December 2013 - council - lists.icann.org

TR: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#137]
by Glen de Saint Géry 09 Dec '13

09 Dec '13

FYI De : ICANN [mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com] Envoyé : lundi 9 décembre 2013 04:35 À : gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org; council(a)gnso.icann.org Objet : GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#137] Name of Officer: * Kristina Rosette Officer Email Address: * krosette(a)cov.com<mailto:krosette@cov.com> Date Prepared: * Sunday, December 8, 2013 GNSO Organization: * Intellectual Property Constituency Officer Position or Title: * President Voting Remedy: * Proxy Reason(s) for or condition(s) leading to the remedy: * IPC Councilor Brian Winterfeldt will be on business travel and unable to attend the December 12 GNSO Council meeting. Specific subject(s)/measure(s)/motion(s)/action(s) of the Council for which the remedy is being exercised: * Motions on (1) JIG Final Report on Universal Acceptance of IDN TLDs; and (2) DNS Security and Stability and Analysis (DSSA) Working Group Final Report, and any other matters requiring a vote. 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] * Saturday, December 14, 2013 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: * Petter Rindforth

1 0

Proposal for a Specification 13 to the ICANN Registry Agreement to Contractually Reflect Certain Limited Aspects of ".Brand" New gTLDs
by Glen de Saint Géry 08 Dec '13

08 Dec '13

http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/spec13-06dec13-en.htm Proposal for a Specification 13 to the ICANN Registry Agreement to Contractually Reflect Certain Limited Aspects of ".Brand" New gTLDs Comment / Reply Periods (*) Comment Open Date: 6 December 2013 Comment Close Date: 9 January 2014 - 23:59 UTC Reply Open Date: 10 January 2014 Reply Close Date: 31 January 2014 - 23:59 UTC Important Information Links Public Comment Announcement<http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-06dec13-en.htm> To Submit Your Comments (Forum)<mailto:comments-spec13-06dec13@icann.org> View Comments Submitted<http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-spec13-06dec13/> Brief Overview Originating Organization: ICANN Categories/Tags: * Contracted Party Agreements * Legal/Regulatory * Top-Level Domains Purpose (Brief): ICANN is posting today for public comment a proposal requested by the Brand Registry Group to incorporate a new Specification 13 to the new gTLD Registry Agreement, which would be available to a Registry Operator that operates a TLD that ICANN determines qualifies as a ".Brand TLD". The proposed draft of Specification 13 and the concepts reflected therein have not been approved by the New gTLD Program Committee of ICANN's Board of Directors. ICANN is seeking public comment on all aspects of the proposal. ICANN is also posting with the proposed draft of Specification 13 a position statement of the Brand Registry Group in support of the proposed draft. Current Status: Awaiting comments Next Steps: ICANN staff will review comments submitted by the community and will provide a summary and analysis of these comments to ICANN management and the New gTLD Program Committee of ICANN's Board of Directors. ICANN management and the Committee will review the feedback as well as the additional research and analysis directed to inform its consideration of the proposal. Staff Contact: Cyrus Namazi Email Staff Contact<mailto:cyrus.namazi@icann.org?subject=More%20information%20on%20the%20Proposed%20Spec%2013%20public%20comment%20period> Detailed Information Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose: ICANN is seeking public comment on a proposal requested by the Brand Registry Group to incorporate a new Specification 13 for the gTLD Registry Agreement, which would be available to a Registry Operator that operates a TLD that ICANN determines qualifies as a ".Brand TLD". Specification 13 affords a .Brand TLD certain modifications to the gTLD Registry Agreement. Stakeholder views are invited to help define and consider all aspects of the proposal. In particular, comments would be helpful in regard to the following: * whether it is appropriate to classify certain TLDs as ".Brand TLDs"; * whether the definition of ".Brand TLD" is sufficiently narrow to capture only what is commonly recognized as a corporate brand; * whether there may be unintended consequences associated with the implementation of draft Specification 13; * whether it is appropriate to permit a Registry Operator for a .Brand TLD to limit its registrar use to one or more preferred ICANN accredited registrar(s); and * whether a two year "cooling off" period prior to re-delegation of the .Brand TLD upon expiration or termination of the Registry Agreement is appropriate (subject to the limitations provided in the draft Specification). Section II: Background: The Brand Registry Group first engaged with ICANN regarding modifications to the new gTLD registry agreement to address concerns of their constituents at ICANN's Beijing Conference in April 2013. Following the Beijing Conference, numerous discussions where held telephonically leading up to both ICANN's Durban and Buenos Aires meetings. Following discussions at ICANN's Buenos Aires Conference, ICANN staff and the Brand Registry Group agreed that posting a draft of Specification 13 would be helpful to facilitate community input and discussion. If adopted, it is anticipated that Registry Operators will apply for qualification as a ".Brand TLD" prior to executing a Registry Agreement. Section III: Document and Resource Links: * Draft Specification 13<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/base-agreement-spec-13-proposed…> [PDF, 80 KB] * Brand Registry Group's supporting statement<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/brand-spec-13-statement-06dec13…> [PDF, 83 KB] Section IV: Additional Information: None. ________________________________ (*) 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

TR: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#136]
by Glen de Saint Géry 06 Dec '13

06 Dec '13

FYI De : ICANN [mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com] Envoyé : vendredi 6 décembre 2013 21:10 À : gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org; council(a)gnso.icann.org Objet : GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#136] Name of Officer: * Keith Drazek Officer Email Address: * kdrazek(a)verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com> Date Prepared: * Friday, December 6, 2013 GNSO Organization: * Registries Stakeholder Group Officer Position or Title: * Chair Voting Remedy: * Temporary Alternate Reason(s) for or condition(s) leading to the remedy: * The RySG has not yet completed our election process to replace Jeff Neuman. We expect to complete the process before the end of December, but not until after the upcoming GNSO Council meeting on 12 December 2013. Specific subject(s)/measure(s)/motion(s)/action(s) of the Council for which the remedy is being exercised: * Please extend the term of Chuck Gomes as Temorary Alternate for Jeff Neuman's vacated Council seat until 31 December 2013, or until such time prior to that date that the RySG elects a permanent replacement. Our elections are currently scheduled to close on 15 December 2013 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] * Tuesday, December 31, 2013 Please identify the individual (cannot be a current GNSO Councilor) who will serve as the abstaining Councilor's Temporary Alternate. [Note: if not already published and available, a short bio and Statement/Disclosure of Interest should be prepared by the Temporary Alternate and delivered to the GNSO Secretariat in advance of any discussion or voting scheduled to take place]. * Chuck Gomes Temporary Alternate Email Address: * cgomes(a)verisign.com<mailto:cgomes@verisign.com>

1 0

FW: [ccwg-internet-governance] Welcome to the CCWG on Internet Governance
by Jonathan Robinson 06 Dec '13

06 Dec '13

FYI -----Original Message----- From: ccwg-internet-governance-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:ccwg-internet-governance-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Sent: 04 December 2013 23:43 To: ccwg-internet-governance(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [ccwg-internet-governance] Welcome to the CCWG on Internet Governance ...and just as a reminder, the WIKI space starts at: https://community.icann.org/x/kyWfAg Kind regards, Olivier _______________________________________________ ccwg-internet-governance mailing list ccwg-internet-governance(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance

4 9

RE: [council] GNSO Council Agenda 12 December 2013 - Item 9 Call for liaisons
by avri 06 Dec '13

06 Dec '13

Hi, I would be willing to take the SCI liaison role on. Doing so would include surrendering my role as vice chair in the SCI group as I don't believe a liaison should also be a (v) chair. Having been co-chair for 3 years, it is about time I did that anyway. avri Sent from a T-Mobile 4G LTE Device -------- Original message -------- From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen(a)icann.org> Date: 12/06/2013 15:21 (GMT+01:00) To: council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: [council] GNSO Council Agenda 12 December 2013 - Item 9 Call for liaisons Dear All, In relation to Item 9 – any other business on the Council agenda, http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/agenda-council-12dec13-en.htm please note that there are two initiatives in need of a Council liaison, namely the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation and the Policy & Implementation Working Group. If you are interested in volunteering for this position, please feel free to express your interest on the mailing list so the Council will be in a position to confirm the liaisons for these efforts during the next meeting. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

GNSO Council Agenda 12 December 2013 - Item 9 Call for liaisons
by Glen de Saint Géry 06 Dec '13

06 Dec '13

Dear All, In relation to Item 9 - any other business on the Council agenda, http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/agenda-council-12dec13-en.htm please note that there are two initiatives in need of a Council liaison, namely the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation and the Policy & Implementation Working Group. If you are interested in volunteering for this position, please feel free to express your interest on the mailing list so the Council will be in a position to confirm the liaisons for these efforts during the next meeting. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

2 1

Motion on the Final Report of the joint DNS Security and Stability Analysis (DSSA) working group
by Mike O'Connor 06 Dec '13

06 Dec '13

dear all, here's a motion with regard to the DSSA working group. a second would be nifty. mikey Motion on the Final Report joint DNS stability and security analysis Working Group Whereas 1. The joint DNS Security and Stability Analysis working group was established by the participating Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees ALAC, ccNSO, GNSO and NRO to better understand the security and stability of the global domain name system (DNS) in 2011. 2. In October 2011 the ICANN Board of Directors established the Board DNS Risk Management Framework Working Group (DNS RMF WG), with the objective to oversee the development of a risk management framework and system for the DNS as it pertains to ICANN's role as defined in the ICANN Bylaws. 3. At the time the DSSA published its draft Report Phase 1 (August 2012), the DSSA went into hibernation to avoid overlap with the work of the Board DNS RMF and noted and informed the participating SO’s and AC’s that in order to reflect the changed environment and working method, the charter of the DSSA would need to be updated to reflect these changes. 4. The co-chairs of the DSSA WG have send a letter to the chairs of each of the participating stakeholder organizations to submit the Final Report and the work products contained in it (available at: http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/dssa-final-08nov13-en.pdf) . 5. The DSSA recommends the acceptance of the Final Report and further recommends that the Final Report be disseminated to the ccTLD’s for their consideration. 6. Upon adoption of the Final report of the DSSA, and notification of adoption to the co-chairs of the DSSA, the working group will be closed. Resolved 1. The GNSO Council adopts the Report submitted by the co-chairs of the DSSA WG, as the Final Report of the DSSA WG in accordance with section 2.4 of its charter. 2. The chair of the GNSO Council is requested to inform the co-chairs of the DSSA WG of adoption of the Report by the GNSO Council. 3. The chair of GNSO Council is also requested to inform the chairs of the other participating SO’s and Ac’s (ALAC, ccNSO and NRO). 4. Finally, the GNSO Council thanks and congratulates all, and in particular the co-chairs of the WG: Olivier Crepin-LeBlond ( ALAC), Joerg Schweiger (.DE, ccNSO), Mikey O’ Connor (GNSO), James Galvin ( SSAC) and Mark Koster (NRO) and all volunteers and staff who helped with this effort. PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)

4 5

Fwd: [council] Reminder: Proposed Dates - GNSO Council Meetings 2014
by Mike O'Connor 06 Dec '13

06 Dec '13

here's a geek thing for all you Mac users (and maybe others as well). i stuck "UTC" behind the lines that didn't have it in Glen's note. now, when i click on these dates, the Calendar program translates them into my local timezone, takes the Daylight Savings Time change into account and offers to drop them into my calendar. pretty neat! a new toy! m Proposed Schedule: 1. 23 Jan 2014 – 18h00 UTC 2. 27 Feb 2014 – 11h00 UTC 3. 26 Mar 2014 – ICANN Singapore 4. 08 May 2014 – 15h00 UTC 5. 29 May 2014 – 18h00 UTC 6. 25 Jun 2014 – ICANN London 7. 24 Jul 2014 – 11h00 UTC 8. 04 Sep 2014 – 15h00 UTC 9. 25 Sep 2014 – 18h00 UTC 10. 15 Oct 2014 – ICANN Los Angeles (Annual Meeting) 11. 13 Nov 2014 – 11h00 UTC 12. 11 Dec 2014 – 15h00 UTC PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)

2 1

Reminder: Proposed Dates - GNSO Council Meetings 2014
by Glen de Saint Géry 06 Dec '13

06 Dec '13

Dear Councillors, Please review the proposed dates and times for the GNSO Council calls going forward to the end of 2014 by Wednesday, 11 December 2013. If there are no significant conflicts noted by that date, this schedule will be published along with the motion deadlines on the GNSO calendar and shared with the Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies. http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar Proposed Schedule: 1. 23 Jan 2014 - 18h00 UTC 2. 27 Feb 2014 - 11h00 UTC 3. 26 Mar 2014 - ICANN Singapore 4. 08 May 2014 - 15h00 UTC 5. 29 May 2014 - 18h00 6. 25 Jun 2014 - ICANN London 7. 24 Jul 2014 - 11h00 8. 04 Sep 2014 - 15h00 9. 25 Sep 2014 - 18h00 10. 15 Oct 2014 - ICANN Los Angeles (Annual Meeting) 11. 13 Nov 2014 - 11h00 12. 11 Dec 2014 - 15h00 Notes: A. Takes account of ICANN Meetings B. Takes account of Brazil Meeting on 24 April 2014 C. Takes account of an August break D. Takes account of INTA Annual Meeting (Hong Kong - May 10th to 14th) Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

5 4

Final Report by the Geographic Regions Review WG for Consideration by the ICANN Community
by Jonathan Robinson 05 Dec '13

05 Dec '13

All, In the forthcoming GNSO Council meeting, we have an item on the Geographic Regions Review WG Final Report. The chair of the WG has made it clear that he would like some formal acknowledgement that we have seen the report, even if we offer no comment. As chair of the Council therefore, I feel we have to provide a formal response, ideally with some substance. It seems to me that we have two options: 1. A single GNSO Council response which: a. acknowledges and thanks the group and b. to the extent that it is possible, synthesises input from GNSO SGs & constituencies OR 2. A single GNSO Council response which: a. acknowledges and thanks the group and b. Indicates that specific GNSO groups will provide additional specific feedback. We have discussed this in the Registries SG and the RySG will formulate some input which will work with 1b or 2b above, depending on what the Council decides is best. I have prepared a short summary of information on the Geographic Regions Review WG which you may find helpful. It is included it below. Any feedback on this item and the way forward will be helpful. Jonathan -- The Geographic Regions Review Working Group, a community-wide working group established by the Board, has nearly completed its work developing recommendations to the ICANN Board for the continued use of theICANN Geographic Regions Framework. The Working Group has produced those recommendations in a Final Report document that is being shared today with the community. According to the Working Group Charter, each community Supporting Organization and Advisory Committee that contributed members to the Working Group will now have the opportunity to formally review and comment on this document before it is submitted to the ICANN Board. The Working Group will host a workshop during the upcoming ICANN Public Meeting in Durban, South Africa and briefings will be made available to the leadership of all Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees (SOs and ACs) as needed. The link below is for the English language version of the Geographic Regions Review WG final report. http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/geo-regions-final-report-22jun13 -en.pdf Executive Summary 1. In this Final Report, the Geographic Regions Review Working Group (hereinafter the "Working Group") reviews its efforts and makes a number of recommendations to the ICANN Board for modifications to the application of the ICANN Geographic Regions Framework. 2. The Working Group was formed by the Board to (1) identify the different purposes for which ICANN's Geographic Regions are used; (2) determine whether the uses of ICANN's Geographic Regions (as currently defined, or at all) continue to meet the requirements of the relevant stakeholders; and (3) submit proposals for community and Board consideration relating to the current and future uses and definition of the ICANN Geographic Regions. 3. The Working Group finds that the ICANN principle of geographic diversity remains important and relevant to ICANN's mission. Over the course of its deliberations, the Working Group has (1) reviewed the underlying history, objectives and general principles of ICANN"s Geographic Regions Framework, (2) identified the various applications and functions to which the regions framework has been applied by existing structures and the ICANN staff; and (3) engaged the community in an extensive collaborative dialogue about issues and potential solutions to maintain and potentially expand the value of the geographic regions framework for the entire community. 4. In 2000, the ICANN Board directed Staff to assign countries and territories to geographic regions on the basis of the United Nations Statistics Division's existing classifications. However, the working Group has found that in mapping the UN Statistics' categorization into ICANN's pre-defined Regions, the Staff apparently deviated significantly from the UN allocations. 5. Despite these deviations from the Board's original objective, the Working Group concludes that over the past decade, ICANN has largely applied geographic diversity principles consistent with the organization's diversity goals. 6. The Working Group attempted to identify an alternative consistent or standard geographic categorization model with international recognition that would better meet ICANN's requirements. Unfortunately, no such model has been found. 7. The Working Group concludes that wholesale modifications to the original geographic regions framework is not merited, and recommends that ICANN adopt its own Geographic Regions Framework based upon the current assignment of countries to regions. This new framework system should govern the make-up of the ICANN Board. However, to provide flexibility to individual communities and structures within ICANN, it is recommended that for the time being they be permitted to: a. follow the same framework as the Board, or b. develop their own mechanisms (with Board oversight) for ensuring geographic diversity within their own organizations. 8. The Working Group recommends that the Board should direct Staff to prepare and maintain ICANN's own unique organizational table that clearly shows the allocation of countries and territories (as defined by ISO 3166) to its existing five Geographic Regions.1 The initial allocation should reflect the status quo of the current assignments. However, Staff should also develop and implement a process to permit stakeholder communities in countries or territories to pursue, if they wish, re-assignment to a geographic region that they consider to be more appropriate for their jurisdiction. 9. Just as the Internet has evolved technically, structurally and geographically over the past decade, ICANN should manage its own evolution to ensure opportunities and make potential allowances for cultural and language diversity. In that context, the Working Group recommends that ICANN seek ways to recognize and accommodate Special Interest Groups to promote the interests and unique attributes of stakeholder communities that may not clearly fit into the formal top down regional structures. These "bottom-up" groupings would be complementary to the formal regional framework, and would not replace it. They would not form any part of ICANN's decision-making structure but would be free to lobby for the support of elected representatives. 10. Finally, the Working Group recommends that the Board maintain oversight over the existing geographic regions framework at all levels within the ICANN organization and review the effectiveness of its application at regular five-year intervals.

1 0