotiations Summary Memo<http://prague44.icann.org/meetings/prague2012/presentation-raa-negotiation-…> [PDF, 100 KB], we provide detail on the status of the negotiations and provide some discussion on topics that we propose for discussion at the 25 June 2012 public session in Prague on the negotiations. The companion Summary Chart<http://prague44.icann.org/meetings/prague2012/presentation-raa-negotiations…> [PDF, 68 KB] provides a short description of the status of negotiations on each of the 12 law enforcement recommendations as well as other negotiation topics. These documents each reflect ICANN's understanding of the status of negotiations. · The Draft 2012 RAA<http://prague44.icann.org/meetings/prague2012/presentation-draft-2012-raa-0…> [PDF, 244 KB] is ICANN's most recent proposal for a new RAA, and is not a negotiated document. While the draft incorporates many terms that have been the subject of negotiations between the ICANN and Registrar Negotiation Teams, the draft also sets forth ICANN's current negotiating position on issues such as data retention, Whois verification, reseller relationships, and others. The Draft 2012 RAA is for discussion only, and does not reflect or incorporate finalized or approved language. ICANN is not posting a redline comparison of this Draft 2012 RAA to the 2009 RAA, as major portions of the document have been re-structured or re-organized, making a redline difficult to read. Instead, to help identify the changes proposed in the Draft 2012 RAA, we are providing a Summary of Changes<http://prague44.icann.org/meetings/prague2012/presentation-raa-summary-chan…> [PDF, 343 KB] document that discusses the changes from the 2009 RAA<http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/ra-agreement-21may09-en.htm>. The Draft 2012 RAA is comprised ICANN's proposed language for many separate specifications that will be attached to the RAA, each attached here in ICANN's proposed draft form: o Whois Specification<http://prague44.icann.org/meetings/prague2012/presentation-registration-dat…> [PDF, 148 KB] - a proposed Whois SLA and other requirements o Whois Accuracy Program Specification<http://prague44.icann.org/meetings/prague2012/presentation-whois-accuracy-0…> [PDF, 72 KB] - a Whois validation/verification program o Data Retention Specification<http://prague44.icann.org/meetings/prague2012/presentation-data-retention-0…> [PDF, 57 KB] - registrar data retention obligations o Additional Registrar Operation Specification<http://prague44.icann.org/meetings/prague2012/presentation-registrar-op-03j…> [PDF, 70 KB] - new requirements for DNSSEC, IPv4/IPv6, and IDNs o Consensus Policy and Temporary Policy Specification<http://prague44.icann.org/meetings/prague2012/presentation-consensus-temp-p…> [PDF, 98 KB] - Clarifying and consolidating the allowed topics for new Consensus Policies o Registrar Information Specification<http://prague44.icann.org/meetings/prague2012/presentation-registrar-info-0…> [PDF, 72 KB] - the categories of information that Registrars must keep updated with ICANN, as well as public posting requirements for some of that information Because the language is not finalized within the draft, ICANN is not at this stage seeking comment on the specific terms and provisions within the Draft 2012 RAA. We do, however, welcome feedback on the discussion topics identified in the RAA Summary Negotiations Memo to help inform the community discussion in Prague. If you have general feedback you'd like to provide, please leave a comment on the RAA Negotiations Status WIKI<https://community.icann.org/display/RAA/Negotiations+Between+ICANN+and+Regi…>. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Roadmap to Implement SAC 051
by Glen de Saint Géry June 5, 2012

June 5, 2012

http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-6-04jun12-en.htm Roadmap to Implement SAC 051 4 June 2012 As requested by the ICANN Board, ICANN is publishing the updated Roadmap<http://www.icann.org/en/groups/ssac/documents/sac-051-roadmap-04jun12-en.pdf> [PDF, 218 KB] for the coordination of the technical and policy discussions necessary to implement the recommendations outlined in SAC 051. There are two main recommendations in SAC 051: 1) improve Whois terminology to enhance and disambiguate the discussion; and 2) replace the Whois protocol to address various technical issues (e.g., internationalization). This Roadmap is the second version of the document, which was revised to include input from the community. The Roadmap will be submitted to the ICANN Board for its consideration. Created in the 1980s, Whois began as a service used by Internet operators to identify individuals or entities responsible for the operation of a network resource on the Internet. The Whois service has since evolved into a tool used for many purposes. However, as usage of Whois service evolved, few changes have been made to the protocol that supports the service. As a result, there is growing concern that the protocol would not meet the need of the community. Beginning in 2002, ICANN's Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) published various advisories describing deficiencies related to the WHOIS protocol, service and data schema, most recently SAC 051: SSAC Report on Domain Name WHOIS Terminology and Structure<http://www.icann.org/en/groups/ssac/documents/sac-051-en.pdf> [PDF, 243 KB]. SAC 051 summarizes the previous advisories, and among other things, recommends that the ICANN community evaluate and adopt a replacement protocol. Recognizing its concerns with the WHOIS protocol deficiencies, on 28 October 2011, the ICANN Board approved a resolution<http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/minutes-28oct11-en.htm#5> directing staff to produce, in consultation with the community, a roadmap for the coordination of the technical and policy discussions necessary to implement the recommendations outlined in SAC 051. On 18 February 2012, ICANN published a draft Roadmap to implement SAC 051 for public comment<http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/sac-051-draft-roadmap-18feb12-e…>. Most commentators agreed with the approach proposed in the draft roadmap to replace the WHOIS protocol (SSAC recommendations 2 & 3). Given the general consensus on the proposed roadmap, it was deemed not necessary to open a second round of public comment. Instead, this updated Roadmap to implement SAC 051 is being published. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Public Comment - Preliminary GNSO Issue Report on the Protection of International Organization Names in New gTLDs
by Glen de Saint Géry June 5, 2012

June 5, 2012

http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/prelim-protection-io-names-04ju… Preliminary GNSO Issue Report on the Protection of International Organization Names in New gTLDs Comment/Reply Periods (*) Important Information Links Comment Open: 4 June 2012 Comment Close: 25 June 2012 Close Time (UTC): 23:59 Public Comment Announcement<http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-5-04jun12-en.htm> Reply Open: 26 June 2012 To Submit Your Comments (Forum)<mailto:prelim-protection-io-names@icann.org> Reply Close: 16 July 2012 View Comments Submitted<http://forum.icann.org/lists/prelim-protection-io-names/> Close Time (UTC): 23:59 Report of Public Comments Brief Overview Originating Organization: ICANN Policy Department Categories/Tags: Policy Processes Purpose (Brief): ICANN staff is seeking community input on the Preliminary GNSO Issue Report on the Protection of International Organization Names in new gTLDs<http://gnso.icann.org/issues/intl-org-names-prelim-issue-report-04jun12-en.…> [PDF, 566 KB]. Current Status: This Report is designated as "preliminary" to allow for community input and dialogue prior to the publication of the Final Issue Report. Next Steps: The Preliminary Issue Report will be updated to reflect community feedback submitted through this forum. A Final Issue Report will then be presented to the GNSO Council for its consideration. Staff Contact: Margie Milam Email: policy-staff(a)icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org?subject=More%20information%20on%20the%20Request%20for%20Preliminary%20GNSO%20Issue%20Report%20on%20the%20Protection%20of%20International%20Organization%20Names%20in%20New%20gTLDS%20public%20comment%20period> Detailed Information Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose ICANN staff is seeking community input on this Preliminary Issue Report which is being published in response to a request by the GNSO Council for an issue report as a required preliminary step before a PDP may be commenced on the topic of whether ICANN should provide additional protections to the names of certain international organizations at the first and second levels for names introduced through the New gTLD Program. In its motion requesting this Issue Report, the GNSO Council specified that the Issue Report should: 1) Define the type of organizations that should be evaluated in any related PDP for any such special protection at the top and second level; and 2) Describe how the PDP could be structured to analyze whether ICANN should adopt policies to protect such organizations at the top and second level. In addition to other elements of this Issue Report, the ICANN community is encouraged as part of the public comment forum to comment on whether a PDP - if initiated, should be focused on additional protections for: (i) only international organizations that are not-for-profit AND are afforded unique protections under international treaties or national laws in multiple jurisdictions, and/or (ii) all international governmental organizations. Section II: Background Issues related to whether certain international organizations such as Intergovernmental Organizations ("IGOs"), the Red Cross/Red Crescent Movement ("RCRC") and the International Olympic Committee ("IOC") should receive special protection for their names at the top level and second level in new gTLDs have been raised throughout the development of the New gTLD program. The ICANN Board has requested policy advice from the GNSO Council and the GAC on whether special protections should be afforded to the RCRC, IOC and/or IGOs. Specifically, in its Singapore resolution, the Board authorized the President and CEO to implement the New gTLD Program "which includes the following elements: "the 30 May 2011 version of the Applicant Guidebook<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/comments-7-en.htm>, subject to the revisions agreed to with the GAC on 19 June 2011, including: ...(b) incorporation of text concerning protection for specific requested Red Cross and IOC names for the top level only during the initial application round, until the GNSO and GAC develop policy advice based on the global public interest....." In addition, the ICANN Board, on 11 March 2012, in response to a letter from the OECD and other IGOs seeking that ICANN provide protections similar to those afforded to the RCRC and IOC and a pre-emptive mechanism to protect their names at the second level, formally requested that the GNSO Council and the GAC provide policy advice on the IGO's request. With regard to providing special protections for the RCRC and IOC names, during the Dakar Meeting on 27 October 2011, the GNSO Council convened an informal drafting team to focus on the narrower issue of whether the RCRC and the IOC should receive special protections beyond those currently afforded to them in the Applicant Guidebook. This drafting team, known as the IOC-RC Drafting Team, was convened to respond to the Board's 20 June 2011 Singapore resolution with regard to the protection of names of the RCRC and the IOC during the first round of applications (the "Singapore resolution) and in particular, to a subsequent GAC proposal to permanently protect the RCRC and IOC names at both the top and second levels. The IOC-RC Drafting Team produced a set of recommendations that were published for public comment on 2 Mar 2012, and were subsequently modified during the March 2012 Costa Rica ICANN Meeting before adoption by the GNSO Council at its special meeting on 26 March 2012. These recommendations, which were forwarded to the ICANN Board for consideration, are described in greater detail on Annex 3 to this Report. At its 10 April 2012 meeting the ICANN Board's New gTLD Program Committee considered the GNSO recommendations but decided not to change the Applicant Guidebook. In its rationale for this resolution, the Committee observed that although "the GNSO's recommendations were well taken, the Committee opted for preserving the status quo. As protections already exist, when balanced with the accountability and operational issues posed by changing the Applicant Guidebook at that time, the Committee noted that "the public interest will be better served by maintaining the status quo.... Nothing in the Committee's action or this rationale is intended to preclude the consideration of the GNSO recommendations for future rounds of applications within the New gTLD Program." The Preliminary Issue Report recommends that the GNSO Council should consider whether or not to initiate a PDP as an approach to develop any additional policy advice in response to Board requests on the topic of whether to create additional protections to only certain types of international organizations in new gTLDs. Section III: Document and Resource Links Preliminary Issue Report<http://gnso.icann.org/issues/intl-org-names-prelim-issue-report-04jun12-en.…> [PDF, 566 KB] Report of Public Comments on Proposal to Protect International Red Cross and International Olympic Committee Names at the Top Level in New gTLDS<http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/report-comments-ioc-rcrc-propos…> [PDF, 284 KB] The ICANN Board Resolution from the Singapore Meeting<http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-20jun11-en.htm> The GAC letter concerning the protection of IOC/RCRC names<https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/1540128/GAC+advice+on+IOC+and…> [PDF, 1.05 MB] The Questions & Answers concerning the protection of IOC/RCRC names<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/30343723/IOC+AND+IRC+RESER…> [PDF, 229 KB] The IGO letter to the Board<http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/igo-counsels-to-beckstrom-et-al…> [PDF, 157 KB] The Board letter to the GNSO and GAC on the IGO issue<http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/beckstrom-to-igo-counsels-11mar…> [PDF, 222 KB] The GNSO Council response to the Board's letter on the IGO issue<http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/gnso-to-board-igo-names-26mar12-en.pdf> [PDF, 105 KB] Section IV: Additional Information Links to relevant background documents and resources are provided in the Preliminary Issue Report (*) Comments submitted after the posted Close Date/Time are not guaranteed to be considered in any final summary, analysis, reporting, or decision-making that takes place once this period lapses. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

New gTLD Program: Updated Applicant Guidebook Available
by Glen de Saint Géry June 5, 2012

June 5, 2012

http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-4-04jun12-en.htm New gTLD Program: Updated Applicant Guidebook Available 4 June 2012 ICANN has issued today a new version of the gTLD Applicant Guidebook<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb>. The Applicant Guidebook describes the requirements and procedures for submitting applications for new generic top-level domains (gTLDs), as well as the criteria and procedures for evaluation. See http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/about for more information about the New gTLD Program. The application submission period is now closed, and changes have not been made to the application process. However, in anticipation of the opening of the objection filing period, the relevant information has been updated in the Guidebook. A summary of the changes can be found at http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/summary-changes-applicant-guide… [PDF, 121 KB]. The summary provides the text revisions in redline, as well as a description and rationale for the changes. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0